BERLIN (AP) — In the 11 months since Russia invaded Ukraine, Germany has emerged as one of Ukraine’s main arms suppliers, but Chancellor Olaf Schulz has been hesitant to take every new step. Notoriety for decisiveness – which created impatience among allies.
Berliners see the stalling, most recently on Kyiv’s long-sought Leopard 2 main battle tank, as rooted at least in part in a post-World War II political culture of military caution and today’s fears of possible escalation. war.
On Friday, Germany moved closer to a decision to deliver the tanks, ordering a review of its Leopard stockpile in preparation for a possible green light for approval.
However, still no promises. Defense Minister Boris Pistorius dismissed the idea that Germany was in the way, but said, “We have to weigh all the pros and cons, like that, before we make a decision like that.”
The pattern repeated itself for months, as Scholz first held off on committing to new, heavier equipment, then finally agreed to do so.
Most recently, Germany said in early January that it would send 40 Marder armored personnel carriers to Ukraine – it did so in a joint statement with the UScommitted to the purchase of 50 Bradley armored vehicles.
The decision follows months of calls for Berlin to send in Marder, and sparked pressure to take another step towards the Leopard tank.
“There’s a difference between the actual size of the commitment and the delivery of the arms — it’s the second-biggest supplier in Europe — and the hesitation to get it done,” said Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff, a senior analyst at Deutsche Marshall in Berlin. American Think Tank Fund.
An unshakably confident statesman with a stubborn personality, unwilling to bow to the public’s call to action, Scholz firmly stuck to his own course. He has said Germany would not go it alone on weapons decisions, noting the need to avoid NATO becoming a direct party to a war with Russia.
As the pressure mounted last week, he announced that he would not make important safety decisions hastily Via “Excited Review”. He insisted that most people in Germany supported his government’s “calm, deliberate and prudent” decision-making.
Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on Wednesday, Scholz cited some of the equipment Germany had provided to Ukraine, declaring it marked “a profound turning point in German foreign and security policy.”
This is true, at least to some extent. Germany’s refusal to supply lethal weapons before the invasion began reflected a political culture partly rooted in Germany’s own history of aggression in the 20th century — including the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union.
“No German chancellor, no political party wants to be at the forefront of pushing a military agenda — you want to try all the other options before resorting to that,” Kleine-Brockhoff said. “So, for domestic consumption, it is seen as a positive thing for the Chancellor not to lead, to be cautious, to resist, to try all other options.”
Scholz does face calls from Germany’s center-right opposition and some in his three-party governing coalition to be more proactive with military aid; not so much from his own center-left Social Democrats, which for decades have Immerse yourself in the legacy of the Cold War settlement pursued by predecessor Willy Brandt in the early 1970s.
Klein-Brockhoff said Scholz “decided very early on that he didn’t want to lead the aid to Ukraine militarily,” although “he wanted to be a good ally, be part of a coalition and be in the middle.”
But Kleine-Brockhoff acknowledged that such a cautious approach “drives allies crazy” and raises the question of whether they can count on the Germans.
Even after Britain announced last week that it would supply Ukraine with its own Challenger 2 tanks, Berlin remains wary of the Leopard.
The indecision is not just a matter between Berlin and Kyiv, as other countries need German permission to ship their own stockpiles of German-made Panther tanks to Ukraine.On Wednesday, Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said Warsaw would consider supplying its tanks Even without permission from Berlin.
“Consent is secondary here. We either get it quickly, or we do the right thing ourselves,” Morawiecki said.
British historian Timothy Garton Ash wrote in The Guardian and other newspapers this week that “to its credit, the German government’s military support for Ukraine since the eve of the Russian invasion The position has changed a lot.”
But he argues that the tank issue has become “a litmus test of whether Germany has the courage to resist (Russian President Vladimir) Putin’s nuclear blackmail, overcome domestic fear and doubt, and defend a free and sovereign Ukraine” and that Scholz should lead the “Europanther plan”.
Whether this will eventually happen remains to be seen. The Schulz administration’s insistence on working closely with the United States may partly reflect Germany’s – unlike Britain and France’s – reliance on the United States for its nuclear deterrent.
On Friday, Scholz spokesman Steffen Hebestreit denied reports that Germany insisted it would deliver the Panther tanks only if the United States sends its own Abrams tanks. He dismissed the notion that Berlin was lagging behind other countries and insisted it was doing the right thing.
“These are not easy decisions and will require careful weighing,” he said. “It’s about their sustainability, and everyone can walk with them and support them – part of leadership performance is maintaining alliances.”
___
Follow AP’s coverage of the war in Ukraine: https://apnews.com/hub/russia-ukraine
