Enlarge image
Illner representative Theo Kroll (centre) with guests
Photo: ZDF/Svea Pietschmann
Olaf Scholz obviously has more important things to do.
There is no other way to explain why the Chancellor prefers to send his Greens to the talk show front - they then have to report on what the government is doing.
So while Scholz is hopefully working behind the scenes with wisdom to save the world, this time Robert Habeck explains why the government is doing nothing in »maybrit illner«.
No, this accusation made by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in parliament on Thursday was "not entirely justified".
Germany is doing some things "that we thought impossible a few weeks ago," said Habeck.
The Ukraine is given, presumably also behind the scenes, "what strengthens it and what helps it."
Merely entering this war is a "necessary limit which we cannot cross".
When asked by Theo Koll (who stepped in for Maybrit Illner, who had failed due to the corona virus), Habeck explained that this limit was then reached for him “when his own soldiers shoot at other soldiers”.
Erich Vad, retired brigadier general, points out that the Russian observer would also like to draw the line where Ukrainian soldiers fired at other soldiers with German weapons.
The Russian armed forces have therefore already kept a watchful eye - and dropped bombs - on transport routes in western Ukraine.
The attack near Lemberg a few days ago "in my opinion was aimed at the supply routes."
Nord Stream 2 was always defended by the German side with reference to the "economy, economy, economy" (Selenskyj) or as a "private-sector project" (Scholz).
What does the economy minister say?
He says that this question "is not to be considered solely from an economic point of view."
The "social peace" in the country must also be considered, which is endangered if energy costs continue to rise exorbitantly.
Suggestion: a temporary warning boycott
Germany would have "tied its own hands" with this policy.
Habeck assures that independence is being worked on and that "fossil withdrawal" will come.
So far there has also been no "rumbling" in the economy, in some places even "beyond the sanctions".
Vad, who also advised Angela Merkel in this regard, can only shrug his shoulders: "We actually always assumed that Putin" would not "use the gas supplies as a weapon."
And "obviously it's still going, right?".
Marie-Agnes Strack Zimmermann from the FDP admires the video world politics that Selenskyj pursued again on Thursday, "while we are sitting in the warmth".
Because the gas flows.
It does, to Andriy Melnyk's chagrin.
The Ukrainian ambassador proposes a "moratorium" on these deliveries, a temporary warning boycott.
Asked about his very clear words by Koll, the diplomat countered diplomatically: "These are not clear words, this is an urgency."
Anti-tank weapons can stifle invasion
He also explains why he thinks the fear of nuclear war is unfounded.
Nuclear weapons would mean "a tough end" to the world.
Putin "wants to go down in history, and that history has yet to be written by someone."
It was enough to "suffocate" the invasion with additional anti-tank weapons.
The West should not let itself be guided by fear of provoking the Kremlin: "It doesn't need any further provocations, this war wasn't provoked."
Across the way sits Michael Roth, for the SPD on the Foreign Affairs Committee, whom Melnyk in SPIEGEL recently called – clearly or urgently – an “asshole”.
Roth calls it a mistake that there wasn't at least one discussion after the speech in the Bundestag - and makes the additional mistake of retreating to the comfortable church day jargon of Annalena Baerbock, who said that one had to be able to "listen" and "speak the word leave".
Koll asks Melnyk about the "limit of civilian casualties that you are willing to give up?".
Melnyk: »This question is so cynical that I will not answer it«.
Putin alone is responsible for any victims.
Koll follows: »How resilient is a people?«.
Melnyk thinks it will take that long to drive out the Russians and asks the opposite question: "Will the Russians be able to put up with these losses for long?".
no-fly zone?
Technically possible - but risky
Koll also has a good question for the retired brigadier general, which we also thought impossible a few weeks ago: »Is it sensible to escalate war against a nuclear power?«.
The military thinks that's difficult.
A no-fly zone against such a strong opponent?
We are not in Iraq, Afghanistan or Syria, everything has "a different quality".
Technically possible, but: "If Putin has his back against the wall," he could "be tempted to resort to nuclear escalation."
In Ukraine, the Russians have already achieved their "strategic goals."
More is not possible, not in the long term and not against the fierce resistance of the defenders.
Vad sees "unparalleled military motivation, about ten percent of which would be quite good for us."
Incidentally, in Iraq or Afghanistan, superior forces very quickly achieved “conventional success” – but then the actual war only began.
From a military point of view, now would be a good time for both sides to seriously negotiate peace.
Melnyk assures that President Zelenskyj is ready for a meeting, "Day and night, on the edge of the world."
Whether it comes to that, like everything else, is up to Putin.