"Hard but fair": Roth and Kiesewetter call for more weapons for Ukraine

Created: 05/10/2022 11:22 am

Michael Roth (SPD member of parliament; chairman of the foreign affairs committee; member of the SPD presidium and party executive) as a guest at “Hard but fair”.

© Screenshot ARD Mediathek

Frank Plasberg discusses Putin's May 9 speech in "Hart aber fair".

Does Ukraine now need more weapons or more diplomatic talks?

The group is almost unanimous.

Nearly.

Berlin – Political scientist Wolfgang Merkel takes on a lonely role in “Hard but fair”: that of the warner.

With his statement "Weapons are not the only option" he gets into continuous fire.

But when he signed the open letter to Chancellor Olaf Scholz against further arms deliveries to Ukraine, he had to reckon with not making any new friends in the group.

Moderator Frank Plasberg is looking for a "glimmer of hope".

He wants to know whether Vladimir Putin's surprisingly reserved speech on May 9 is a sign of weakness.

And the war in Ukraine could therefore end earlier than expected?

But the round gives him no hope.

After a clip contrasts the Putin parade in Moscow with Russian tanks destroyed in the Ukraine, Roderich Kiesewetter (CDU) quickly made it clear that one had to "prepare for a longer war".

Plasberg begins to ponder and is visibly touched when Kiesewetter becomes more specific: "It will take years."

"Tough but fair" on the war against Ukraine: atomic bomb over the Baltic Sea?

Even military expert Claudia Major can only give Plasberg little hope in the escalating Ukraine conflict.

In Putin's speech she could see "no departure from the previous goals".

For them it is clear: Ukraine does not have the "choice between war and peace, but between war and submission".

A little later she explains in detail why the fear of a nuclear war is unfounded.

It's just "nuclear blackmail".

Fear itself is the weapon.

But the danger of a nuclear strike is "still very, very low".

She explains various missile systems and can even recite the number of nuclear warheads in West and East by heart.

When she finally mentions that there are also smaller, so-called “tactical nuclear weapons”, Frank Plasberg asks, just to be safe, what that means.

The answer "like in Hiroshima" doesn't exactly cheer him up.

"You call that a little one?" he asks in disarray.

Major sees two possible scenarios for the possible use of such a "small" atomic bomb: either directly in Ukraine or as a "demonstration strike", for example over the Baltic Sea.

"We have to come to a ceasefire as quickly as possible, in which both sides can recognize each other," warns political scientist Wolfgang Merkel.

“A Putin who loses face has his back against the wall.

Every hour, every day and every month, we have to see again and again: where is there a place where we can negotiate.”

For Kiesewetter this is not a viable option.

He finds Merkel "naive".

With his speech, Vladimir Putin missed the last chance to end the war.

Plasberg's cautious question as to whether "every spiral of escalation has to be involved" is countered by Kiesewetter edgy: "We're not involved." Ukraine had offered Putin talks, "but Russia's answer was genocide".

"Hard but fair": These guests discussed with Frank Plasberg:

• Roderich Kiesewetter

  (CDU member of parliament; member of the foreign affairs committee; retired colonel)

• Gesine Dornblüth

  (journalist, Moscow correspondent for Deutschlandradio until 2017)

• Michael Roth

  (SPD member of parliament; chairman of the foreign affairs committee; member of the SPD presidium and party executive)

• Claudia Major

  (military expert; heads the security policy research group of the Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik in Berlin)

• Wolfgang Merkel

  (political scientist and democracy researcher)

Political scientist Merkel's calls for de-escalation are caught in the crossfire.

Even those involved notice this, so that at some point there is a remarkable moment when one after the other tries to demonstratively “build a bridge” with Merkel.

However, they turn out to be rather wooden, so incompatible are the positions at the table.

As the audience reactions show later in the show, Merkel was more popular in front of the television than in it.

War on Ukraine: Same arguments as US Secretary of Defense

The military specialist major makes it clear where the war should now lead: “The first goal is the sovereignty of Ukraine.

And then: "To weaken Russia politically, militarily and economically in such a way that such attacks as the current one are not possible again." That is exactly the line that US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently expressed.

According to Plasberg, war aims can be “defined very differently”.

He wants to know from SPD man Roth whether Germany isn't in danger of being on the verge of having to take over the war aims of the USA.

He dodges.

Plasberg has to follow up three times before Roth replies: "I don't see the danger." He was in the Ukraine and a woman told him "The best humanitarian aid is when you deliver weapons".

Conclusion of the "hard but fair" talk

More weapons for Ukraine - according to this program "hard but fair" that is the only right solution.

And the fear of a nuclear strike is unjustified.

The thesis "Negotiating is better than shooting" had only one advocate in the studio.

But democracy researcher Wolfgang Merkel accepted the unequal sparring anyway.

He had more encouragement than in the studio among the viewers, who, as usual, were quoted during the broadcast.