Does Ukraine have to “win” the war?
Olaf Scholz remains cautious to vague on the evening of the Leopard announcement.
With good reason, comments Florian Naumann.
Olaf Scholz now wants to deliver after all - Leopard tanks for the Ukraine.
There was also a big delivery on Wednesday evening in the SPD Chancellor's ZDF interview: However, mainly the word material for interpretation, not the crystal-clear "Wumms" announcements.
Neuralgic points: The question, once again talked away, of whether Ukraine must “win” the Russian war of aggression.
And the still missing justification for the week-long, almost agonizing hesitation in the Leopard question.
Scholz again avoided hints and phrases.
One thing is clear: It would be better if the Federal Chancellor spoke more clearly to the people in Germany.
However, the chancellor is mostly right in his decisions and attitudes.
And at important points also with his choice of words.
War in Ukraine: There are reasons for Scholz's waiting for the Leopard - even if the Chancellor does not name them
First: Why the procrastination?
Scholz again failed to provide the plain text.
In the ZDF program "Was nun, Herr Scholz?" he explained that tanks should not be supplied for "domestic political reasons" - a dig at his critics.
On the other hand, he said that people in Germany expect a weighing up.
That too: a domestic justification.
That sounds paradoxical.
It is.
And only about half the truth.
It's not wrong though.
What Olaf Scholz might be thinking about: Russia is also addressing people in Germany with threats and propaganda.
This could be experienced indirectly, for example, in heated debates about war sanctions.
However, Scholz must not lose support for his Ukraine policy, because only Russia would benefit from it.
Sometimes demonstrative waiting and "weighing" helps in this regard.
For example, in the dispute over a gas embargo a few months ago, albeit in a different way.
At the same time, the chancellor did not want to openly say that he had insisted on (co-)deliveries of tanks from the USA.
He would have done that
can, it is obvious.
There's nothing wrong with that either.
Even if insiders in Washington supposedly roll their eyes and critics miss a German leadership role, it certainly doesn't damage a unified image of NATO if the United States, along with Great Britain and Germany, also supplies battle tanks.
Just as little as the backing for the deliveries in Germany.
"Leadership" prestige is very secondary.
The independence of the EU will not decide on Leopard deliveries.
More lasting tests await.
"Russia must fail": The heart may demand a Ukraine "victory" - but Scholz's words fit
And then there is the eternal “Russia must not win”.
Isn't "Ukraine must win" what Ukrainians and many Westerners want to hear?
Yes for sure.
But experience teaches that the Kremlin exploits every word for propaganda purposes, taking it out of context if necessary.
But one should not even remotely allow the confused conspiracy theory that Ukraine is actively waging a war.
The country has nothing to "win" in a traditional sense.
It struggles for its existence;
for the life, well-being and freedom of its citizens.
There will be no "winners" in Putin's Ukraine war.
At the same time, the chancellor could want to prevent it from being said at some point in a roundabout way that Germany was attacking - under international law!
- Russian territory approved or demanded.
That's probably why when asked only "Ukraine must not lose this war" and "Russia must fail with what it has set itself".
That may seem petty, especially since Volodymyr Zelenskyy rules out such attacks.
But as long as Scholz makes it clear that the
invasion must not be successful in any way, that is a small price to pay for an achievement that may be helpful again: not acting like a war party.
And thus, on the one hand, not to provide any pretexts for (however unrealistic) attacks.
And at the same time
leaving the door at least a crack open for (unfortunately also unrealistic) negotiations, for example in the Normandy format.
Hearty rhetoric can be practiced by others.
Away from the Chancellery.
Florian Naumann
