Is the danger of nuclear war real?
Ex-oligarch Khodorkovsky warns NATO against "de-escalation".
An expert advises Scholz to find a permanent solution with France.
Hamburg - Vladimir Putin, security expert Frank Sauer and Russian ex-oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky agree, is an "extremely bad strategist".
Khodorkovsky, who lives in a Siberian penal camp in London after ten years in prison, makes it clear in the ZDF talk show “Markus Lanz”: “Putin doesn't understand the concept of 'win-win' at all”.
He is a cruel tactician but far too impatient for long-term considerations.
However, Sauer warns that in the event of a nuclear strike there would be no possibility of evacuation.
For example, the nuclear warheads stationed in western Russia are only a seven-minute flight away from Berlin.
On the other hand, there are nuclear US bombs in Hesse, among other things, whose accuracy is currently being improved using new technology.
World
journalist Robin Alexander later recalled the "nuclear participation" of the NATO countries, which also applies to Germany: "The American nuclear weapons are also with us and would also be transported by German aircraft in the event of a catastrophe".
Expert: Ten percent of Russian nuclear weapons were enough to devastate planets
Fear of nuclear war is nothing new, emphasizes Sauer: "This is technology from the 1980s." The danger has only been "suppressed" over the past few years, and it is no longer perceived as a threat due to the détente.
Sauer refreshes the memory and wants to make the dimensions clear: "In Russia there are about 6,000 warheads," he says, of which "1,550 are strategic weapons" - i.e. those with particularly devastating power.
Just ten percent of this arsenal was enough to devastate the world.
But Sauer also makes it clear that a "nuclear threat" is still "in the air", but that there is currently no acute danger.
The expert is convinced that “sleepless nights” are not necessary.
Because: For Putin, the use of atomic bombs would only bring disadvantages, including making the use of NATO weapons possible - a strategic disadvantage for Putin in Ukraine.
Currently, "the threat" is much "more useful" for Putin than the deed.
The Kremlin boss is already manipulating large parts of the German population, promoting discussions and sometimes even discord.
"Markus Lanz" - these guests discussed with:
Katja Kipping (Die Linke) -
Berlin Senator for Social Affairs
Mikhail Khodorkovsky -
Russian ex-oligarch in exile, connected from London
Dr.
_
Frank Sauer -
political scientist at the University of the Federal Armed Forces in Munich
Robin Alexander -
Deputy Editor-in-Chief of the
World
Putin encouraged?
Khodorkovsky warns NATO against excessive "de-escalation"
Khodorkovsky, who joined the group, also thinks that an attitude of strength is an important tool for the West: "We shouldn't be afraid of escalation, we should be afraid of de-escalation," warns the exiled Russian.
"Any attempt to reassure Putin that NATO will not be part of the conflict" rather encourages Putin to use tactical nuclear weapons.
Khodorkovsky also sees Putin's support at home as a problem.
He explains that the Russian population is becoming a follower of Putin's power politics as a result of the propaganda.
That allows Putin to sell his attack as a defensive measure: "People in Russia believe that if Putin hadn't started the war, bombs would have fallen on Russian cities." "Gangsters," according to Khodorkovsky.
Nuclear strike worries about Putin: is the key to security in France?
Alexander also considers the danger of a nuclear strike to be manageable at the moment.
Above all, because Germany has so far protected "the American nuclear weapons" on Hessian soil to a large extent.
The
world
journalist can certainly imagine a change in the geopolitical situation, for example if Joe Biden is no longer president after the US elections.
Sauer calculates that the annual maintenance of its nuclear bombs alone costs the USA around 50 billion US dollars.
Alexander: "The thought is obvious when the Americans become insecure," a European nuclear defense is possible with the French, who are among the nuclear-weapon states.
But Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) "shirked" the task.
Journalist Robin Alexander at Lanz: Sahra Wagenknecht blackmails the left
It becomes clear in the last part of the program that Sahra Wagenknecht could damage the left in particular by stoking fears of a possible nuclear attack.
Former party leader Katja Kipping vented her displeasure: "For me, being left is standing on the side of those who are being attacked and not demonstrating with Nazis and the right." She is alluding to the "Manifesto for Peace" initiated by Wagenknecht, who also Applause was given to the AfD.
+
In “Markus Lanz”, the left-wing Berlin Senator for Social Affairs, Katja Kipping, commented on the situation of the refugees in the capital, Sahra Wagenknecht’s peace manifesto and possible coalitions after the Berlin elections.
© Cornelia Lehmann/ZDF
When Kipping dodged further questions about the state of the party, Alexander stepped in as an interpreter: "I'll say what Mrs. Kipping isn't allowed to say..." he begins.
His thesis: Wagenknecht, as a member of the Bundestag with six hard supporters, including parliamentary group leader Dietmar Bartsch, "blackmails" her party.
There is a risk of dissolution and the loss of mandates if this hard core of the group falls apart.
Wagenknecht is driving "the party further and further into trouble, which can be clearly read on Mrs. Kipping's face." Kipping does not deny it: "I am in favor of the faction positioning itself clearly," she says.
Alexander comes to a different conclusion: perhaps the party has also lost its field of activity.
The AfD is now taking care of failed eastern existences and Saskia Esken and Kevin Kühnert have brought left-wing social issues to the SPD.
Conclusion of the "Markus Lanz" talk
Security expert Frank Sauer refutes the alleged threat from nuclear weapons.
The debate about a possible nuclear defense of Europe with French nuclear weapons is becoming interesting - but this thread quickly comes to nothing.
The talks with Khodorkovsky, who was announced as a visionary of a "complete reconstruction" of Russia, are disappointing.
But with his somewhat awkward manner of expression and an almost tired tone of voice, the exiled Russian doesn't really let any concepts get through.
(Verena Schulemann)