As of: February 25, 2024, 10:51 a.m
By: Moritz Maier
Comments
Press
Split
Thorsten Frei, the CDU's number two in the Bundestag, attacks Chancellor Scholz for his Ukraine and security policy.
In the interview, Frei says that Europe has no right to protection from the USA.
Berlin - On the second anniversary of the Russian attack on Ukraine, Thorsten Frei (CDU) settles accounts with Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) and his Ukraine policy.
He accuses the Chancellor of breaking his word and calls for a rethink in European security policy.
Mr. Frei, it is the second anniversary of the war in Ukraine and Kiev is hardly reporting any successes.
The Union says the federal government is not helping enough.
We must understand that we are not spectators of this war, but rather, at least indirectly, participants.
Because Russia has not only attacked a small neighboring country, but also the European order of peace and freedom.
That's why we have to support Ukraine so that it can win the defensive battle.
What the federal government did was mostly too late and not energetic enough.
CDU politician sharply criticizes Chancellor Scholz for his policies in the Ukraine war
Thorsten Frei (CDU) accuses Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) and the federal government of far-reaching misconduct in Ukraine policy.
He calls for a change of course in German security and defense policy.
© IMAGO
What do you mean?
It started two years ago, when the then Defense Minister seriously believed that she could support Ukraine with 5,000 helmets.
And this continues to this day when you think of the agonizingly long debate about Taurus cruise missiles, which is fatally reminiscent of the wrangling over the Leopard 2 tanks.
Chancellor Scholz bases his policy on the consideration of not being drawn into the war.
It must be made clear: the Chancellor's hesitation and hesitation is costing lives.
I would like to see more determination and consistent action from the federal government.
It must finally provide the arms industry with orders, otherwise the companies cannot produce.
It's about weapons for Ukraine, but also about our own Bundeswehr stocks.
My news
Russia escalates tensions on the border with Finland and sends thousands of refugees
Russia openly threatens to shoot down NATO jets – read “return of particularly aggressive attitude”.
2 hours ago
More than AfD and FPÖ: Right-wing populists are on the rise in Europe – what the survey comparison shows
2 hours ago
Farmers' demonstration during Lang's visit to the Greens gets out of hand - "it was tricky for a moment" read
Search for cause of death: Mysterious visits cause rumors about Navalny's death to flare up
“Lunch against Putin”: Kremlin critic explains Russia’s “serious vulnerability” read
Ukraine war, turning point and promises of the Federal Chancellor
In his speech at the turn of the century, Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced exactly that.
Back then, the Chancellor correctly analyzed what was necessary in the military sector.
But the fact is that he did not take these necessary steps in government.
The Chancellor did not keep his promises of February 27, 2022.
In your opinion, is the issue of our safety at the traffic lights a top priority?
No definitely not.
This is already evident in the Federal Defense Minister, who cannot enforce any of his demands.
He wanted ten billion euros more in the budget - which is right.
He received exactly zero euros.
At the same time, we are witnessing a government that is stoically working through a coalition agreement that is out of date.
There is still the Bundeswehr special fund, which can be used to gradually increase the defense budget.
The federal government makes policy according to the motto 'after me the flood'.
The Chancellor has announced that he will adhere to the two percent target for defense and security and will also set up the special fund.
We as a Union supported that.
The fact is now that the federal government will not increase the defense budget in the medium term and the special fund will be used up by 2027 at the latest.
Frei: “The Chancellor has no idea” how he wants to close the financial hole
So from the Union's perspective, the Bundeswehr is still in a bad position?
Nothing has substantially improved in defense and the Chancellor has no idea how he wants to close the financial hole of 30 billion euros in the defense budget from 2028.
Only someone who knows full well that they will no longer have any political responsibility in 2027 makes such a policy.
Criticism comes easily from the opposition.
Where would you get the 30 billion from without reforming the debt brake or another special fund?
Easing the debt brake and creating a new special fund are out of the question for us because it would be a burden for future generations.
This year we have national tax revenue of almost one trillion euros, more than ever before.
The money is here.
The Russian attack was a turning point and means that priorities have to be reset.
Politicians must clearly say what can no longer be financed in this situation because we have to ensure our security.
For the Bundeswehr: Should public holidays be abolished?
The economist Guntram Wolff recently called for public holidays to be canceled for climate and defense financing.
Is that an option for you?
In any case, we should not impose any prohibitions on thinking.
We must not deceive people into believing that security comes for free.
This time is over.
We have to restrict ourselves in other areas and cannot simply carry on living as before.
Where do we have to limit ourselves?
First of all, we need economic growth in Germany.
Last year we had a recession and the current growth forecast was scaled down.
We have the worst value in the entire euro area.
If our economy only grew at the European average, we would have an additional tax revenue of around 20 billion euros.
This would solve many household problems.
That's additional income.
But you talk about less spending.
Where does Germany have to save money?
Real wages are falling and the burden on the budget in the area of citizens' money has now increased to 40 billion euros.
We cannot fill two million jobs and on the other hand we have 5.5 million recipients of civil benefit.
If we could get just one million people into work, we would have government relief worth 30 billion euros.
Another aspect is the building energy law.
This should save seven million tons of CO₂.
That is just half of what will be additionally emitted by the shutdown of the last three nuclear power plants in Germany.
And this is only possible with double-digit billions in government subsidies.
This is an absolutely uneconomical approach.
The law has to go.
When it comes to defense issues, we are quick to address the EU and the upcoming election.
Can the issue of personal safety bring more people to the ballot box for an otherwise rather unattractive election?
I really hope so.
Europe will be even more important in the future.
We must become more competitive at EU level and need less dirigisme and less bureaucracy.
And here too, security policy plays an important role.
You talk about Europe's defense capability.
It's about relevance, but also about very practical questions, such as how weapon systems fit together, how European armies can coordinate and complement each other.
To illustrate this with figures: We in the EU are proud that the member states will increase their spending on security and defense from 250 to 300 billion euros.
For comparison: the smaller economy of the USA has a defense budget of 877 billion euros.
CDU politician Frei: Europe has no right to security from the USA
Not much can happen without the USA.
We cannot rely on the United States alone to ensure our security.
Furthermore, we have no right to this at all.
Of course, we will continue to rely on close cooperation with the USA in NATO in the future.
But it goes without saying that an American president – whatever his name is – will value the fact that it is not the Americans who pay for European security, but rather that we contribute our fair share.
This means: We must massively increase defense spending in Germany and Europe.
So it is irrelevant to the objectives of European defense policy who becomes US President?
I don't think much of the current debate in which the rabbit just stares at the snake.
There has been a shift in emphasis in the USA for years - away from Europe and towards the Indo-Pacific.
Because the number one rival is China, no longer Russia.
And that is the case regardless of who the president is.
That's why we have to do our part, Americans make their own decisions.
Migration is a big issue in politics – too big?
Speaking of decision.
State elections are coming up in the fall, and the number of refugees is likely to rise again by then.
Migration policy is important to people, but their everyday lives are primarily determined by issues such as affordable housing, the economic situation and inflation.
Is the question of migration being made too big by the media, but also by the Union?
One thing is certain: the topic of migration is of great concern to people.
In addition, the question of migration is a test of the functionality of a state.
In Germany we don't have an orderly or controlled migration, but rather a government that, at best, lets things take its course.
This is exactly what causes high levels of dissatisfaction with government actions overall.
Do you see migration not as an everyday issue for people, but as a symbol of the state of government?
Of course, people experience migration in everyday life.
The federal government's migration report states that 2.7 million people came to Germany in 2022.
At the same time, our country is missing up to 800,000 apartments and 380,000 daycare places.
We also have problems providing adequate medical care in rural areas.
Migration is something positive if it takes place in the labor market, can be controlled and limited and integration is successful.
But if that is not the case and parallel societies emerge, then migration is a problem that people not only feel in their everyday lives, but also creates enormous social centrifugal forces.