One of my relatives had a very bad habit of commenting the sight of an overweight person by saying: “German tanks are back in action”. His subsequent chuckle would reveal that he was very well aware of just how offensive his comment was. But there was another dimension this man, who was proud of his activism in the anti-war movement of the 70s and 80s, was alluding to. A boundary, the German Federal Republic has been careful not to overstep since its formation after WWII: German tanks back in action, exactly that.
A German Foreign-Foresight-Minister?
I just watched this interview from 1 April this year between two women who I hold in highest regards: CNN’s Chief International Anchor, Christiane Amanpour, who regularly astonishes me by her way of not having any bullshit[1]I believe the way Amanpour brushes over Kremlin spokesperson Dimitry Peskov’s propagandistic lies after lies is a prime example: … Continue reading; and Germany’s Federal Minister of Foreign Affairs, Annalena Baerbock, whose candour makes me listen to her statements with a higher attention than I usually do when listening to other German politicians. Though, it is this candour that bears the risk of creating confusion around a government that more and more seems to be divided in key aspects of their foreign policy.
As it does in the above-mentioned interview. Here, Amanpour states that “it’s been observed around the world that […] you have, as a nation, turned your foreign [and] defence policy essentially a 180° from what it was post WWII” and also calls the thing by its name that wouldn’t just turn any policy around, but spin it into oblivion for the decades to come: “[…] Germany will be delivering some 56 tanks to the Ukrainians”, while Mrs. Baerbock listens intently without lifting so much as an eyebrow.
Wait. What?!
German Tanks! Where are they? And how many?
Hold on a minute! I am checking the publication date of this interview again: Have German tanks really been sent into a war zone at the beginning of April and are “back in action”, so to speak?!
No, they aren’t.
I discovered this interview exactly 25 days after its publication, on the day Germany actually announced that it definitely will send some of its own tanks into war-stricken Ukraine.[2]Specifically, 50 anti-aircraft “Gepard” tanks. The training for the tank crew may, however, take up to 6 months. The delivery of another 88 “Leopard” battle tanks and 100 “Marder” … Continue reading However, the announcement followed a three-week-long heated debate over German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’ reluctancy to commit to his very own “Zeitenwende”-speech from 27 February.
Maybe it was this speech, that led CNN to easily absorb the news of an assumed real transfer of German tanks to Ukraine. CNN’s official news report on the 1 April delivery (the one Ms. Amanpour was referring to) still reads inconclusive as it both states that Germany will deliver vs. has approved delivery by the Czech Republic of “infantry fighting vehicles”.[3]The text also contains a correction, stating that “the type of vehicle” has been incorrectly described. I wonder if the previous text contained Amanpour’s wording (“some 56 tanks”) and who … Continue reading Fact is that as of 1 April 2022, Germany has merely approved the delivery of infantry fighting vehicles, which were originating from Germany, but currently belong to the Czech Republic.[4]The German Weapons Control Act prescribes such an approval process for exported weapons of war in order to provide a certain level of control over how and where German weapons are being used. Absolutely no German armoured vehicles have been delivered to Ukraine from German territory at this point.
Now, I am still thinking about the interview and wonder, why on earth Mrs. Baerbock registered this false assessment of Ms. Amanpour without a frown, let alone why she didn’t correct it. Was she not listening? Did she already know about Scholz’ opinion on that matter and hoped that this misunderstanding would help create some pressure on him? Or did she know that contracts have already been finalized and signed that would allow the German weapons industry to send discarded tanks to Ukraine, like German defense minister Christine Lambrecht alleged?
In any case, Germany would not have gotten so easily away with its decision to progress a step further in its own “Zeitenwende”. After all, a tank stands like nothing else for the sheer might of a war machinery and Ukrainian civilians have contributed to this symbolism with their defiant acts of trying to stop Russian tanks with their bare hands.[5] https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russian-tanks-ukraine-human-shield-b2024709.html [6]https://edition.cnn.com/europe/live-news/ukraine-russia-news-02-26-22/h_aabb90712d1378fd1446f84d86815fb5 [7]https://www.businessinsider.com/defiant-ukrainian-civilians-kneel-in-front-of-russian-tanks-block-roads-2022-2?op=1
Heavy Weapons: A Timeline
So, where has all this talk about “heavy weapons” suddenly been coming from in Germany? Well, simply because the war in Ukraine changed significantly. As the Russians were retreating from its positions around Kiew and the entire north of Ukraine, it was unveiled to the world what the Russian troops are capable of in the territories they occupy. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg deemed the images from Bucha a “brutality against civilians we haven’t seen in Europe for decades” and intercepted radio messages[8]https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/07/russian-soldiers-discussed-killing-civilians-in-radio-intercepts indicate that the Russian army’s killings of civilians was systematic rather than random acts by an undisciplined army.
So, the graver the brutalities, the heavier the weapons? Not quite.
It seems that these dramatic developments made Ukraine’s call for different, heavier weapon systems just more audible. And create an even darker scenario for the Baltic states who continue to fear being cut-off from Europe and tirelessly point to NATO’s weak-spot, the Suwalki gap.[9]https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/02/02/nato-baltic-states-sea-russia-military-defense/; … Continue reading
While the Baltic state’s demand for a higher NATO presence is finally being heard[10] https://www.dw.com/en/germanys-baerbock-calls-for-stronger-nato-strategy-in-baltics/a-61557467[11]NATO has increased its number of multi-national battle groups to eight, which extend all along NATO’s western flank: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_136388.htm, the Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky grows tired for having to repeat the contents of the Ukainian’s wish list of weapons, as he told The Atlantic recently: “When some leaders ask me what weapons I need, I need a moment to calm myself, because I already told them the week before.”[12]https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2022/04/zelensky-kyiv-russia-war-ukrainian-survival-interview/629570/ Zelensky’s frustration is understandable, given that he had to repeat himself many times. In February this year he spoke at the Munich Security Conference, claiming that “[t]he security architecture in Europe and the world is almost destroyed. […]” and spoke out what most would only come to realize five days later: “[T]he annexation of Crimea and the war in Donbas affects the whole world. And this is not a war in Ukraine, but a war in Europe. I said this at summits and forums. In 2019, 2020, 2021. Will the world be able to hear me in 2022?”[13] https://kyivindependent.com/national/zelenskys-full-speech-at-munich-security-conference/
Yet, he and his staff kept raising the issue of the delivery of more and more weapons in the belief that Ukrainians are fighting and dying so that Europeans won’t have to. After Butcha, the delivery of heavy weapons became a new talking point in Germany. On 5 April 2022, the Ambassador of Ukraine to Germany Andriy Melnyk emphasized in a television interview that Ukraine needed “above all heavy weapon systems […] armored vehicles, tanks, howitzer and artillery guns.”[14]https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/melnyk-ukraine-101.html in order to destroy Russia’s multiple rocket launchers that indiscriminately destroy entire Ukraine cities. He also voices the intention to free Ukraine’s territory in the south and south-east, expressing Ukraine’s confidence in launching counter-offensives against the Russian invasion.
In fact, any kind of effective warfare in Ukraine’s east and south make any kind of armored vehicles a necessity, as the terrain is different than in the north: It is considerably less populated than the outskirts of Kiev or the lively West of the country making infantry a vulnerable target to Russia’s altillery[15]https://wiretappedamerica.com/2022/04/21/ukraine-update-the-heavy-weapons-spigot-has-finally-opened-for-ukraine/. As Ukraine was preparing for a new offensive launched from the East, time was cruicial.
And, again, it was German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, who brought the issue up – again-, by saying that “Ukraine needs more military material, above all heavy weapons” on 11 April.[16] https://www.stern.de/politik/ausland/ukraine-krieg–aussenministerin-baerbock-fordert-lieferung-schwerer-waffen-31772868.html Now, the topic finally had reached the German media. The following two weeks saw a heated debate that was filled with reasons why Germany could not, should not and will not send its tanks to Ukraine.
At this point, I should add that Mrs. Baerbock added to her remarks that “now is not the time for excuses. But for creativity and pragmatism.”[17]ibid. She must have foreseen what was to follow..
(If you are wondering where the German Chancellor is in all this – so do I. In part 2 of this article, I will be trying to seeking him out and shed some light on what they are thinking about Germany’s “Zeitenwende” abroad.)
Image Credit: Rainer Lippert, CC BY-SA 4.0
References