- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Please use your browsers built in function to translate and read the full article in english:
Olaf Scholz, the German Chancellor, is facing a significant challenge surrounding the Taurus missile, a 5-meter-long, 1.4-ton precision-guided cruise missile of the Bundeswehr. Initially, it was an internal political dispute within the coalition on whether to deliver the missiles to Ukraine. However, since Scholz broke his silence on Taurus last week, the issue has gained international attention, with accusations of indiscretion and a leaked conversation among Bundeswehr officers adding to the complexity.
In a conversation initiated by Luftwaffeninspekteur Ingo Gerhartz, details about Taurus were disclosed, including the potential quantity of missiles for delivery and their estimated cost. The situation has raised concerns about Germany’s security, as the leaked information could pose risks given the country’s vulnerability to Russian intelligence. Additionally, the controversy has strained relations with allies, particularly the UK, following Scholz’s public explanation for rejecting Taurus delivery to Ukraine and allegations of Germany’s inability to handle target guidance independently.
The British government denied Scholz’s claims, but the leaked conversation indicated the UK’s involvement in supporting Ukraine with missile guidance. The situation has heightened tensions, with some viewing Scholz’s statements as an abuse of intelligence information. There are also accusations of the Chancellor providing false information regarding the necessity of German involvement in Taurus deployment.
Despite these challenges, Scholz and Defense Minister Boris Pistorius are adopting a defensive strategy, urging unity against Russian President Vladimir Putin’s alleged eavesdropping. The government characterizes the situation as absurd Russian propaganda. While the opposition may exert pressure, Scholz appears unlikely to reverse his decision on Taurus delivery, fearing it would be seen as a response to the surveillance and potentially escalate the situation. Overall, the delivery of Taurus missiles to Ukraine seems increasingly improbable in the aftermath of recent events, aligning with Putin’s interests.
A (imho) better translation would be “I’m the chancellor, and what I say is what we do” - granted, that translation isn’t literal, but the intention is better.
But he’s definitely not my chancellor and I couldn’t care less, what he deems has to be done - he and his coalition lost all my trust and while I personally still think the FDP didn’t allow the greens and the SPD to wreck havoc and prevented the absolute worst case…it’s still an utter shitshow.
While I agree we shouldn’t send boots at this point, completely ruling it out like he did, gives Russia incentive and legitimises their “cause”.
Taurus on the other hand should be sent and IMHO, Ukraine should determine what to attack, because we should also trust their tactical judgement. Ukraine followed the deals to the letter - and honouring that trust in us is trusting Ukraine to keep doing that. Which is something Russia never did.
About the leak, i think it was intentional as well.
“What I say, goes” might be the proper intention, I was being a little facetious in my initial translation but I decided against it.
I personally would have liked to see a little more green in the broader German ambitions, and more push back against the Agri lobby.
In terms of the war the self imposed constraints keep puzzling me and frustrating others. I just hope that Europe will now get serious on a European defense sector that is able to be self sufficient and can sufficiently standardize stuff across the various armies. In the mean time, Germany ordering another 100 Taurus from the manufacturer and sending Ukraine 2 batches of 50 would be helpful. No individual weapon is a game changer, but taking out that stupid bridge will be one.