Germany: Brigadier general takes on Green politicians
While in the inner-German discourse some uphold the motto "Hannemann, go ahead, you've got the biggest boots on", others warn: "The way you shout into the forest, it echoes back." Would it be militarily helpful, strategically wise or even morally necessary to supply Ukraine not only with money, light weapons, and indirectly also with heavy equipment, but directly with tanks, artillery and combat aircraft?
Only agree on one issue
On the political show Maybrit Illner on Thursday evening, former Vice-Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel (SPD), the member of the Bundestag and former Colonel Roderich Kiesewetter (CDU), the German and Ukrainian citizen and member of the Greens, Marina Weisband, discussed this military advisor to Angela Merkel and former brigadier general, Erich Vad, and the defense expert from the German Science and Politics Foundation, Claudia Major. Illner opens the program with the title "Putin's offensive - Germany still defensive?" with the words: "Anyone who follows the Chancellor's attempts at explanation knows less than before."
Everyone in the group agrees on one point: everyone wants peace for Ukraine, and nobody wants a third world war or a nuclear war. But while Gabriel and Vad believe that supplying heavy weapons to Ukraine could provoke Russian President Vladimir Putin into doing so, Major, Weisband and Kiesewetter claim the opposite.
Retired brigadier general against “war rhetoric”
Weisband reports the lack of understanding that relatives from the Ukraine have for German politics. She wants peace for her family in Ukraine and Germany. She therefore expects Chancellor Scholz to answer the question: "Does the federal government want Ukraine to win the war?" Later she asks: "Can Ukraine not win the war?".
The retired brigadier general Vad considers this type of “war rhetoric” to be dangerous and fundamentally wrong. The focus should be on ending the war and not on a military victory. It would be important to say: "We don't want Ukraine to win." It would be about finding a long-term peaceful and political solution to a conflict that would stretch out for a long time.
Vad describes the discussion about the supply of main battle tanks as a "phantom debate". Sending main battle tanks is "militarily nonsensical" because the Ukrainian soldiers have neither the necessary training nor the technology, infrastructure and logistics. The other NATO countries would also not supply any heavy weapons.
The number of military experts has grown like the virologists before”
This means that Vad has former Foreign Minister Gabriel on his side. This formulates as a red line: “What the USA can do, we can also do. We can't do what the USA doesn't do.” The two also agree in their criticism of would-be experts. Vad is visibly agitated: “It bothers me when German politicians from the Greens present military solutions as the ultimate goal. This is crazy. That’s what politicians do who have refused military service.” Gabriel is pleased to have a “real expert” in the ranks of the retired brigadier general, because recently the “number of military experts has grown like the number of virologists before”.
Another expert, Claudia Major, advocates crossing the red line set by Gabriel, including the demand for battle tanks. It is "in our interest that Russia does not win this war". War should not be worthwhile in Europe. Major can count on Weisband's approval, who formulates: "For international law to be of any value, it must be defended." For her part, Major sees the red line in NATO's decision not to become a party to the war. Below that, however, a lot is possible and Germany is "in good company" and is taking part in the massive armament of Ukraine. Germany has a responsibility: "If we move, we can make a difference."
What if Putin attacks other countries?
Retired Colonel Kiesewetter also sees a moral duty in supporting the Ukraine with all possible means. Although Germany is already providing money and light weapons and is participating in the ring exchange in Slovenia, Ukraine deserves “all the help”. Ukraine is defending values that "we prevented it from doing" by not yet admitting the country to NATO or the EU. It is important to create this perspective.
In the event of a defeat, there is a risk that Putin will attack other countries in Eastern Europe. The CDU politician calls for "safety guarantees that are resilient" for Ukraine. With a migration policy argument, he underlines the urgency of his concern. Over twelve million Ukrainian refugees are on the move. These must be signaled that there is a chance to return to the Ukraine. He leaves it to the viewer to decide what that would mean for domestic politics if it didn't succeed.
In the overall honest discussion at Illner, only Gabriel's SPD apologetics is a little out of line. After a film sequence showing the cooperation between the SPD and Russia in recent years, the latter replies that the prevailing opinion is: "Everyone who has spoken to Russia is to blame for this war." He considers this attitude to be "madness". After all, building Nord Stream 2 was a mistake, says Gabriel and at the same time makes it clear that he did not apologize for it.
On the political show Maybrit Illner on Thursday evening, former Vice-Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel (SPD), the member of the Bundestag and former Colonel Roderich Kiesewetter (CDU), the German and Ukrainian citizen and member of the Greens, Marina Weisband, discussed this military advisor to Angela Merkel and former brigadier general, Erich Vad, and the defense expert from the German Science and Politics Foundation, Claudia Major. Illner opens the program with the title "Putin's offensive - Germany still defensive?" with the words: "Anyone who follows the Chancellor's attempts at explanation knows less than before."
Everyone in the group agrees on one point: everyone wants peace for Ukraine, and nobody wants a third world war or a nuclear war. But while Gabriel and Vad believe that supplying heavy weapons to Ukraine could provoke Russian President Vladimir Putin into doing so, Major, Weisband and Kiesewetter claim the opposite.
Retired brigadier general against “war rhetoric”
Weisband reports the lack of understanding that relatives from the Ukraine have for German politics. She wants peace for her family in Ukraine and Germany. She therefore expects Chancellor Scholz to answer the question: "Does the federal government want Ukraine to win the war?" Later she asks: "Can Ukraine not win the war?".
The retired brigadier general Vad considers this type of “war rhetoric” to be dangerous and fundamentally wrong. The focus should be on ending the war and not on a military victory. It would be important to say: "We don't want Ukraine to win." It would be about finding a long-term peaceful and political solution to a conflict that would stretch out for a long time.
Vad describes the discussion about the supply of main battle tanks as a "phantom debate". Sending main battle tanks is "militarily nonsensical" because the Ukrainian soldiers have neither the necessary training nor the technology, infrastructure and logistics. The other NATO countries would also not supply any heavy weapons.
The number of military experts has grown like the virologists before”
This means that Vad has former Foreign Minister Gabriel on his side. This formulates as a red line: “What the USA can do, we can also do. We can't do what the USA doesn't do.” The two also agree in their criticism of would-be experts. Vad is visibly agitated: “It bothers me when German politicians from the Greens present military solutions as the ultimate goal. This is crazy. That’s what politicians do who have refused military service.” Gabriel is pleased to have a “real expert” in the ranks of the retired brigadier general, because recently the “number of military experts has grown like the number of virologists before”.
Another expert, Claudia Major, advocates crossing the red line set by Gabriel, including the demand for battle tanks. It is "in our interest that Russia does not win this war". War should not be worthwhile in Europe. Major can count on Weisband's approval, who formulates: "For international law to be of any value, it must be defended." For her part, Major sees the red line in NATO's decision not to become a party to the war. Below that, however, a lot is possible and Germany is "in good company" and is taking part in the massive armament of Ukraine. Germany has a responsibility: "If we move, we can make a difference."
What if Putin attacks other countries?
Retired Colonel Kiesewetter also sees a moral duty in supporting the Ukraine with all possible means. Although Germany is already providing money and light weapons and is participating in the ring exchange in Slovenia, Ukraine deserves “all the help”. Ukraine is defending values that "we prevented it from doing" by not yet admitting the country to NATO or the EU. It is important to create this perspective.
In the event of a defeat, there is a risk that Putin will attack other countries in Eastern Europe. The CDU politician calls for "safety guarantees that are resilient" for Ukraine. With a migration policy argument, he underlines the urgency of his concern. Over twelve million Ukrainian refugees are on the move. These must be signaled that there is a chance to return to the Ukraine. He leaves it to the viewer to decide what that would mean for domestic politics if it didn't succeed.
In the overall honest discussion at Illner, only Gabriel's SPD apologetics is a little out of line. After a film sequence showing the cooperation between the SPD and Russia in recent years, the latter replies that the prevailing opinion is: "Everyone who has spoken to Russia is to blame for this war." He considers this attitude to be "madness". After all, building Nord Stream 2 was a mistake, says Gabriel and at the same time makes it clear that he did not apologize for it.
Source: Junge Freiheit
Posts
