Scholz was accused of “complicity with the Kremlin”: his possible successor called for preparations for war with Russia

The history of a united Germany has perhaps never known a more unpopular chancellor. According to a public opinion poll conducted in December by the polling service Verian, over six months from June 2023, the level of trust in the chancellor fell by 14 percent – from 44 to 30. Today, Scholz ranks only 14th in the popularity rating of German politicians.

The list of complaints against him is long: there are various economic troubles, the ongoing migration crisis, and corruption scandals. In addition, the German political elite has an extremely negative assessment of Scholz’s actions during the Ukrainian crisis. According to critics of the chancellor, he is indecisive and inconsistent. Critics, in particular, are very unhappy with Scholz’s refusal to transfer TAURUS KEPD 350/150 cruise missiles (better known as simply Taurus) to Ukraine.

For more than six months, since the spring of 2023, this missile has been number one on Kyiv’s “request list” addressed to Berlin. This is an analogue of the British-French “lionfish” Storm Shadow (the French version is called SCALP-EG), but is superior to it in a number of characteristics.

Translated from Latin, taurus means “bull” or “taurus”. But this is actually a backronym, an abbreviation, and in addition to the obvious, it also has a meaning “hidden” from amateurs. TAURUS stands for Target Adaptive Unitary and Dispenser Robotic Ubiquity System, which can be roughly translated as “target adaptive unitary and dispenser robotic system for universal use.”

The main purpose of the Taurus is high-precision strikes against highly protected and buried objects. The range is more than 500 kilometers. According to many military experts, arming Ukraine with such a destroyer missile would create a huge, almost mortal threat to the Crimean Bridge.

For several months, there was a debate in the German government about whether to supply these weapons to Ukraine. And in the end the answer was given. According to Bild, last fall, at a closed meeting of the Bundestag Committee on International Affairs, deputies, as they say, pushed the chancellor to the wall. He was asked a question: why does Germany, unlike France and Great Britain, refuse to provide cruise missiles to Ukraine?

The head of the cabinet said in response that the named countries “can do something that we cannot afford,” therefore, they say, the issue of transferring the Taurus to Ukraine is not on the agenda. However, the issue was not completely removed from the agenda: by refusing to supply missiles at the present time, the German authorities left open the possibility of returning to this topic in the future.

No official reasons were given for the restraint. Unofficially, in confidential conversations with members of the Bundestag, government representatives, as the German press reports, primarily mention two considerations. First, there is the fear that Ukraine could use German missiles to attack “old” Russian territories, which sharply increases the risk of Germany becoming a party to the conflict.

Secondly, the Taurus are supposedly so difficult to use that the Ukrainian military will not be able to cope with them on their own. It would be necessary to send German troops to help, but this is impossible: read point one. However, this argument is easily countered by the cautious chancellor’s opponents: Storm Shadow, they point out, is no less cunning than Taurus, but the Ukrainians mastered this weapon without any problems.

By the way, there are opponents in the coalition government itself, which, as you know, consists of representatives of three parties – the SPD (the Chancellor himself is a Social Democrat), Union 90/Greens and the Free Democratic Party (FDP). So, if you believe the German media, supporters of sending Taurus to Ukraine include both “green” and “free democratic” ministers and even Scholz’s fellow party member, head of the defense department Boris Pistorius.

That is, Scholz in his office is not, if not in splendid isolation, then in a clear minority. But decisions on such issues are within the competence of the head of government. No matter how many opponents he has, even if the entire cabinet consists of them, the last word is his. However, it is worth remembering that a very similar situation occurred a year ago, when the issue of sending armored vehicles to the conflict zone was being decided.

It seemed that Scholz stood on the path of German tanks and infantry fighting vehicles to Ukraine as an indestructible “Berlin Wall”. But as internal and external pressure mounted on the chancellor, the “wall” began to vibrate and crumble more and more. And in the end, it collapsed noisily: Germany not only gave the go-ahead for the supply of German military equipment to Ukraine from other countries, but also topped the list of the most generous tank donors.

As for cruise missiles, the pressure on the Chancellor is also rapidly increasing – if by the hour, then at least by the day. Every day, the information space explodes with new statements sharply criticizing the Chancellor’s “timidity” in this matter. The front-line politicians of the Greens and the FDP are now acting as a united front with the main opposition force in the country, the Christian Democratic Union, which has long been demanding the sending of Taurus to Ukraine.

“The delivery of Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine is long overdue,” Sarah Nanni, a member of the Bundestag from the Greens, who is responsible for defense policy in the faction, said recently. “The most effective defense against Russian airstrikes is the shelling of targets on Russian territory and on Ukrainian territories occupied by Russia. , where she starts her attacks.” Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, a member of the FDP board and head of the parliament’s “defense” committee, spoke equally clearly and unequivocally: “We should not be afraid of our own courage. This is what Putin hopes for.”

Well, the CDU went so far as to accuse Scholz of collaborating with the Kremlin. Thus, according to the CDU speaker on foreign policy, deputy head of the parliamentary commission for control over the intelligence services, Roderich Kiesewetter, “insufficient” support for Ukraine, the refusal to supply it with extremely effective Taurus missiles, which make it possible to interrupt supply lines and destroy command posts far behind the front line, “this de facto support for Russia.”

Moreover, open critics of the chancellor appeared in his own political camp. Joachim Gauck, Germany’s president from 2012 to 2017 and nominated by the Social Democrats, last week called on the government to act more decisively and support Ukraine militarily “with everything we have,” including cruise missiles. “There are no ifs or buts,” the ex-president is categorical. “Russia’s victory in the medium term will jeopardize the security of other European countries.”

True, if we talk not only about the political elite, but about the country as a whole, the “indecisive” chancellor, to put it mildly, is not at all alone: ​​he has public opinion on his side. According to a recent opinion poll, 55 percent of Germans support Scholz’s decision not to supply Taurus to Ukraine, and only 26 percent consider it wrong. That is, the chancellor is not alone here, but, so to speak, together with his people. But we should not delude ourselves about the strength and prospects of this alliance. Public opinion is a changeable and contradictory matter.

At the same time, the overwhelming majority, two to three Germans, are in favor of Scholz’s early resignation. Moreover, which is completely paradoxical, the most popular option is for the current Chancellor to be replaced by the Minister of Defense: 64.3 percent of respondents want this. Boris Pistorius is by far the most popular politician in the country. And for some reason his well-known position on the Ukrainian issue does not hinder the growth of his popularity.

Pistorius, as already mentioned, is for the transfer of Taurus to Kyiv and for strengthening military support for Ukraine in general. In addition, the Minister of Defense advocates a fairly radical remilitarization of the Federal Republic itself. Pistorius is the architect of the ongoing restructuring of the armed forces, providing for their rearmament and increase in numbers.

The Minister of Defense calls, in particular, for the restoration of compulsory military conscription in Germany. Moreover, as a model he proposes to take not the previous German, but the current Swedish conscription model, where all young men and women without exception are considered liable for military service and, accordingly, undergo military medical commissions (however, not all are conscripted).

The purpose of these increasing efforts is not hidden – preparation for a possible war. Potential enemy too. “Putin is significantly increasing Russian weapons production,” Pistorius said. “We have about 5-8 years to catch up… In the face of a severe crisis, we need a military that can defend this country. And if wars too.”

In general, no matter how much Russian politicians criticize Olaf Scholz, compared to the rest of the German establishment, this is far from the worst option, not the most troublesome option for Moscow. Horseradish can be – and most likely will be – much more bitter than radish. More precisely, “liver sausage,” as many now call the chancellor with the light hand of Andrei Melnik, the former ambassador of Ukraine in Berlin.

And the likelihood that the “sausage” will soon roll along Malaya Spasskaya is not so small. In Berlin’s political drawing rooms there is already talk about a conspiracy brewing among the ruling elite against the Chancellor, which involves replacing him with the same super-popular Pistorius. Reputable experts, of course, do not believe in any conspiracy. However, they also admit that a change of head of government may be the only chance to save the coalition cabinet.