Jan 26: Minna Alander- Berlinology- Lesson 1
Thread as published on January 23, 2023
Who is Minna Ålander…
Minna Ålander is a research fellow at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs. Her research topics include German foreign and security policy and security in the Nordic region.
Minna Ålander: Berlinology- Lesson 1
Welcome to my seminar “introduction into Berlinology”, lesson 1.
Today the German government spokesperson said “the federal government does not exclude the possibility of delivering leopard tanks. It just hasn’t decided yet, whether it will do so.”
What do we make of it ?
In classic mixed messaging, leaving everyone deeply baffled, FM Baerbock said yesterday on French tv that Germany would not block others from delivering leopards. But it remained unclear whether she spoke for the whole government.
Government spokesperson, when asked about Baerbock’s statement, answered: “if such a request was made to Germany, which is not the case at the moment, there are processes to answer such a request. And we all stick to them.”
This means: no, Baerbock did not speak for the whole government.
There was a top-level SPD meeting today, where the tank question was debated for an hour (!). The chancellor seems convinced he’s doing the right thing with his Besonnenheit approach and reiterated his talking points about avoiding escalation (NATO-Russia war) & keine Alleingänge.
Here my thread about the fear of escalation and alleged “Besonnenheit” as a reminder: Unroll available on Thread Reader
Fascinatingly, Scholz has called his own bluff about going it alone by admitting that anything without the US is a no-go (European partners don’t apparently matter in the equation).
He also points to the public opinion (that there is no clear majority in favour of Leo delivery).
Here’s my thread drilling into the question why Scholz has so far never said that Ukraine should win, only that “Ukraine cannot lose, and Russia cannot win”, including public opinion polls on the leopard delivery and Crimea:
Unroll available on Thread Reader
Particularly interesting: in the chancellery, the military significance of leopard tanks is estimated to be very high - with them Ukraine would have a real advantage over Russia.
…uhm yes that is THE argument FOR delivering leopards ?
…right ?
???
It sounds very much like a confirmation of my interpretation of Scholz’/ the SPD position: that Ukraine shouldn’t push Russia too much and too far, otherwise it could have unpredictable escalatory consequences.
A flawed cynical logic that costs Ukrainian lives.
And finally, what I always say: the guesswork of Putin’s red lines, a must-have debate over and over again with every new weapons system sent to Ukraine, are in reality self-imposed red lines for Scholz/ Germany. But they have been constantly moving, taboo after taboo.
The parameters will keep moving, the longer the war lasts. It’s tanks now, fighter jets next, and longer-range missiles at some point. In Germany, the debate will probably be the same, every time.
Unless Scholz finally endorses a Ukrainian victory and defines what it means.
Further reading…
Minna Alander, It’s the National Security, Stupid- Lawfare
Finland has been edging closer to NATO membership this spring. But the historic U-turn in the Nordic country’s hitherto militarily nonaligned security policy has raised concerns about possible retaliation from neighboring Russia. Finland shares a 830-mile-long border with its eastern neighbor—a geopolitical fact that many international observers have only recently found out. Finland, however, has never lost sight of the long eastern border, and it is not an exaggeration to say that Finns have been preparing for potential aggression coming from the east all their history. As then-Defence Minister Jyri Häkämies said in a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C., in 2007: “[G]iven our geographical location, the three main security challenges for Finland today are Russia, Russia and Russia.”
