Russian invasion of Ukraine | Fewer tweets, more discussion

Good article.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/jan/18/germany-history-defend-ukraine-zelenskiy

If Germany has truly learned from its history, it will send tanks to defend Ukraine
Timothy Garton Ash
Wed 18 Jan 2023

While many have pledged support, Germany has a unique historical responsibility toward Zelenskiy and his people. It cannot shirk it

[...]

Germany’s historical responsibility comes in three unequal stages. Eighty years ago, Nazi Germany was itself fighting a war of terror on this very same Ukrainian soil: the same cities, towns and villages were its victims as are now Russia’s, and sometimes even the same people.

[...]

The second stage of historical responsibility comes from what the German president, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, has honestly described as the “bitter failure” of German policy towards Russia after the annexation of Crimea and the start of Russian aggression in eastern Ukraine in 2014.

[...]

This historic mistake led to the third and most recent stage. A month after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine on 24 February last year, a group of leading German figures formulated an appeal for an immediate boycott of fossil fuels from Russia. “Looking back on its history,” they wrote, “Germany has repeatedly vowed that there must ‘never again’ be wars of conquest and crimes against humanity. Today the hour has come to honour that vow.” (Full disclosure: I co-signed this appeal.)

Chancellor Olaf Scholz decided against this radical course, arguing that it would endanger “hundreds of thousands of jobs” and plunge both Germany and Europe into recession.

[...]

According to a careful analysis by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air, in the first six months of the full-scale war, Germany paid Russia some €19bn for oil, gas and coal. For comparison: Russia’s entire military budget for six months in 2021 was around €30bn. (No reliable figures are available for 2022.) Since a large part of Russia’s budget revenues comes from energy, the unavoidable conclusion is that Germany was contributing to Putin’s military budget, even as he prosecuted a war of terror on the very soil where Nazi Germany had prosecuted a war of terror 80 years before. Yes, other European countries also went on paying Russia for energy, but none had Germany’s unique historical responsibility towards Ukraine.

[...]

This has also become a litmus test of Germany’s courage to resist Putin’s nuclear blackmail, overcome its own domestic cocktail of fears and doubts, and defend a free and sovereign Ukraine. Scholz’s speech at the World Economic Forum on Wednesday gave no hint of such boldness. But in stepping to the front of a European Leopard plan for Ukraine, Scholz would be showing German leadership that the entire west would welcome. He would also be learning the right lessons from Germany’s recent and very recent history.
Miracles do happen, I agree with you on something, this is a good article ;)

A bit oversimplifying the events of WW2 and completely ignoring the events of WW1 (which lead some Russian propaganda outlets to claim that Ukraine is just an artificial construct created by the Germans and not a real nation), but I guess this is more important if you want to analyze Russian reasoning and not really for the Germans now.

However I fear it's not going to happen. The selection of the new Defence Secretary (Boris Pistorius) doesn't indicate a policy change by Scholz, as Pistorius never was a vocal critic of Russia but instead for example advocated some years ago for reducing the sanctions put into place after 2014. So the typical russophile SPD member in a sense. However he definitely is more competent at organising stuff than Lambrecht was, so if decisions are made I have a little bit more hope that they are actually fulfilled in a useful and timely manner.
 


Spot on of course.

If only more European leaders would've realized this reality earlier, they wouldn't be burdened by scrambling to divest from reliance on Russia in the present.
 
He has been against helping Ukraine since the start, and has also been against Sweden and Finland joining NATO.

An idiot who still has nostalgia for Soviet Union (like many left-wing people in ex-Yugoslavia have), or being in Russian's payroll, this is the question.
Maybe both. His mandate will be all about him spouting crap after crap for 5 years. Hopefully he'll lose the election on Ukraine theme cause as you said he's been prorussian from the start.
 

Finally some mid-to-long range capabilities will be provided, long hecking overdue…Ideally, should be given 300km though. Hope these can be delivered in the shortest possible timeframes not allowing Russia to adjust their logistics.
 
Last edited:
The US has an absolutely stupid amount of tanks, they really could send some to Ukraine and not notice they were gone.
The problem with the M1 Abrams is not the amount of available tanks, it's the engine that is the main issue.
Western tanks like Leopard, Challenger and Leclerc all use diesel engines very similar to a normal truck engine and can be repaired by any half decent truck mechanic.
The M1 Abrams on the other hand uses a turbine engine that requires specially trained mechanics and special spare parts. It's fuel consumption is also quite a bit higher.
 
More on that new US package.
WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. is finalizing a massive package of military aid for Ukraine that U.S. officials say is likely to total as much as $2.6 billion.

It’s expected to include for the first time nearly 100 Stryker combat vehicles and at least 50 Bradley armored vehicles to allow Ukrainian forces to move more quickly and securely on the front lines in the war with Russia — but not the tanks that Ukraine has sought.
https://apnews.com/article/russia-ukraine-military-technology-45417ab5b91036fc291cedf357533509
 
The US has an absolutely stupid amount of tanks, they really could send some to Ukraine and not notice they were gone.

The problem with sending Abrams is that it will be mostly useless without the huge logistical support that the US military is built around. I could see the US announcing that it will be giving Ukraine some token amount of tanks just to force Scholz to come up with another excuse, but they would be functionally useless. The turbine engine makes some sense in the broader American military infrastructure system, but the diesels in Leopards would be far more useful to the Ukrainians since they could be maintained more easily.
 
Did Ukraine actually think west is helping them win and not prolonging this until eternity?

This makes no sense. Weakening Russia is in everyone's best interests. Well except Hungary and Serbia.
 
Makes my blood boil, Germany simply can’t be relied upon in future defense conversations.


This is just silly. What difference does it make to Germany whether USA sends Abrams or not? What is Scholz worried about? That Russia will bomb Berlin with nuclear weapons and will not bomb Washington? I cannot find any logical explanation for what Scholz is doing for a full year now. Is he a Russian agent?

Remember this? January 27, 2022, one year ago. Five thousand helmets!!! How generous!

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/27/germanys-offer-to-send-5000-helmets-to-ukraine-provokes-outrage.html

‘It’s a joke’: Germany’s offer of 5,000 helmets to Ukraine is met with disdain amid Russia invasion fears
 

I have said that already some time ago, it’s a nightmare logistically speaking, making Germany’s condition even more crazy.

Also:


In addition, Austin will apparently pressure the new Germany’s defense minister to drop this nonsensical condition too. Not a good look on Germany at all this whole Leopard case.
 
It sounds like the US should just send an Abram to fulfil the condition and open the doors for the tanks that suit Ukraine
 


Good on her. It’s such a shortsighted argument “we are giving all this money and weapons to Ukraine”.

The real argument is “Ukraine are currently the first line of defence in Europe and we are giving them what we need to protect us, in return many are giving up their lives”.
 
This makes no sense. Weakening Russia is in everyone's best interests. Well except Hungary and Serbia.

Its the - west is escalating the war by providing weapons - stance. You know Russia wants peace and negotiations and Ukraine and the West are escalating it..
 
Last edited:
The problem with sending Abrams is that it will be mostly useless without the huge logistical support that the US military is built around. I could see the US announcing that it will be giving Ukraine some token amount of tanks just to force Scholz to come up with another excuse, but they would be functionally useless. The turbine engine makes some sense in the broader American military infrastructure system, but the diesels in Leopards would be far more useful to the Ukrainians since they could be maintained more easily.

Do America still older less advanced tanks or have they sold them all off at this point?