German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has been under pressure for weeks to deliver Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine. Last week, he explained for the first time in more detail why he would not agree to a delivery – albeit at the expense of his allies. A wiretapping scandal further complicates the situation. A classification of the situation.
Since Russia published a recording of a discussion between senior Bundeswehr officials about a possible use of the Taurus, the debate has become even more confusing.
What do we learn from the recording?
The recording published by a Russian state broadcaster confirms that the decision to deploy Taurus cruise missiles is ultimately a political decision: experts from the German Bundeswehr differ in their assessments when it comes to Ukraine’s training time, the necessary interfaces with the aircraft and the provision of data.
But they believe it is feasible to provide a quick fix within three months and a more comprehensive solution for the Taurus deployment within about eight months. Only with longer training could it be assumed that the Ukrainians would manage the system themselves.
It is repeatedly emphasized that this is technically feasible, but a political decision must be made on the extent to which Germany should be involved – especially if Russia’s Kerch Bridge to the occupied Crimean Peninsula is attacked. This is based on the political ‘red lines’. The military also assumes that Germany will be “involved in some way,” especially in meaningful, rapid data evaluation for target coordinates. The delivery of 50, perhaps 100 Taurus cruise missiles, which could also be used against Russian ammunition depots, is conceivable.
How much is too much?
According to Scholz, the overriding rule since the outbreak of the war has been that the war between NATO and Russia must not escalate. Scholz repeated this a few days ago. The debate is complicated by French President Emmanuel Macron, who on Monday in Paris publicly no longer rules out the deployment of ground troops in Ukraine.
In the recording of the German officers published by Russia, it is said that the British had some experts in Ukraine for the use of the ‘Storm Shadow’ cruise missiles, while the French did not. There were already reports about this weeks ago. There is also talk of civilian employees in Ukraine ‘with American accents’.
Scholz troubled his NATO allies by claiming last week that British and French forces were actively involved in the use of long-range missiles in Ukraine, for which he was widely criticized. His statements caused great astonishment in London and Paris.
The Chancellor of Germany
Scholz had already argued in the tank debate in 2023 that as German Chancellor he was particularly responsible for German security and would have to make decisions afterwards.
The Russian leadership also repeats the comparisons with Nazi Germany in the Bull debate. Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev quotes from poems from World War II that it is good to kill German soldiers. The German debate fuels this because it warns of both an escalation and the Chancellor’s “cheering” against Russia.
A matter of technology
Part of the debate revolves around Scholz’s claim that Bundeswehr soldiers should be deployed for the Taurus mission in Ukraine itself. However, the Chancellor never said that. At the dpa on Monday he emphasized the general line that there should be no Bundeswehr soldiers in Ukraine. However, regarding Stier, he added: “German soldiers should not be linked at any point or place to the goals this system achieves – not even in Germany.”
The background is that the target data for Taurus can also be controlled from Germany. German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius further complicated the debate when, in response to a question a few days ago, he spoke cryptically about several Taurus systems – also used in South Korea.
By the way: unlike in Great Britain, the deployment of Bundeswehr soldiers in Ukraine would require a parliamentary resolution.
What if Taurus is abused?
Scholz emphasized for the first time on Friday that Taurus, with a range of 500 kilometers, is a weapon “that, if used incorrectly, can reach a specific target somewhere in Moscow.” Referring to Britain and France, he added: “That is why – I will say it in all diplomatic abstraction – others have also made sure they know exactly where everything ends up.”
The Russian recording also shows the British looking at the target data. The British ‘Storm Shadow’ and the French ‘Scalp’ can only fly about 250 kilometers and would therefore not reach Moscow. The US has not yet delivered such long-range cruise missiles to Ukraine. Scholz always insists on coordination with US President Joe Biden when it comes to new weapon systems.
Ukrainians complain of distrust of the German chancellor. But in government circles, at least behind closed doors, it is being pointed out that we need to think about what might happen in a year or two. Domestic politics in Ukraine are already boiling today. In any case, it is not impossible that at some point President Volodymyr Zelensky will no longer be in power, but rather a desperate successor who would fire Taurus at the Kremlin in an emergency. This must be taken into account given the range of this weapon.
Source: Krone
I am Wallace Jones, an experienced journalist. I specialize in writing for the world section of Today Times Live. With over a decade of experience, I have developed an eye for detail when it comes to reporting on local and global stories. My passion lies in uncovering the truth through my investigative skills and creating thought-provoking content that resonates with readers worldwide.
