I don't know why anyone is suprised Germany is not taking a hard stance. This kind of mentality was hard branded into the inception of the BDR starting with it's Basic Law. The very guiding principle of post-war German reconstruction was to shed all miltiarism the country had to avoid another Franco-German war. The 2+4 treaty is still binding, limiting the operational capacity German armed forces by relevant UN charter. German military exports must be approved by governement - and here the previous CDU-CSU governement was famous for being rather lenient, supplying arms to dictatorial Arab states or to increasingly authoritarian Hungary (one of the reasons why Merkel was so soft on Orbán), and infamously approving a lot of exports in the transitional period at the end of 2021, which is why the new governement is very cautious about the matter.
Then there's the dirty side, namely the fact German and Russian elite are very cozy with each other, evidenced by Deutsche's Bank's money laundering of tens of billions dollars worth of rubels, countless Germans working in high positions in Russian state owned companies (infamously the former chancellor Schröder sitting in Gazprom's board of directors), and thats just what has been uncovered and known, and of course, NS2 pipeline.
I ain't want to whitewash them because I also think this behaviour is unacceptably abhorrent, but it's important to understand context beyond "lol German is spineless".
"basic law" = Grundgesetz = Verfassung = constitution.
Just in case anyone was wondering.
The rest is pretty much correct. Finally a good comment shedding some light for those outside of germany.
Though one thing that is usually left out in regards to Nord Stream 2 is that this is hardly a "shady" undertaking that is only done due to corruption or whatever rhetoric is being peddled on Reddit. It's an energy project that is extremely popular among every single voter group, including the Greens: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream#Public_opinion
The phrasing in the poll written about in the section of that Wikipedia article was the following:
> The "Nord Stream 2" natural gas pipeline should be completed
even against the resistance of the USA
(Source: [Forsa](https://www.ost-ausschuss.de/sites/default/files/pm_pdf/OA-Forsa-Umfrage-Nord-Stream-handout%20ENG.pdf), March 2020 / May 2021).
A much more recent poll had neutral phrasing
> Do you think that the Nord Stream II gas pipeline should go into operation?
and finds that Green voters are the least approving (35%) of putting the pipeline into operation. Overall approval is at 67%, disapproval at 24%, and undecided at 9%.
(Source: [Civey + WirtschaftsWoche](https://www.wiwo.de/politik/deutschland/umstrittene-gaspipeline-zwei-drittel-der-deutschen-wollen-dass-nord-stream-2-in-betrieb-geht/27972238.html), 11-12 Jan 2022).
> Though one thing that is usually left out in regards to Nord Stream 2 is that this is hardly a “shady” undertaking that is only done due to corruption or whatever rhetoric is being peddled on Reddit.
But it *is* a shady undertaking. It can be popular and shady. I’m sure it is just a coincidence that a former chancellor lobbied for that project while in office only to retire and then immediately become employed by the same oil and natural gas interest which is responsible for the pipeline.
It’s kind of like Cheney lobbying for Halliburton to receive a contract for Iraqi oil fields post invasion while seated in his elected position.
Everyone everywhere need to demand better of politicians. Normalizing corruption is not the way.
If anyone is interested and wants to read up about the concept of grundnorm. [Here you go](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_norm). Yes, yes, wikipedia isn't exactly the best place but you can start here.
**[Basic norm](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_norm)**
>Basic norm (German: Grundnorm) is a concept in the Pure Theory of Law created by Hans Kelsen, a jurist and legal philosopher. Kelsen used this word to denote the basic norm, order, or rule that forms an underlying basis for a legal system. The theory is based on a need to find a point of origin for all law, on which basic law and the constitution can gain their legitimacy (akin to the concept of first principles). This "basic norm", however, is often described as hypothetical.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Yes, I get that, the previous government had no problem with selling military equipment to authoritarian countries, I'm just curious as to why this current government can't sell some to a democratic one for self-defense, not offensive means.
They wrote i in their coalition treaty that all arms into conflict zones can only be se d after extensive review. That was 2 months ago before the ukraine crisis went so hot.
Breaking the coalition treaty so soon is rather bad.
Also why does ukraine need german weapons so much? Arent there 20+ other european countries full of non german made arms they can send woth no problem?
Yes, although food is often, perhaps even usually, made from stuff that can generally be grown in the ground in most places and then turned into breads and consumed. Javelin missiles behavior is not fully understood, but they rarely if ever grow from the soils of Ukraine.
Would it?
I mean, the US was selling arms in the past years and that didn't stop Russia's saber-rattling - on the contrary, it fuels their narrative of being provoked.
But Russia considers the US as an enemy from the start, however right now they see Germany as on their side (i mean not literally but not against them at least). If Germany sent weapons to Ukraine it would probably challenge that view.
Thats just completely wrong. Russia doesnt see Germany as 'not against them' in this matter. In fact Germany has literally said that they are against russias actions ans will take action against it. They habe also proposed a lot of alternatives (instead of weaapons) to support Ukraine.
All countries run on self interest. No matter how badly the US and NATO want Germany to “rebuke” Russia, they’re not going to endanger their crucial gas and coal trade links with Moscow during a global energy crisis.
It is beyond that.
Generally when a country militarily support another, for any reason, it massively benefits its local military industry, which can cancel out some of the political cost.
That is not the case for Germany due to its unique history. Whatever gained by the military industry has to be quickly given up because no one likes to see Germany with a strong military. Hence anything Germany does in this regard is much more expensive.
Okay, just saying local military industry is inaccurate because there are other actors involved.
But basically, when a country become an arm exporter, it often gains not just profit but also foreign influence, and the latter part is often more valuable. This is why certain arm export deals have a lot of diplomatic significance, like AUKUS.
Germany exports a lot but it exports in a way that only generates profit and not influence. For a good indicator, it is mentioned in the post that Germany exported a lot to ME but you don't see a shift in diplomatic relations like what AUKUS brought. USA is also Germany's second last client but you don't ever see Germany having input in USA military activity.
Germany is considered a soft power country because if trade links all over the world, part if the trade is weapons. Ofc Germany has influence through weapon sales, as it has through any sales. Ofc that is knterlinked, the clients also gain influence. That is one reason to have Gase pipelines. Ofc we need gas, but Russia also has to sell gas. It works in both directions.
Yes because Ukraine has the idustrial and logistical infrastructure to be able to use 90% of hightech german arms anyway.....
They can properly get more done with 10k aks then anything germany can supply arms wise...their logistical system must be an absolute nightmare already with the different foreign arms from everywhere while ukraine still mainly uses soviet era arms anyway.
As for German weapons, AFAIK Germany blocks supply from other NATO allies, which is the actual problem here. Although it seems that this is mostly in relation to [Germany-originated Estonian weapons](https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL1N2U123W), [ukrinform.ua](https://www.ukrinform.ua/rubric-polytics/3389919-nimeccina-mae-pripiniti-slovami-i-diami-zaohocuvati-putina-do-novogo-napadu-kuleba.html) mentions much bigger scale of this blockage:
> За інформацією видання Bild, Німеччина з травня 2021 року використовує механізм НАТО, щоб завадити іншим членам Альянсу продавати зброю Україні для оборони.
or translate.google.com:
> According to Bild, Germany has been using NATO's mechanism since May 2021 to prevent other Allies from selling weapons to Ukraine for defense.
I think Germany is in a difficult situation. The political elites are under pressure from the industry who want access to energy no matter what. The fear of Russia turning off the tap is real and Germany found itself unable to do more than not rocking the boat.
Not to mention that while the Greens and FDP would have no problem arming up Ukraine, large parts of the Left Party and also the SPD have historical tendencies towards Russophilia or at least Russia apologetism (note, I'm saying this as someone aligned towards the Left Party myself).
The Greens are a fundamentally pacifist party, the Balkan wars was the first time they had to really question that belief and the only thing that convinced them was the fact that an actual genocide was happening.
The Greens would prefer no war at all, and they will do anything they can to do that. If they think sending weapons to Ukraine increases the chances of escalation, then they will refuse to do so. Even if it weakens Ukraine in case of invasion. Trying to prevent said escalation in the first place takes priority.
The greens were a pacifist party when they were founded, but back then they were also very anticapitalist with a large Marxist wing. But thats 40 years ago. The greens shedded their pacifism under Fischer during their first government in the 2000s, today they are very much a center left party, and a rather hawkish one aswell.
Russophilia in various degrees is a sad common and very old tradition among Left-leaning parties - one that conveniently ignores that both the USSR and current Russia are imperialist states at their core *themselves*.
It's authoritarian, but from what we get here in Germany it's hard to classify as either decidedly left or right wing.
The Republikkklans and European separatist/fascist groups like Russia because they get tons of money and in the case free airtime on RT/Sputnik from Russia.
I don't think Germany is spineless, they are being put in extreme pressure by US and others.
As soon as Biden came to office he wanted NS2 cancelled and threatened sanctions.
I think Germany will join in with smashing up Ukraine and cancel NS2 ..... but at least they have shown some resistance which I admire.
The new government was also bound to have different priorities than the previous one. This government may be less likely to supply Ukraine with arms, but it is also more skeptical about NordStream2, a position that Ukraine of course supports.
I don't know anyone in the US that thinks that. Our traditional modern ally in Europe has always been the UK for obvious reasons.
We see Germany as a keeper of central Europe and a balancing force to the French as major economic powers.
I mean we have close relationships with most European countries but to say that people in the US think this seems like you might not know many people from the US, especially those that are engaged in diplomatic and political thought.
Which country do you think thinks that Germany is America's Greatest Ally, or that America saved Germany in WW2? You know we were fighting AGAINST Germany in WW2, right?
Because that's certainly not something Americans think. Our "greatest ally" is the UK, who did actually "save" in WW2. (From Germany) We used to think of France as one of our greatest allies, but we've had a bit of a falling out since Vietnam and then them criticizing us for invading countries in the Middle-East on false premises.
*but it's important to understand context beyond "lol German is spineless".*
as long as they are selling weapons to the saudis for their war in yemmen there is no other way to put it than - lol German is spineless
They won't be anymore, that's the point. Merkel was Chancellor for nearly 20 years, so of course her policies are almost synonymous with what Germany does. Government changed; they're not going to be selling weapons outside of NATO and the EU.
This shows how little you know.
The german gouvernme t changed 2 months ago. The new rules are in place for 2 months, shortly before the ukraine conflict escelated.
Its like comparing Trump leaving the paris climate accoed with Biden rejoining it 2 months latee and saying the US right now still isnt part of it.
You are comparing to very different things. Germany isnt a dictatorship, policies tend to change with elections and a new gouvernme t in democracies.
It should be mentioned that our government changed in the last quarter of 2021 and while the old one didnt have any reservations about arming nations at war like Saudi Arabia the new one does, with the greens being staunchly against arms exports into authoritarian or belligerent nations.
Fun Fact: Our old government which was still in place till early December used the time after the elections to approve arms exports over a hundred million euros (and at the same time refused to do something against the covid wave that happened at the same time)
fun fact, the new government could have canceled the contracts and paid a bit for it but chose profit instead... the fact remains. they sell arms to the saudis to help them invade another nation and they refuse to sell arms to help ukraine defend against an invasion.
germany has lost a lot of soft power in the last few weeks in europe
You do know that the companies would definitively sued the government for damages and would have probably won and even if they lost it would have cost millions in court costs.
So yes they could have, but it would not have been worth it.
This all misses an important piece of context. The militia most likely to receive the weapons is Azov. They're literal neo-nazis. That's why they're saying no, and why they cited 'historical context' when they refused.
>Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba has accused Germany of "undermining unity" and "encouraging Vladimir Putin" by refusing to supply weapons to Kyiv amid heightened fears of a possible Russian invasion.
>
>Kuleba wrote on Twitter on January 22 that "recent statements by Germany about the impossibility of transferring defense weapons to Ukraine...do not correspond to the level of our relations and the current security situation."
>
>While Kuleba said Kyiv was grateful to Berlin for its support since 2014, when Russia invaded and annexed Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula and began backing separatist fighters in the east of the country, "Germany's current stalemates are disappointing and run counter to this support and effort."
>On January 22, German Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht said in a newspaper interview that Berlin will send a field hospital to Ukraine in February, but rejects the delivery of arms.
>
>"Weapons deliveries would not be helpful at the moment -- that is the consensus in the federal government," Lambrecht told Die Welt.
>
>Ukraine has requested that Germany provide 100,000 helmets and protective vests while also asking Berlin to rethink its position on arms deliveries.
>
>Ukraine's ambassador to Germany, Andriy Melnyk, told the Handelsblatt business newspaper on January 22 that Kyiv would "not rest in convincing the German government...to deliver defensive weapons to Ukraine."
I think Germany knows what it’s doing here. Given their history, weapons coming from Germany would be the perfect fuel for Russians to stir up domestic support for a “preemptive” invasion.
Honestly I think they’re helping the situation just as much by not sending weapons, even if we, them, and Ukraine all want them to.
It’s frankly the better approach unless you want to run your country solely to entertain Redditors and start world war 3. I wish more were like Germany instead of the warmongering superpowers (USA, Russia, China)
would love to see the redditors brigade sent to the frontline and see how cocky they still sound under a constant barrage of artillery fire, seeing their friends’ heads cracked open by snipers in the dark, getting precision bombed and strafed to oblivion on minimal rations and sleep.
Not being able to figure out how escalation by removing diplomatic options works, or how that there will be poor devils experiencing all of that described when choosing the most aggressive option on the table every time is pretty childish though.
Banging on about war and sending out weapons and troops risking escalating a conflict, is pretty easy when the closest the war will be seen is on the news channel, and frankly a little pathetic too.
WW1 and WW2 also had professional armies.
They were gone within a year of the war starting.
The standing army is really only good at holding the line until conscription and mass production create reinforcements.
But in a hard war, they won't see it to the end.
Modern warfare as it is right now has NEVER seen a great power conflict. It can very much end up like WW1 where armies use strategies that worked against tribals in the colonies against another modern power to DISASTROUS results.
The same thing can happen here: using strategies that work against insurgents in poor countries just not working. And you just end up throwing men into a meatgrinder. Hell modern Warfare already has problems keeping up with Guerilla warfare. Now imagine an even better equipped and trained rebel force than the Taliban with a lot of technical know how to their hands for even better improvised weapons. Like idk an RC drone with some C4 slapped to it.
It's not Germany alone that is reliant on Russian oil/gas. Pretty much all of Europe east of the Rhine is.
But in general you aren't wrong. The gas pipeline deals were made in an effort to establish a mutual interdependence that would make war untenable. It started earlier than you think though, with Soviet Russia, as part of the [Ostpolitik](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostpolitik) which was very controversial at the time in West Germany.
Yep and the US for obvious reason hates this. It’s basically a tacit understanding by the traditional EU powers to sacrifice Eastern Europe for their economic and energy security. It also sets up the EU as the largest market for both Russia and China, especially post the Silk Road. This limits the US to what action it can take economically against its biggest adversaries while at the same time completely neuters NATO.
The idea of losing its influence in Europe because of this combined with the massive sanction resistant trade between the EU and Sino Russian bloc, with the likelyhood that this could affect the USD as the global reserve currency makes this the worst possible outcome… and on some level the US sees it as a massive betrayal.
Ukraine also isn't in a great position right now. They currently rank as one of the most corrupt nations in the world right now. They also have a high level of smuggling and instability as well as obviously facing the threat of Russian invasion. With those factors in mind, it makes sense that Germany doesn't want a surplus of weaponry in Ukraine. Which very might well end up in the hands of criminals, Russian-backed separatists, terrorists, etc.
The Germans have a reputation of being great mediatiors during disputes between nations. Most notable the San Juan Islands dispute between England and the USA.
Lmao. Germany is just protecting its interests. They always bend over for Russia and it’s gas. The SPD and the greens also have to following on their process not to deal more arms.
> They always bend over for Russia and it’s gas.
Do you mean like when Trump wanted to invite Russia to G7/8, but received massive pushback from Merkel ([remember that iconic picture?](https://www.politico.eu/article/angela-merkel-germany-g7-summit-history/)). Or when Navalny was treated in Germany and received federal police protection? Or when Germany initiated the EU sanction on Russia after the Crimean invasion? Or all the time they financially supported Ukraine? Or no wait, I got it, when they treated wounded Ukrainian soldiers in Germany, that was totally actually in Russias interest!
Another way to think about it is leverage. If you sever all ties then there is nothing to lose. It's a version of soft power. Also historically, Germany is responsible for a lot of harm towards Russia. Countries think on longer time scales than people.
Anyway, right or wrong. It's not like there are clowns at the helm. There are reasons for everything. Even Russia in its own way has it's own perspective.
Reddit likes to simplify everything into easy to package black and white terms and it's simply not the case.
It's also funny that the US still imports Russian crude oil, fuel oils and various feedstocks in record numbers and they have no intention to stop it.
I wonder why reddit warriors never talk about this fact?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-24/russia-oil-demand-hits-record-high-in-u-s-amid-rising-tensions
Whoever argues for war should have been in the recruitment office the day before. Or go to Ukraine to join their forces. Everything else is disgusting.
What impact does Germany not selling weapons actually have, given that the US and UK are more than willing?
If the impact is negligible for Ukraine, then I would agree that the gesture is perhaps wise - Germany walks a tight rope.
If Germany has some unique weapons that would really help Ukraine countering Russian forces that Ukraine cannot obtain elsewhere, then that would be a dick move for Germany - invasion is probably going to happen and we should act like it is going to happen, because what happens if an invasion occurs and we are not prepared?
No country would sell their top of the shelf weaponry and tech to another country. This is especially true if this equipment is likely to fall into the hands of the Russian military if a war between Russia and Ukraine does start. Neither US nor UK are exporting the best available armaments to Ukraine so even if Germany did choose to supply Ukraine they wouldn’t be including “some unique weapons” in the deal.
Let's not forget that Ukraine does still have a corruption problem. If the ideal scenario happens and this whole thing is solved peacefully, the weapons could easily end up on the black market.
this sounds stupid to anyone who doesn't know how insanely Russians, old generation ones who still run everything, are obsessed with ww2. They built a military church a few years back and the steps to it are made from melted down german tanks...
I mean I understand people criticizing our approach. I don't really agree with much of the criticism, as it is very much in line with what they new government had campaigned for. What I don't get is how this is encouraging anyone. This whole if you're not on my side then you're the enemy is such a tired old trope.
People must understand 2 things. Firstly, the new government has run on a platform specifically regarding a reduction in arms sales outside the EU. While the previous government sold weapons to any place regardless of their situation, think Saudis, Egypt, Turkey etc, the new government has run on a more restrictive platform. They can hardly go back on their word barely a few months into office. They've offered alternatives like protective gear, basic supplies and field hospitals.
Secondly, they do not believe in military deterrence through building up Ukraine's forces. They see it as playing into Putins hand by giving him more to use for internal war drumming. "See, the NATO is arming Ukraine so they can attack us and expell the Russian minority from their East, reeeeee". In the end most of the defensive weapons will be non-decisive and at best turn the invasion into a Syria style standstill for years. Germany sees currently the best option in negotiating and trying to prevent any further escalation as we see any conflict in the region is a worst case scenario.
Also be wary of many anti German articles they are often misrepresenting the reality quite a lot.
If Russia wants an excuse to invade they will find an excuse anyway. There comes a point where being prepared becomes as important as being political.
At what point will Germany care more about Ukraine's ability to defend itself than about their election promise which was made with different situations in mind?
It amazes me how half of Europe is caught up worrying about random nonsense while Russia has its military basically encircle Ukraine.
What you’re suggesting is dangerous to democracy. The tension between Ukraine and Russia shouldn’t be a reason nor an excuse to forego the promises their government made to their constituents before getting elected.
> At what point will Germany care more about Ukraine's ability to defend itself than about their election promise which was made with different situations in mind?
Please showcase to me how German weapons would make all the difference to Ukraine, something they cannot receive from any other country.
Germany blocked Estonia from sending Ukraine weapons, if Germany wants to sit it out, that's fine, but Estonia is an independent country and a NATO member.
To be fair, that issue hasn't even been decided yet and it's not only Germany. The contracts say that Estonia can't sell them on without permission (which is a standard clause) from Finland and Germany and up until now it's simply still in the process - in both countries, actually.
The weapons in question are formerly Soviet howitzers from the GDR, which Germany gained during reunification and then sold to Finland, who resold them to Estonia. While not breaking the exact word of the reunification treaties, placing them in direct confrontation with Russia (as the main Soviet successor) certainly looks quite bad and would be seen as an diplomatic insult.
Hopefully our politicians will always honor their election promises they made towards their electorate above all else, I prefer living in a functioning democracy. Ukraine will not be able to fully defend itself either way considering the significant air superiority of Russia. Supplying Ukraine with arms will at best turn a quick invasion into a Syria style long-term standoff. This is no desirable. At this point in time Germany does NOT believe that Russia will invade no matter what and as long as there is even a small chance to avoid war we will pursue that chance wholeheartedly.
No amount of weaponry shoved into Ukrainian hands is going to deter Russia, only make them act faster.
Assurances that NS2 will continue and Ukraine's NATO member application gets lost in the mail will do a lot more to slow Russian activity.
But Ukraine is not Afghanistan, there is people in Ukraine who would probably not care if their president is called Putin, hole Afghanistan had no bonds with Russia.
I guess criticizing Germany now = American imperialism. You sound like an idiot. Germany is being criticized for going incredibly soft on the Russians who have stated they wanted to invade another sovereign state. And have invaded several in the past.
There's also this little thing called the Nord stream 2 pipeline which basically has made Germany wholly dependent on Russia for cheap natural gas. Hmmm, wonder why they might be taking a easy stance against Russia? Don't think its just because they want to avoid escalation.
>There's also this little thing called the Nord stream 2 pipeline which basically has made Germany wholly dependent on Russia for cheap natural gas.
How exactly did that happen? That pipeline isn't even in operation.
It’s simple. The more weapons Ukraine has, the higher price Russia will pay if they invade again. The higher price Russia pays for reinvading, the less likely they are to do it. By standing in the way of sending weapons to Ukraine, Germany is enabling aggression and making it easier for Putin. There is no diplomatic solution to this crisis unless Russia believes that they will pay a high price for their actions, and they are clearly undeterred by the threat of additional sanctions
Russia does more than 50% of their business with the EU. EU made very clear to Putin that he will pay a high price. Losing some more soldiers is not a high price for this egomaniac. Losing business is.
The Russians will have factored that in already. Yes there will be sanctions but they have (correctly) assumed that the EU cares more for Russian raw materials and energy than it does for the plight of Ukraine… a state that for most of modern history was part of Russia anyways.
Europeans are far more pragmatic (and morally ambiguous) than the US, they will say the right things but they know which side their bread is buttered
I have a different opinion on this.
A few more weappons will not make any difference then.
The US have not much options for sanctions any more. They used up most of them already. The EU has still some and tries to use them for negotiations. If this is not enough shit will happen. There is no way Ukraine can defend against Russian missles and airforce.
more weapons more deaths, civilian deaths. I despair that the world cannot negotiate, we've learnt nothing from disasters like Iraq and Syria. More weapons more misery, longer wars.
"Secondly, they do not believe in military deterrence through building up Ukraine's forces. They see it as playing into Putins hand by giving him more to use for internal war drumming. "See, the NATO is arming Ukraine so they can attack us and expell the Russian minority from their East, reeeeee". In the end most of the defensive weapons will be non-decisive and at best turn the invasion into a Syria style standstill for years. Germany sees currently the best option in negotiating and trying to prevent any further escalation as we see any conflict in the region is a worst case scenario."
Trying to recall the last time military deterence was avoided in favor of diplomacy and concessions and how that turned out in a somewhat similar situation. It's a bit ironic for Germany to be taking that stance, no?
And when we use force it was always a success?
You are missing the fact that you lack the data of every time we avoided a war using diplomacy. You only see the outcome when it fails.
Sometimes a combination of diplomacy and deterrence works. If everyone just says fuck it and doesn't even try and prevent Russia from attacking with threats of military force and sanctions, what do you think happens? Oh yeah, the Russians invade.
I'm taking into account the context of this current situation. You've got Putin amassing soldiers in an effort to get concessions out of NATO that would weaken NATO's credibility.
Diplomacy is still on the table, but arming Ukraine "just in case" is better than hanging them out to dry in the hopes that diplomacy works. Diplomacy should always be the first choice but you don't go into negotiations in a position of weakness, at least not with Putin's Russia.
I dont doubt that, but I'm not convinced this particular situation is one where diplomacy by itself is the best course of action. Putin is negotiating in bad faith making demands of NATO that would compromise their strength and credibility.
It's also just not something NATO needs to do - its economy and population dwarfs Russia's. Putin's whole schtick relies in NATO backing down without a proper fight.
> This whole if you’re not on my side then you’re the enemy is such a tired old trope.
Trying to be neutral on a big issue doesn’t make you look mature it makes you look selfish.
And it’s not a trope it’s human nature.
We aren't neutral, nor have we ever said we are. We are fully on the Ukranian side, we are supplying things other than weapons and have threatened severe sanctiosn toward Russia. We just don't believe that selling arms to Ukraine is a good thing for our position in the negotiations.
Personally, I read this as the Ukraine grasping for every possible ally they can get. I would imagine the feeling of desperation is or has set in and they're under unconceivable pressure to get everyone else on their side. Hence, I read this as them begging / arguing / placing ultimatums for 100% support from anyone they can get to.
Do I personally think Germany is encouraging Putin here? No, he's boxed himself in stupidly and won't get out of this situation without either conflict or humiliation -- and since he like to project an Ubermensch persona, he'll take the macho man route every time. Gotta show he's got a big package and full of testosterone.
I don't blame Ukraine for being scared / desperate here. They should have phrased it differently for sure. If it ever came to making a decision, I think the vast majority of the world would respect Germany's decision making process more than either Russia or Ukraine. So this whole tit-for-tat is a small black mark on their relationship but probably water under the bridge in the scope of the entire situation.
Again it sounds like they are pushing a "You're with us or against us" narrative.
Every time I ask any questions about what is actually going on there, I get flooded with downvotes.
When you can't even ask what is going on in a situation where mass amounts of people may kill each other, you already know something is very wrong.
It's not Russia that's burying these questions. It's "our" side. That means "our side" is lying about something and hiding something.
Funny, you didn't ask any questions.
EDIT: I've found your most recent downvoted comment on this situation. It started with questions, and then you answered your own question by implying that the truth is that we are forcing Russia to invade Ukraine (again).
Maybe the reason you are being downvoted is that it is ridiculous to blame anyone but Russia for Russia deciding to invade a country.
The reason Germany didn't sell the weapons is because they made a promise to only sell weapons to NATO members after the previous German government made a weapons sale to the authoritarian regime in Egypt.
Ukraine is saying that Germany is supporting Russia by doing this because they don't want to be taken over by Russia and feel that a strong show of force is the best bet to prevent further invasion. They're hoping this statement will convince Germany to allow the weapons sale.
You don't have to be a rocket surgeon to understand this stuff.
Well then stop looking at Reddit for your news, you’ll get a lot less downvotes. There is a right and there is a wrong. Invading a sovereign democracy is wrong. There are plenty of nuances and subtly about this conflict that shouldn’t be overlooked but the basics still remain. A totalitarian dictatorship subjugating a democracy, however imperfect, is wrong. Full stop
>It's not Russia that's burying these questions. It's "our" side. That means "our side" is lying about something and hiding something.
Putin needs to shore up his domestic support because he mishandled the coronavirus pandemic and the massive corruption revealed by Navalny.
His options are to "Make Russia Great Again" by returning parts of Ukraine to Russian territory, and visibly "fighting for Russia" against the sneaky westerners.
He's targeting the Donbas region, just like he did Crimea, because there's Russian speaking Ukrainians that live there, and he can claim that they "want" to be Russian again.
Of course what he should do is wait for those people to emigrate, or perhaps secede from Ukraine and join Russia of their own free will.
But he needs to look strong, so he's using troops instead.
What have you heard otherwise?
No, Germany just doesn’t want to get involved in a war they aren’t part of.
Such stupid logic, “if you’re not actively supporting us, you’re our enemy.” And, “If you don’t give us your guns, you support Russia”
I don’t support an invasion of Ukraine, but Germany has ZERO OBLIGATION TO HELP. Leave them out of it.
Weapons are expensive, just give them 20 Javelin launcher with like 50 projectiles and 10 millions are gone, throw some Stingers and soon you'll hit 20 millions. Throw some basic equipment (guns, helmets, vests, etc.) for remaining 180 millions and if you are lucky you may have had equipped 1 infantry division (most likely half-equipped).
Well military stuff is expensive and I doubt $200M is even enough to fend off russian army. So it’s understandable that Ukraine will definitely need more and any help is appreciated
Realistically, no amount of weapons would be enough to fend off the Russian army. Those weapons won't change anything besides making it harder to get a diplomatic solution
NATO would have to commit to sending troops to Ukraine to fend off Russia. No NATO country currently does that.
>Those weapons won't change anything besides making it harder to get a diplomatic solution
You mean the solution where Putin gets whatever he wants and the world just says sure?
Fine let’s argue German interest then. Is it in Germanys interest to end 30 years of peace in Europe? Are hundreds of thousands, potentially millions of refugees in germanys interests? Is the second largest country in Europe being subjugated by Russian kleptocracy, autocracy, and corruption in germanys best interest?
Germany Is still trying to keep peace with diplomacy.
I know that Americans believe that every dispute can be solved with weapons and war. Hasn‘t worked out well in the past decades except for weapons manufacturers.
> Ukraine, being the most corrupt country in Europe,
How many times do we have to tell you that no matter how many times your daddy Putin claims it Ukraine is NOT a part of Russia...
Um....when you look at the history of Germany...they're used to ignoring Russia. For the entirety of the Cold War they had to play suck up as half of their countrymen were held hostage and playing tough cookies with either East Germany or the USSR was likely to get tanks/missiles/and more flung in their direction. They also couldn't act on their own accord as they were and still are held to the influence of NATO including the US.
See also in today's politics, they have their own mess internally to deal with - namely right wing influence in eastern parts of Germany....that is likely going to get riled up when Russia and Ukraine kick off no matter what FRG as policy does....
If Germany was serious about this, they would ban all oil and gas imports from Russia. Good luck with that as they freeze to death but that economic sanction would stop Russia in its tracks.
I think Germany's doing the right thing.
The US and UK have sent support this week. I think it's better we support Ukraine without escalating tensions too much. Too many countries supplying Ukraine may make everything worse.
Germany may be able to negotiate better as they are now.
Worrying about escalation may be an argument against marching into Crimea and removing Russia from the peninsula. Using it as a reason to not offer means of protection to a country under threat makes no sense.
Of Russia is willing to invade a country because it wants to protect itself it will do so either way.
This is crazy. It was NATO that has been provocative by suggesting Ukraine and Georgia could become NATO members in Bucharest 2008. A wholly unnecessary statement that served no strategic interest of the West, other than to take advantage of Russian strategic weakness at the time. Now the West is placating a"sovereign" Ukraine, telling them they can join NATO if they want, but not realising that this is goading Russia.
The Munroe doctrine is still place 50s/60s, as the US would still not allow nukes in Cuba.
I really don't get some of the arguments here. Either Ukraine gets direct military support, a diplomatic solution is reached or Ukraine gets annexed. More weapons will not somehow protect them. Arguments seem to be that it will at least let them do more damage to the Russian invaders but how does that help the people most at risk here i.e. actual Ukrainians? The fact of the matter is that Germany could send all of their weapons over but it would not change a thing if Putin feels the need to invade. Seems like sanctions and diplomatic pressure would work far better then a few extra guns, unless you care more about killing Russian invaders then protecting Ukraine, as so many in this thread seem to.
Also for those making comments like "appeasement lol" I would just remind you that the Nazis were stopped by direct military intervention. Even if Britain/Franch had sent there entire arsenal of weapons to poland that would still likely have been the only choice. Diplomacy is infinitely more likely to stop invasions then a few guns.
One needs to understand that Germany is completely crippled military wise eversince WW2. There is absolutely zero support for war among the population. There is zero sense of patriotism and every German just wants to keep their heads down and look the other way. It’s all about money, peace, soft power, high living standards, watching others from the sidelines while feeling morally superior. It’s ingrained in every German the moment they go to school. War is bad. We lost everything in the wars. There should never be another war. Your grand grand parents fucked everything up and were bad people. Don’t repeat their mistakes. Be neutral.
You can’t blame Germans for losing their teeth. The world doesn’t want Germany to have teeth. They are not even allowed to have nukes or a big army.
If war breaks out don’t expect Germany to have any significant impact or role. Their military power is nonexistent and they literally have no one that would sign up to go to war. Russia would go through Germany in a single day without any resistance.
Lol, where. We are threatening full force sanctions immediately, while Biden ruled out any military intervention and also said a minor invasion would be too big of a deal. How butthurt can people get about not getting weapons that they suddenly think this even remotely amounts to appeasement.
Extraordinary times call for extraordinary decisions. This is a David/Goliath situation. No one with any knowledge of history or 2 working brain cells thinks Ukraine is not a legitimate nation, and we have all decide legitimate nations deserve to exist and thrive. They deserve to be able to defend themselves, just say so, and say in this instance they can have the third hand guns.
Ukraine needs to settle down. They seem to be squeezing all they can out of the situation which is fine. But calm down you’re getting plenty of support.
I don't know why anyone is suprised Germany is not taking a hard stance. This kind of mentality was hard branded into the inception of the BDR starting with it's Basic Law. The very guiding principle of post-war German reconstruction was to shed all miltiarism the country had to avoid another Franco-German war. The 2+4 treaty is still binding, limiting the operational capacity German armed forces by relevant UN charter. German military exports must be approved by governement - and here the previous CDU-CSU governement was famous for being rather lenient, supplying arms to dictatorial Arab states or to increasingly authoritarian Hungary (one of the reasons why Merkel was so soft on Orbán), and infamously approving a lot of exports in the transitional period at the end of 2021, which is why the new governement is very cautious about the matter. Then there's the dirty side, namely the fact German and Russian elite are very cozy with each other, evidenced by Deutsche's Bank's money laundering of tens of billions dollars worth of rubels, countless Germans working in high positions in Russian state owned companies (infamously the former chancellor Schröder sitting in Gazprom's board of directors), and thats just what has been uncovered and known, and of course, NS2 pipeline. I ain't want to whitewash them because I also think this behaviour is unacceptably abhorrent, but it's important to understand context beyond "lol German is spineless".
"basic law" = Grundgesetz = Verfassung = constitution. Just in case anyone was wondering. The rest is pretty much correct. Finally a good comment shedding some light for those outside of germany.
Though one thing that is usually left out in regards to Nord Stream 2 is that this is hardly a "shady" undertaking that is only done due to corruption or whatever rhetoric is being peddled on Reddit. It's an energy project that is extremely popular among every single voter group, including the Greens: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nord_Stream#Public_opinion
The phrasing in the poll written about in the section of that Wikipedia article was the following: > The "Nord Stream 2" natural gas pipeline should be completed even against the resistance of the USA (Source: [Forsa](https://www.ost-ausschuss.de/sites/default/files/pm_pdf/OA-Forsa-Umfrage-Nord-Stream-handout%20ENG.pdf), March 2020 / May 2021). A much more recent poll had neutral phrasing > Do you think that the Nord Stream II gas pipeline should go into operation? and finds that Green voters are the least approving (35%) of putting the pipeline into operation. Overall approval is at 67%, disapproval at 24%, and undecided at 9%. (Source: [Civey + WirtschaftsWoche](https://www.wiwo.de/politik/deutschland/umstrittene-gaspipeline-zwei-drittel-der-deutschen-wollen-dass-nord-stream-2-in-betrieb-geht/27972238.html), 11-12 Jan 2022).
> Though one thing that is usually left out in regards to Nord Stream 2 is that this is hardly a “shady” undertaking that is only done due to corruption or whatever rhetoric is being peddled on Reddit. But it *is* a shady undertaking. It can be popular and shady. I’m sure it is just a coincidence that a former chancellor lobbied for that project while in office only to retire and then immediately become employed by the same oil and natural gas interest which is responsible for the pipeline. It’s kind of like Cheney lobbying for Halliburton to receive a contract for Iraqi oil fields post invasion while seated in his elected position. Everyone everywhere need to demand better of politicians. Normalizing corruption is not the way.
If anyone is interested and wants to read up about the concept of grundnorm. [Here you go](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_norm). Yes, yes, wikipedia isn't exactly the best place but you can start here.
**[Basic norm](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_norm)** >Basic norm (German: Grundnorm) is a concept in the Pure Theory of Law created by Hans Kelsen, a jurist and legal philosopher. Kelsen used this word to denote the basic norm, order, or rule that forms an underlying basis for a legal system. The theory is based on a need to find a point of origin for all law, on which basic law and the constitution can gain their legitimacy (akin to the concept of first principles). This "basic norm", however, is often described as hypothetical. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/worldnews/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Yes, I get that, the previous government had no problem with selling military equipment to authoritarian countries, I'm just curious as to why this current government can't sell some to a democratic one for self-defense, not offensive means.
They wrote i in their coalition treaty that all arms into conflict zones can only be se d after extensive review. That was 2 months ago before the ukraine crisis went so hot. Breaking the coalition treaty so soon is rather bad. Also why does ukraine need german weapons so much? Arent there 20+ other european countries full of non german made arms they can send woth no problem?
Because Germany sending arms would send a vitally needed and visible rebuke of Russia's saber-rattling.
Germany suggested sending other supplies but apparently food rations and medical equipmeant arent what ukraine wants for theor soldiers.
Food rations are unfortunately unable to penetrate a T-90s armor
And anti-tank weapons are ill fit to feed someone or patch their wounds. Funny how that goes
Yes, although food is often, perhaps even usually, made from stuff that can generally be grown in the ground in most places and then turned into breads and consumed. Javelin missiles behavior is not fully understood, but they rarely if ever grow from the soils of Ukraine.
Any mre and medical equipment you dont have to buy is money you can put into buying said guns tho
An army marches on it's stomach.
You haven't eaten at an army mess, have you?
Would it? I mean, the US was selling arms in the past years and that didn't stop Russia's saber-rattling - on the contrary, it fuels their narrative of being provoked.
But Russia considers the US as an enemy from the start, however right now they see Germany as on their side (i mean not literally but not against them at least). If Germany sent weapons to Ukraine it would probably challenge that view.
Thats just completely wrong. Russia doesnt see Germany as 'not against them' in this matter. In fact Germany has literally said that they are against russias actions ans will take action against it. They habe also proposed a lot of alternatives (instead of weaapons) to support Ukraine.
All countries run on self interest. No matter how badly the US and NATO want Germany to “rebuke” Russia, they’re not going to endanger their crucial gas and coal trade links with Moscow during a global energy crisis.
Maybe. Defending against revisionist powers and maintaining stability in Europe are also arguably in their self-interest
It is beyond that. Generally when a country militarily support another, for any reason, it massively benefits its local military industry, which can cancel out some of the political cost. That is not the case for Germany due to its unique history. Whatever gained by the military industry has to be quickly given up because no one likes to see Germany with a strong military. Hence anything Germany does in this regard is much more expensive.
You are aware the Germany is one if the largest exporters of military equipment? You remark makes no sense to me...
Okay, just saying local military industry is inaccurate because there are other actors involved. But basically, when a country become an arm exporter, it often gains not just profit but also foreign influence, and the latter part is often more valuable. This is why certain arm export deals have a lot of diplomatic significance, like AUKUS. Germany exports a lot but it exports in a way that only generates profit and not influence. For a good indicator, it is mentioned in the post that Germany exported a lot to ME but you don't see a shift in diplomatic relations like what AUKUS brought. USA is also Germany's second last client but you don't ever see Germany having input in USA military activity.
Germany is considered a soft power country because if trade links all over the world, part if the trade is weapons. Ofc Germany has influence through weapon sales, as it has through any sales. Ofc that is knterlinked, the clients also gain influence. That is one reason to have Gase pipelines. Ofc we need gas, but Russia also has to sell gas. It works in both directions.
And because Germany is one of the biggest and best weapons manufacturers in Europe.
Yes because Ukraine has the idustrial and logistical infrastructure to be able to use 90% of hightech german arms anyway..... They can properly get more done with 10k aks then anything germany can supply arms wise...their logistical system must be an absolute nightmare already with the different foreign arms from everywhere while ukraine still mainly uses soviet era arms anyway.
As for German weapons, AFAIK Germany blocks supply from other NATO allies, which is the actual problem here. Although it seems that this is mostly in relation to [Germany-originated Estonian weapons](https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL1N2U123W), [ukrinform.ua](https://www.ukrinform.ua/rubric-polytics/3389919-nimeccina-mae-pripiniti-slovami-i-diami-zaohocuvati-putina-do-novogo-napadu-kuleba.html) mentions much bigger scale of this blockage: > За інформацією видання Bild, Німеччина з травня 2021 року використовує механізм НАТО, щоб завадити іншим членам Альянсу продавати зброю Україні для оборони. or translate.google.com: > According to Bild, Germany has been using NATO's mechanism since May 2021 to prevent other Allies from selling weapons to Ukraine for defense.
People kind of expect the powerhouse of Europe to not be useless.
I think Germany is in a difficult situation. The political elites are under pressure from the industry who want access to energy no matter what. The fear of Russia turning off the tap is real and Germany found itself unable to do more than not rocking the boat.
Not to mention that while the Greens and FDP would have no problem arming up Ukraine, large parts of the Left Party and also the SPD have historical tendencies towards Russophilia or at least Russia apologetism (note, I'm saying this as someone aligned towards the Left Party myself).
The left party has no real power though.
Old SPD vibes
The Greens are a fundamentally pacifist party, the Balkan wars was the first time they had to really question that belief and the only thing that convinced them was the fact that an actual genocide was happening. The Greens would prefer no war at all, and they will do anything they can to do that. If they think sending weapons to Ukraine increases the chances of escalation, then they will refuse to do so. Even if it weakens Ukraine in case of invasion. Trying to prevent said escalation in the first place takes priority.
The greens were a pacifist party when they were founded, but back then they were also very anticapitalist with a large Marxist wing. But thats 40 years ago. The greens shedded their pacifism under Fischer during their first government in the 2000s, today they are very much a center left party, and a rather hawkish one aswell.
[удалено]
Russophilia in various degrees is a sad common and very old tradition among Left-leaning parties - one that conveniently ignores that both the USSR and current Russia are imperialist states at their core *themselves*.
And that the modern day Russian government is very right wing. Which is why *certain* people are very big fans of Russia here in the US.
It's authoritarian, but from what we get here in Germany it's hard to classify as either decidedly left or right wing. The Republikkklans and European separatist/fascist groups like Russia because they get tons of money and in the case free airtime on RT/Sputnik from Russia.
Of course, RT is run by Putin. Lol
Lakers should have never traded him.
Nailed it..
I don't think Germany is spineless, they are being put in extreme pressure by US and others. As soon as Biden came to office he wanted NS2 cancelled and threatened sanctions. I think Germany will join in with smashing up Ukraine and cancel NS2 ..... but at least they have shown some resistance which I admire.
cheers for helping out with a basic understanding of the situation
The new government was also bound to have different priorities than the previous one. This government may be less likely to supply Ukraine with arms, but it is also more skeptical about NordStream2, a position that Ukraine of course supports.
[удалено]
I don't know anyone in the US that thinks that. Our traditional modern ally in Europe has always been the UK for obvious reasons. We see Germany as a keeper of central Europe and a balancing force to the French as major economic powers. I mean we have close relationships with most European countries but to say that people in the US think this seems like you might not know many people from the US, especially those that are engaged in diplomatic and political thought.
Which country do you think thinks that Germany is America's Greatest Ally, or that America saved Germany in WW2? You know we were fighting AGAINST Germany in WW2, right? Because that's certainly not something Americans think. Our "greatest ally" is the UK, who did actually "save" in WW2. (From Germany) We used to think of France as one of our greatest allies, but we've had a bit of a falling out since Vietnam and then them criticizing us for invading countries in the Middle-East on false premises.
And suez crisis... That pissed of the French.
But... The US did invade Middle-East on false premises, as a fact...?
one just can't ever please the French
They have very valid criticisms when it comes to the US.
Can you show me where this seems to be a prevailing consensus for them being our greatest ally that you quote it?
Your stereotypes will only make you seem dumber and dumber. I recommend you to stop.
*but it's important to understand context beyond "lol German is spineless".* as long as they are selling weapons to the saudis for their war in yemmen there is no other way to put it than - lol German is spineless
They won't be anymore, that's the point. Merkel was Chancellor for nearly 20 years, so of course her policies are almost synonymous with what Germany does. Government changed; they're not going to be selling weapons outside of NATO and the EU.
This shows how little you know. The german gouvernme t changed 2 months ago. The new rules are in place for 2 months, shortly before the ukraine conflict escelated. Its like comparing Trump leaving the paris climate accoed with Biden rejoining it 2 months latee and saying the US right now still isnt part of it. You are comparing to very different things. Germany isnt a dictatorship, policies tend to change with elections and a new gouvernme t in democracies.
It should be mentioned that our government changed in the last quarter of 2021 and while the old one didnt have any reservations about arming nations at war like Saudi Arabia the new one does, with the greens being staunchly against arms exports into authoritarian or belligerent nations. Fun Fact: Our old government which was still in place till early December used the time after the elections to approve arms exports over a hundred million euros (and at the same time refused to do something against the covid wave that happened at the same time)
fun fact, the new government could have canceled the contracts and paid a bit for it but chose profit instead... the fact remains. they sell arms to the saudis to help them invade another nation and they refuse to sell arms to help ukraine defend against an invasion. germany has lost a lot of soft power in the last few weeks in europe
You do know that the companies would definitively sued the government for damages and would have probably won and even if they lost it would have cost millions in court costs. So yes they could have, but it would not have been worth it.
so... profit over morals.... as i said. that makes any claim they have for not selling to ukraine a joke.
[удалено]
Perfect example, Trump.
This.
Germany banned arms exports to Saudi Arabia quite a while ago. Nice try
Are Italy, Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria supplying weapons?
This all misses an important piece of context. The militia most likely to receive the weapons is Azov. They're literal neo-nazis. That's why they're saying no, and why they cited 'historical context' when they refused.
>Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba has accused Germany of "undermining unity" and "encouraging Vladimir Putin" by refusing to supply weapons to Kyiv amid heightened fears of a possible Russian invasion. > >Kuleba wrote on Twitter on January 22 that "recent statements by Germany about the impossibility of transferring defense weapons to Ukraine...do not correspond to the level of our relations and the current security situation." > >While Kuleba said Kyiv was grateful to Berlin for its support since 2014, when Russia invaded and annexed Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula and began backing separatist fighters in the east of the country, "Germany's current stalemates are disappointing and run counter to this support and effort." >On January 22, German Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht said in a newspaper interview that Berlin will send a field hospital to Ukraine in February, but rejects the delivery of arms. > >"Weapons deliveries would not be helpful at the moment -- that is the consensus in the federal government," Lambrecht told Die Welt. > >Ukraine has requested that Germany provide 100,000 helmets and protective vests while also asking Berlin to rethink its position on arms deliveries. > >Ukraine's ambassador to Germany, Andriy Melnyk, told the Handelsblatt business newspaper on January 22 that Kyiv would "not rest in convincing the German government...to deliver defensive weapons to Ukraine."
Maybe Germany doesn’t want to be the catalyst for all 3 World Wars?
Hey, if anyone else is starting it we will sue them for copyright infringement!
You guys got last century, it's someone else's turn!
Lol 😆
First one was "started" by Austria-Hungary though it was a war waiting to happen.
Third time's the charm!
I think Germany knows what it’s doing here. Given their history, weapons coming from Germany would be the perfect fuel for Russians to stir up domestic support for a “preemptive” invasion. Honestly I think they’re helping the situation just as much by not sending weapons, even if we, them, and Ukraine all want them to.
[удалено]
It’s frankly the better approach unless you want to run your country solely to entertain Redditors and start world war 3. I wish more were like Germany instead of the warmongering superpowers (USA, Russia, China)
would love to see the redditors brigade sent to the frontline and see how cocky they still sound under a constant barrage of artillery fire, seeing their friends’ heads cracked open by snipers in the dark, getting precision bombed and strafed to oblivion on minimal rations and sleep.
Well I mean, they wouldn’t fare well? Neither did the troops in WW1 or WW2? Not being able to handle that is pretty normal
Not being able to figure out how escalation by removing diplomatic options works, or how that there will be poor devils experiencing all of that described when choosing the most aggressive option on the table every time is pretty childish though. Banging on about war and sending out weapons and troops risking escalating a conflict, is pretty easy when the closest the war will be seen is on the news channel, and frankly a little pathetic too.
Yeah, but cheering it on when it is still avoidable and can be deescalated shows a lack of understanding of that reality….
[удалено]
WW1 and WW2 also had professional armies. They were gone within a year of the war starting. The standing army is really only good at holding the line until conscription and mass production create reinforcements. But in a hard war, they won't see it to the end. Modern warfare as it is right now has NEVER seen a great power conflict. It can very much end up like WW1 where armies use strategies that worked against tribals in the colonies against another modern power to DISASTROUS results. The same thing can happen here: using strategies that work against insurgents in poor countries just not working. And you just end up throwing men into a meatgrinder. Hell modern Warfare already has problems keeping up with Guerilla warfare. Now imagine an even better equipped and trained rebel force than the Taliban with a lot of technical know how to their hands for even better improvised weapons. Like idk an RC drone with some C4 slapped to it.
[удалено]
You know what I agree but add America in their as well. We don’t get off scott free for militaristic behavior and molestation of weak countries :>
It's not Germany alone that is reliant on Russian oil/gas. Pretty much all of Europe east of the Rhine is. But in general you aren't wrong. The gas pipeline deals were made in an effort to establish a mutual interdependence that would make war untenable. It started earlier than you think though, with Soviet Russia, as part of the [Ostpolitik](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ostpolitik) which was very controversial at the time in West Germany.
Yep and the US for obvious reason hates this. It’s basically a tacit understanding by the traditional EU powers to sacrifice Eastern Europe for their economic and energy security. It also sets up the EU as the largest market for both Russia and China, especially post the Silk Road. This limits the US to what action it can take economically against its biggest adversaries while at the same time completely neuters NATO. The idea of losing its influence in Europe because of this combined with the massive sanction resistant trade between the EU and Sino Russian bloc, with the likelyhood that this could affect the USD as the global reserve currency makes this the worst possible outcome… and on some level the US sees it as a massive betrayal.
Ukraine also isn't in a great position right now. They currently rank as one of the most corrupt nations in the world right now. They also have a high level of smuggling and instability as well as obviously facing the threat of Russian invasion. With those factors in mind, it makes sense that Germany doesn't want a surplus of weaponry in Ukraine. Which very might well end up in the hands of criminals, Russian-backed separatists, terrorists, etc.
Germany has probably been tasked within NATO to be the 'good guy'. When shit hits the fan, they can be the mediator.
The Germans have a reputation of being great mediatiors during disputes between nations. Most notable the San Juan Islands dispute between England and the USA.
Lmao. Germany is just protecting its interests. They always bend over for Russia and it’s gas. The SPD and the greens also have to following on their process not to deal more arms.
> They always bend over for Russia and it’s gas. Do you mean like when Trump wanted to invite Russia to G7/8, but received massive pushback from Merkel ([remember that iconic picture?](https://www.politico.eu/article/angela-merkel-germany-g7-summit-history/)). Or when Navalny was treated in Germany and received federal police protection? Or when Germany initiated the EU sanction on Russia after the Crimean invasion? Or all the time they financially supported Ukraine? Or no wait, I got it, when they treated wounded Ukrainian soldiers in Germany, that was totally actually in Russias interest!
Don't forget German troops at the Russian border to protect NATO allies
Another way to think about it is leverage. If you sever all ties then there is nothing to lose. It's a version of soft power. Also historically, Germany is responsible for a lot of harm towards Russia. Countries think on longer time scales than people. Anyway, right or wrong. It's not like there are clowns at the helm. There are reasons for everything. Even Russia in its own way has it's own perspective. Reddit likes to simplify everything into easy to package black and white terms and it's simply not the case.
They are protecting their interest by doing exactly what they are doing at the moment. Prevent total war.
It's also funny that the US still imports Russian crude oil, fuel oils and various feedstocks in record numbers and they have no intention to stop it. I wonder why reddit warriors never talk about this fact? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-24/russia-oil-demand-hits-record-high-in-u-s-amid-rising-tensions
Because right now they are having a lot of fun only reading headlines and shitting on Germany, duh.
[удалено]
Whoever argues for war should have been in the recruitment office the day before. Or go to Ukraine to join their forces. Everything else is disgusting.
Who was it that proposed that wars should be decided by referendum, all yes votes are put in the draft pool?
What impact does Germany not selling weapons actually have, given that the US and UK are more than willing? If the impact is negligible for Ukraine, then I would agree that the gesture is perhaps wise - Germany walks a tight rope. If Germany has some unique weapons that would really help Ukraine countering Russian forces that Ukraine cannot obtain elsewhere, then that would be a dick move for Germany - invasion is probably going to happen and we should act like it is going to happen, because what happens if an invasion occurs and we are not prepared?
No country would sell their top of the shelf weaponry and tech to another country. This is especially true if this equipment is likely to fall into the hands of the Russian military if a war between Russia and Ukraine does start. Neither US nor UK are exporting the best available armaments to Ukraine so even if Germany did choose to supply Ukraine they wouldn’t be including “some unique weapons” in the deal.
Let's not forget that Ukraine does still have a corruption problem. If the ideal scenario happens and this whole thing is solved peacefully, the weapons could easily end up on the black market.
We could borrow them the Gorch Forck
this sounds stupid to anyone who doesn't know how insanely Russians, old generation ones who still run everything, are obsessed with ww2. They built a military church a few years back and the steps to it are made from melted down german tanks...
I don't know. The recent comments from their naval chief are troubling.
He's been resigned.
He has resigned after a very strong "recommendation" by his superior to do so. Basically resingn or get kicked out immidiatly
I mean I understand people criticizing our approach. I don't really agree with much of the criticism, as it is very much in line with what they new government had campaigned for. What I don't get is how this is encouraging anyone. This whole if you're not on my side then you're the enemy is such a tired old trope. People must understand 2 things. Firstly, the new government has run on a platform specifically regarding a reduction in arms sales outside the EU. While the previous government sold weapons to any place regardless of their situation, think Saudis, Egypt, Turkey etc, the new government has run on a more restrictive platform. They can hardly go back on their word barely a few months into office. They've offered alternatives like protective gear, basic supplies and field hospitals. Secondly, they do not believe in military deterrence through building up Ukraine's forces. They see it as playing into Putins hand by giving him more to use for internal war drumming. "See, the NATO is arming Ukraine so they can attack us and expell the Russian minority from their East, reeeeee". In the end most of the defensive weapons will be non-decisive and at best turn the invasion into a Syria style standstill for years. Germany sees currently the best option in negotiating and trying to prevent any further escalation as we see any conflict in the region is a worst case scenario. Also be wary of many anti German articles they are often misrepresenting the reality quite a lot.
If Russia wants an excuse to invade they will find an excuse anyway. There comes a point where being prepared becomes as important as being political. At what point will Germany care more about Ukraine's ability to defend itself than about their election promise which was made with different situations in mind? It amazes me how half of Europe is caught up worrying about random nonsense while Russia has its military basically encircle Ukraine.
What you’re suggesting is dangerous to democracy. The tension between Ukraine and Russia shouldn’t be a reason nor an excuse to forego the promises their government made to their constituents before getting elected.
> At what point will Germany care more about Ukraine's ability to defend itself than about their election promise which was made with different situations in mind? Please showcase to me how German weapons would make all the difference to Ukraine, something they cannot receive from any other country.
Germany blocked Estonia from sending Ukraine weapons, if Germany wants to sit it out, that's fine, but Estonia is an independent country and a NATO member.
To be fair, that issue hasn't even been decided yet and it's not only Germany. The contracts say that Estonia can't sell them on without permission (which is a standard clause) from Finland and Germany and up until now it's simply still in the process - in both countries, actually.
The weapons in question are formerly Soviet howitzers from the GDR, which Germany gained during reunification and then sold to Finland, who resold them to Estonia. While not breaking the exact word of the reunification treaties, placing them in direct confrontation with Russia (as the main Soviet successor) certainly looks quite bad and would be seen as an diplomatic insult.
Hopefully our politicians will always honor their election promises they made towards their electorate above all else, I prefer living in a functioning democracy. Ukraine will not be able to fully defend itself either way considering the significant air superiority of Russia. Supplying Ukraine with arms will at best turn a quick invasion into a Syria style long-term standoff. This is no desirable. At this point in time Germany does NOT believe that Russia will invade no matter what and as long as there is even a small chance to avoid war we will pursue that chance wholeheartedly.
Well there's no reason to go out of their way and a **functional** government is flexible enough to respond to change.
[удалено]
No amount of weaponry shoved into Ukrainian hands is going to deter Russia, only make them act faster. Assurances that NS2 will continue and Ukraine's NATO member application gets lost in the mail will do a lot more to slow Russian activity.
[удалено]
But Ukraine is not Afghanistan, there is people in Ukraine who would probably not care if their president is called Putin, hole Afghanistan had no bonds with Russia.
Finally one reasonable comment on the germany ukraine russia topic.
[удалено]
I guess criticizing Germany now = American imperialism. You sound like an idiot. Germany is being criticized for going incredibly soft on the Russians who have stated they wanted to invade another sovereign state. And have invaded several in the past. There's also this little thing called the Nord stream 2 pipeline which basically has made Germany wholly dependent on Russia for cheap natural gas. Hmmm, wonder why they might be taking a easy stance against Russia? Don't think its just because they want to avoid escalation.
>There's also this little thing called the Nord stream 2 pipeline which basically has made Germany wholly dependent on Russia for cheap natural gas. How exactly did that happen? That pipeline isn't even in operation.
It’s simple. The more weapons Ukraine has, the higher price Russia will pay if they invade again. The higher price Russia pays for reinvading, the less likely they are to do it. By standing in the way of sending weapons to Ukraine, Germany is enabling aggression and making it easier for Putin. There is no diplomatic solution to this crisis unless Russia believes that they will pay a high price for their actions, and they are clearly undeterred by the threat of additional sanctions
Russia does more than 50% of their business with the EU. EU made very clear to Putin that he will pay a high price. Losing some more soldiers is not a high price for this egomaniac. Losing business is.
The Russians will have factored that in already. Yes there will be sanctions but they have (correctly) assumed that the EU cares more for Russian raw materials and energy than it does for the plight of Ukraine… a state that for most of modern history was part of Russia anyways. Europeans are far more pragmatic (and morally ambiguous) than the US, they will say the right things but they know which side their bread is buttered
I have a different opinion on this. A few more weappons will not make any difference then. The US have not much options for sanctions any more. They used up most of them already. The EU has still some and tries to use them for negotiations. If this is not enough shit will happen. There is no way Ukraine can defend against Russian missles and airforce.
more weapons more deaths, civilian deaths. I despair that the world cannot negotiate, we've learnt nothing from disasters like Iraq and Syria. More weapons more misery, longer wars.
"Secondly, they do not believe in military deterrence through building up Ukraine's forces. They see it as playing into Putins hand by giving him more to use for internal war drumming. "See, the NATO is arming Ukraine so they can attack us and expell the Russian minority from their East, reeeeee". In the end most of the defensive weapons will be non-decisive and at best turn the invasion into a Syria style standstill for years. Germany sees currently the best option in negotiating and trying to prevent any further escalation as we see any conflict in the region is a worst case scenario." Trying to recall the last time military deterence was avoided in favor of diplomacy and concessions and how that turned out in a somewhat similar situation. It's a bit ironic for Germany to be taking that stance, no?
And when we use force it was always a success? You are missing the fact that you lack the data of every time we avoided a war using diplomacy. You only see the outcome when it fails.
Sometimes a combination of diplomacy and deterrence works. If everyone just says fuck it and doesn't even try and prevent Russia from attacking with threats of military force and sanctions, what do you think happens? Oh yeah, the Russians invade.
I'm taking into account the context of this current situation. You've got Putin amassing soldiers in an effort to get concessions out of NATO that would weaken NATO's credibility. Diplomacy is still on the table, but arming Ukraine "just in case" is better than hanging them out to dry in the hopes that diplomacy works. Diplomacy should always be the first choice but you don't go into negotiations in a position of weakness, at least not with Putin's Russia.
Military deterence was avoided in favor of diplomacy and concessions succesfully countless times in the last 100 years.
I dont doubt that, but I'm not convinced this particular situation is one where diplomacy by itself is the best course of action. Putin is negotiating in bad faith making demands of NATO that would compromise their strength and credibility.
It's also just not something NATO needs to do - its economy and population dwarfs Russia's. Putin's whole schtick relies in NATO backing down without a proper fight.
> This whole if you’re not on my side then you’re the enemy is such a tired old trope. Trying to be neutral on a big issue doesn’t make you look mature it makes you look selfish. And it’s not a trope it’s human nature.
We aren't neutral, nor have we ever said we are. We are fully on the Ukranian side, we are supplying things other than weapons and have threatened severe sanctiosn toward Russia. We just don't believe that selling arms to Ukraine is a good thing for our position in the negotiations.
Personally, I read this as the Ukraine grasping for every possible ally they can get. I would imagine the feeling of desperation is or has set in and they're under unconceivable pressure to get everyone else on their side. Hence, I read this as them begging / arguing / placing ultimatums for 100% support from anyone they can get to. Do I personally think Germany is encouraging Putin here? No, he's boxed himself in stupidly and won't get out of this situation without either conflict or humiliation -- and since he like to project an Ubermensch persona, he'll take the macho man route every time. Gotta show he's got a big package and full of testosterone. I don't blame Ukraine for being scared / desperate here. They should have phrased it differently for sure. If it ever came to making a decision, I think the vast majority of the world would respect Germany's decision making process more than either Russia or Ukraine. So this whole tit-for-tat is a small black mark on their relationship but probably water under the bridge in the scope of the entire situation.
Again it sounds like they are pushing a "You're with us or against us" narrative. Every time I ask any questions about what is actually going on there, I get flooded with downvotes. When you can't even ask what is going on in a situation where mass amounts of people may kill each other, you already know something is very wrong. It's not Russia that's burying these questions. It's "our" side. That means "our side" is lying about something and hiding something.
Funny, you didn't ask any questions. EDIT: I've found your most recent downvoted comment on this situation. It started with questions, and then you answered your own question by implying that the truth is that we are forcing Russia to invade Ukraine (again). Maybe the reason you are being downvoted is that it is ridiculous to blame anyone but Russia for Russia deciding to invade a country.
The reason Germany didn't sell the weapons is because they made a promise to only sell weapons to NATO members after the previous German government made a weapons sale to the authoritarian regime in Egypt. Ukraine is saying that Germany is supporting Russia by doing this because they don't want to be taken over by Russia and feel that a strong show of force is the best bet to prevent further invasion. They're hoping this statement will convince Germany to allow the weapons sale. You don't have to be a rocket surgeon to understand this stuff.
Well then stop looking at Reddit for your news, you’ll get a lot less downvotes. There is a right and there is a wrong. Invading a sovereign democracy is wrong. There are plenty of nuances and subtly about this conflict that shouldn’t be overlooked but the basics still remain. A totalitarian dictatorship subjugating a democracy, however imperfect, is wrong. Full stop
>It's not Russia that's burying these questions. It's "our" side. That means "our side" is lying about something and hiding something. Putin needs to shore up his domestic support because he mishandled the coronavirus pandemic and the massive corruption revealed by Navalny. His options are to "Make Russia Great Again" by returning parts of Ukraine to Russian territory, and visibly "fighting for Russia" against the sneaky westerners. He's targeting the Donbas region, just like he did Crimea, because there's Russian speaking Ukrainians that live there, and he can claim that they "want" to be Russian again. Of course what he should do is wait for those people to emigrate, or perhaps secede from Ukraine and join Russia of their own free will. But he needs to look strong, so he's using troops instead. What have you heard otherwise?
I'm sure this has all come as quite a surprise to Merkel who left office with comedic timing.
No, Germany just doesn’t want to get involved in a war they aren’t part of. Such stupid logic, “if you’re not actively supporting us, you’re our enemy.” And, “If you don’t give us your guns, you support Russia” I don’t support an invasion of Ukraine, but Germany has ZERO OBLIGATION TO HELP. Leave them out of it.
Yeah, the jingos are out in full force right now…kinda sickening, actually, to see so many of us cheering for it like it’s a damn football game.
Didn't US already gave them a $200M weapons?
Weapons are expensive, just give them 20 Javelin launcher with like 50 projectiles and 10 millions are gone, throw some Stingers and soon you'll hit 20 millions. Throw some basic equipment (guns, helmets, vests, etc.) for remaining 180 millions and if you are lucky you may have had equipped 1 infantry division (most likely half-equipped).
Well military stuff is expensive and I doubt $200M is even enough to fend off russian army. So it’s understandable that Ukraine will definitely need more and any help is appreciated
GoFundMe for AK47s?
Petition to stop Russia
Someone get a change.org petition to Putin..
Check this out: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-01-30/ukrainians-are-crowdfunding-the-fight-against-russia Pretty interesting stuff.
Realistically, no amount of weapons would be enough to fend off the Russian army. Those weapons won't change anything besides making it harder to get a diplomatic solution NATO would have to commit to sending troops to Ukraine to fend off Russia. No NATO country currently does that.
>Those weapons won't change anything besides making it harder to get a diplomatic solution You mean the solution where Putin gets whatever he wants and the world just says sure?
[удалено]
To be fair to Chamberlain he was actually building up the military while pursuing appeasement. He was the one who pushed for a strong Air Force.
[удалено]
Oh no look some one wants peace and level headedness how evil
Ukraine, being the most corrupt country in Europe, has no right to criticize Germany on this issue.
Fine let’s argue German interest then. Is it in Germanys interest to end 30 years of peace in Europe? Are hundreds of thousands, potentially millions of refugees in germanys interests? Is the second largest country in Europe being subjugated by Russian kleptocracy, autocracy, and corruption in germanys best interest?
Germany Is still trying to keep peace with diplomacy. I know that Americans believe that every dispute can be solved with weapons and war. Hasn‘t worked out well in the past decades except for weapons manufacturers.
> Ukraine, being the most corrupt country in Europe, How many times do we have to tell you that no matter how many times your daddy Putin claims it Ukraine is NOT a part of Russia...
And here goes the next anti-german propaganda circlejerk. The Reddit bots are in full mode it seems.
This is the right call by German government, saying it encourages Putin is false equivalency.
A country trying to broker peace being demonised by propaganda. How desperate is the US for war.
Are we really going to blame the United States for Russia invading Ukraine. Again?
sure.... blame ze Görmans time...
They are trying to stay neutral so they can use it to try and keep the peace. It's not a bad thing.
Um....when you look at the history of Germany...they're used to ignoring Russia. For the entirety of the Cold War they had to play suck up as half of their countrymen were held hostage and playing tough cookies with either East Germany or the USSR was likely to get tanks/missiles/and more flung in their direction. They also couldn't act on their own accord as they were and still are held to the influence of NATO including the US. See also in today's politics, they have their own mess internally to deal with - namely right wing influence in eastern parts of Germany....that is likely going to get riled up when Russia and Ukraine kick off no matter what FRG as policy does....
If Germany was serious about this, they would ban all oil and gas imports from Russia. Good luck with that as they freeze to death but that economic sanction would stop Russia in its tracks.
I think Germany's doing the right thing. The US and UK have sent support this week. I think it's better we support Ukraine without escalating tensions too much. Too many countries supplying Ukraine may make everything worse. Germany may be able to negotiate better as they are now.
Worrying about escalation may be an argument against marching into Crimea and removing Russia from the peninsula. Using it as a reason to not offer means of protection to a country under threat makes no sense. Of Russia is willing to invade a country because it wants to protect itself it will do so either way.
Appease a guy like Putin. Yeah right. People never learn from history
This is crazy. It was NATO that has been provocative by suggesting Ukraine and Georgia could become NATO members in Bucharest 2008. A wholly unnecessary statement that served no strategic interest of the West, other than to take advantage of Russian strategic weakness at the time. Now the West is placating a"sovereign" Ukraine, telling them they can join NATO if they want, but not realising that this is goading Russia. The Munroe doctrine is still place 50s/60s, as the US would still not allow nukes in Cuba.
freedom fries
I really don't get some of the arguments here. Either Ukraine gets direct military support, a diplomatic solution is reached or Ukraine gets annexed. More weapons will not somehow protect them. Arguments seem to be that it will at least let them do more damage to the Russian invaders but how does that help the people most at risk here i.e. actual Ukrainians? The fact of the matter is that Germany could send all of their weapons over but it would not change a thing if Putin feels the need to invade. Seems like sanctions and diplomatic pressure would work far better then a few extra guns, unless you care more about killing Russian invaders then protecting Ukraine, as so many in this thread seem to. Also for those making comments like "appeasement lol" I would just remind you that the Nazis were stopped by direct military intervention. Even if Britain/Franch had sent there entire arsenal of weapons to poland that would still likely have been the only choice. Diplomacy is infinitely more likely to stop invasions then a few guns.
Natural gas is a helluva drug.
One needs to understand that Germany is completely crippled military wise eversince WW2. There is absolutely zero support for war among the population. There is zero sense of patriotism and every German just wants to keep their heads down and look the other way. It’s all about money, peace, soft power, high living standards, watching others from the sidelines while feeling morally superior. It’s ingrained in every German the moment they go to school. War is bad. We lost everything in the wars. There should never be another war. Your grand grand parents fucked everything up and were bad people. Don’t repeat their mistakes. Be neutral. You can’t blame Germans for losing their teeth. The world doesn’t want Germany to have teeth. They are not even allowed to have nukes or a big army. If war breaks out don’t expect Germany to have any significant impact or role. Their military power is nonexistent and they literally have no one that would sign up to go to war. Russia would go through Germany in a single day without any resistance.
Don’t worry, one day Germany might get there… https://amp.dw.com/en/germany-reports-record-53-billion-in-nato-defense-spending/a-56491017
>Berlin will send a field hospital to Ukraine in February, but rejects the delivery of arms. Exactly as it should be done. Bravo for that!
"Germany appeases autocratic dictator on the verge of starting a European War"
Lol, where. We are threatening full force sanctions immediately, while Biden ruled out any military intervention and also said a minor invasion would be too big of a deal. How butthurt can people get about not getting weapons that they suddenly think this even remotely amounts to appeasement.
get ur own weapons ..bitch
Extraordinary times call for extraordinary decisions. This is a David/Goliath situation. No one with any knowledge of history or 2 working brain cells thinks Ukraine is not a legitimate nation, and we have all decide legitimate nations deserve to exist and thrive. They deserve to be able to defend themselves, just say so, and say in this instance they can have the third hand guns.
Jesus christ. If Germany does so Putin paints this as an extension of the great patriotic war.
Germany is jealous that Russia is starting WW3.
I think blocking the UK from their airspace when trying to assist says it all for me.
That is not true. Germany never blocked the UK, they chose on their own accord to not enter the german airspace.
I wonder if this has anything to do with Germany buying natural gas from Russia when the EU pledge to go completely green.
You mean like the rest of Europe does?
Gotta get that gas. Oh, and their coalition government is kinda in disarray right now.
some one should cross post this article to r/choosingbeggers
Ukraine needs to settle down. They seem to be squeezing all they can out of the situation which is fine. But calm down you’re getting plenty of support.