29. März 2024 – Translated from German via Google and OFP
Berlin (dpa) – An incendiary letter from five social democratic historians on the government’s course in Ukraine policy is shaking up the SPD. In the letter to the party executive, the group led by Berlin professor Heinrich August Winkler accused Chancellor Olaf Scholz of lacking “unambiguous solidarity” with Ukraine. Historians even criticized faction leader Rolf Mützenich’s statement about “freezing” the war as “fatal”.
On Thursday, SPD foreign politician Andreas Schwarz countered the impression that there was a rift in his party. However, he admitted on Deutschlandfunk that the Ukraine course was being discussed “slightly contrary” in the Bundestag faction. “A democracy, a party must also be able to tolerate the fact that there are different opinions on a really very complex question.”
Spotlight on differences in the SPD
The letter highlights the fact that the dispute in the traffic light coalition [SPD, Greens, FDP–OFP😉] over the Ukraine course is not only between the SPD on the one hand and the Greens and FDP on the other, but also within the SPD. So far, there has been little public opposition from prominent Social Democrats to the Chancellor’s red lines regarding the delivery of the Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine and the deployment of ground troops. The left wing of the party, which has long wanted more diplomatic initiative in addition to arms deliveries, felt strengthened by this stance. Party leader Rolf Mützenich (SPD) seemed to be euphoric about this and even brought up the possibility of “freezing” the conflict – i.e. a ceasefire to enable a negotiated solution.
This idea went way too far for some people. But few said it as clearly as Defense Minister Boris Pistorius (SPD), who distanced himself from Mützenich with the words: “In the end it would only help Putin.”
Harsh historian criticism: “Quite often factually wrong”
The historians took up this idea in their letter and also applied it to the Chancellor’s red lines: “If the Chancellor and the party leadership draw red lines not for Russia, but exclusively for German politics, they will sustainably weaken German security policy and play Russia into their hands,” they wrote. They also accuse the Chancellor, and party and parliamentary group leaders of repeatedly arguing “arbitrarily, erratically and often factually incorrectly” in the debate about arms deliveries.
They also criticize the lack of an “honest examination of the mistakes of Russia policy of the last decades” within the SPD. Neither the entanglements of its own members with Russian interest representatives nor “the misguided energy policy that has led Germany into a fatal dependence on Moscow” have so far been seriously problematized.
No reaction from the Chancellor or party leadership yet
There has so far been no reaction from the Chancellor, party or parliamentary group leadership. A few days ago, SPD leader Lars Klingbeil published a video on Instagram in which he merely reiterated the line of political, financial and military support for Ukraine. “This will continue as long as Ukraine needs our support.” He did not directly address the debate about red lines in Ukraine policy.
The Chancellor would prefer to end the Taurus debate entirely. He recently criticized it as being “unsurpassable in terms of ridiculousness.” Scholz feels encouraged in his course because the poll numbers for him and his SPD have been rising since his no to Taurus – in time for the upcoming start of the European election campaign. When asked whether he would actively make Ukraine policy an election campaign issue, he replied on Wednesday: “I am convinced that many citizens see it this way, that precisely this question of security in Europe is important to the government I lead and is in good hands with me.”
Second warning signal to the Chancellor and party leadership within a short period of time
In the SPD we know from painful experience that their internal party disputes are more damaging. That’s why the few reactions to the letter that there have been so far are rather reassuring. The excitement in the SPD about the letter was “limited,” said foreign policy expert Nils Schmid to “Spiegel”. “But with Taurus, the SPD respects the Chancellor’s considerations.”
The letter is now the second warning signal to the Chancellor and party leadership that there is discontent within their own ranks. The first sign was the announcement at the beginning of the week by the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Michael Roth, that he would withdraw from political activity. Roth was one of the very few members from the SPD who ever opposed the Chancellor’s [weak–OFP] course on Ukraine policy. In a “Stern” interview, he justified his withdrawal with an alienation from politics as a whole, but also from his own parliamentary group: “When the door to the parliamentary group hall opened, I finally had the impression that I was climbing into a refrigerator.”
“Scholz feels encouraged in his course because the poll numbers for him and his SPD have been rising since his no to Taurus – in time for the upcoming start of the European election campaign.”
Not much has changed in the basic mindset of Berlin’s government around Scholz. And, the lack of education about this topic makes any impressions of Germany’s electorate moot. They are poorly informed as to the urgent need in helping Ukraine win this war with everything that is important to achieve this goal, including the Taurus. It seems that Scholz, and at least a part of the SPD and the German population, are refusing to see the clear and present danger that a continued weak response to mafia land’s criminal war presents. Many are still daydreaming of a negotiated peace, despite the crystal clear evidence of the past failures of countless other negotiations during the last 10 years. It’s baffling to see so many still being so blind after so much time and so much effort.
I am glad that these historians have put a focus on this issue. Although I doubt it will move the stubborn eunuch from his position about the Taurus, it might get others in German politics and the general population to think a little bit deeper about this. Too bad not everyone in Germany thinks like our Mr. Gray.
Oh, thanks for the kind words, Mr. Ofp! But, guess what? For most of my life, I have voted SPD, being a fan of the late chancellor Helmut Schmidt. So, somehow I’m part of this inner party struggle, even though not a member. Schmidt himself, a resolute supporter of a strong deterrence against Russian imperialism, had had conflicts with the pacifistic left wing of his party, too. So, such heated discussions are like an old tradition for Social Democrats. “The more the world changes, the more it stays the same!” (Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr, 1849)
🙄
Helmut Schmidt was one of Germany’s greatest chancellors. It’s too bad that the country had such garbage as Schröder and Merkel, and, to an extent, Scholz.
Germany murdered Ukrainians in in industrial quantities within living memory.
They must step fully up to the mark, admit their responsibilities and help Ukraine to the maximum of their quite considerable capabilities.
Name Shroeder and Merkel as Russian agents would be a good start. Take those bastards’ money and property and give it to Ukraine.
Alas, Germany has yet to admit its many gross mistakes regarding mafia land. Neither Schröder nor Merkel have admitted to their despicable behavior. There is no critique about them in the German press to this very day.