Ukraine: Scholz in the frame

By Richard North - January 18, 2023

With a busy news schedule and much going on of intertest, I hadn’t intended to return to the Ukraine war today. However, we are I believe at the cusp of a major development which could have significant impact on the conduct of the war.

If I’m right, this has nothing directly to do with the fighting on the ground. It has more to do with the strange game being played out between London and Berlin over the provision of Western tanks.

At the outset, it was clear and readily acknowledged that the British decision to supply Challenger 2s to the Ukrainians was essentially political. The intention was to leverage the release of greater numbers of Leopard 2s and, possibly, Abrams M1A1 MBTs, which also brings Washington into the frame.

What is very strange about all this is that even if the number of Leopards potentially available were sent to Ukraine – said to be in the order of 90 – these tanks would not be enough to make the difference on the battlefield, unless you are the Guardian of course.

Andrzej Duda, the Polish president, rather gives the game away, saying that a positive decision from Berlin to allow the re-export of German-manufactured Leopard 2 tanks was “very, very, very, very needed”, and that a group of Nato countries wanted to come together to help form an armoured brigade that could be given to Ukraine.

Ostensibly, therefore, the row that has developed, and is developing, cannot be solely (or at all) about military capabilities – a new brigade is neither here nor there, and cannot possibly influence the outcome of the war.

The moves thus seem more to do about power plays, the nature of which are not entirely clear. One possible motive could be about putting Olaf Scholz on the spot, as his permission is required to release the Leopards, possibly a somewhat crude attempt to secure a greater German commitment to the war.

This may also have something to do with the impenetrable (to outsiders) coalition politics, and the recent replacement of the German defence minister, although a change of the guard doesn’t seem to have had any immediate effect.

This speculation about motives is not helped by UK foreign secretary, James Cleverly, who does not seem to have been sent the memo.

He is over in the United States where he has been telling a Washington thinktank that the supply of Challengers to Ukraine was designed to bring the war to a quick conclusion, adding that there was “a moral imperative” to end the war soon. It was “time to bring it to a conclusion”, he said.

Given that the supply of Challengers, directly at least, was most decidedly not designed to bring the war to a quick conclusion, one wonders if Cleverly is not so very, having fallen for the trap, common amongst certain types of politicians, of believing the Americans to be as stupid as he is himself.

This is a strange error given that, by the time he spoke, the German economy minister, Robert Habeck, had already been reported as saying that the United States must send battle tanks to Ukraine first before Scholz would approve donations of Leopard 2 tanks.

That might seem to put Biden on the spot, something (not so) Cleverly might have factored into his speech, as it somewhat changes the dynamics of this game. The US could now be seen as the gatekeeper for more advanced weaponry being sent to Ukraine.

American officials, though, are claiming that the Abrams are too complicated for the Ukrainian military to operate and maintain (according to the Telegraph). This seems something of a thin excuse, given that the Kuwait Army, the Moroccans, Egyptians and Iraqis are all current operators of the type.

Given also that the Polish land forces have also been allowed to buy 250 of the newest, most complex M1A2 SEP v3 version, and could quite easily run a repair and deep maintenance facility for the Ukrainians, on the Polish side of the border, the American reservations do not seem to hold water.

Arguably, therefore, Cleverly might have been better employed in trying to convince the US to release a number of Abrams, thereby putting the focus back on Scholz

But not only is the foreign secretary keeping the focus on Scholz, so too is defence secretary Ben Wallace who is reported as preparing to attend a meeting of the so-called “Leopard coalition” of countries willing to or keen to see western tanks sent to Ukraine, a day before the Ramstein group of defence ministers meet.

Defence sources are said to be claiming that the purpose of the meeting is “to encourage the Germans”, although it may be pre-empted by the German chancellor who is due to speak at the Davos WEF summit this afternoon.

If Scholz doesn’t do the honours today, this puts Wallace directly at odds with him and, by inference, puts the UK on a political collision-course with Germany. And, in this post-Brexit world, one might have thought that this is a confrontation that cannot possibly end up in a British victory.

Unusually though, in the context where Germany is so often claimed to be running the EU, European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen is supporting the Ukrainians, telling Germany’s Bild that, “If they say they need battle tanks, then we should take it seriously and deliver them”.

In a statement that clearly puts Scholz in the frame, she added: “I am in favour of the European states delivering what Ukraine actually needs. After all, the Ukrainians are proving that they can defend themselves if they have the right military means”.

This followed a joint declaration on EU-NATO Cooperation, just over a week ago, where in press comments afterwards, von der Leyen said she thought Ukraine should get all the necessary military equipment they need, including “advanced military equipment”.

Since this was in response to a question on whether Ukraine should get heavy tanks, there was no ambiguity in her response. The Commission, alongside the Council – and Nato – is decidedly in favour of Ukraine getting its tanks.

That Scholz should put himself out on such a limb is, on the face of it, not easily explained, especially as his stance seems to be ceding the political high ground to the UK and leaving Germany bereft of allies.

Even Reuters is under the impression that the Cleverly intervention actually favours Ukraine and brings it closer to receiving modern Western battle tanks.

Such is the state of play that even Zelensky is taking things for granted, telling a group of German students that Ukraine “will be able to liberate its cities and villages from Russian terrorists with the help of German Leopards, Marders and Gepards”.

Referring to Scholz directly, he Zelensky thanked him for his “determination to admit that the past is over” and the fact that Germany is becoming one of the leaders in supporting Ukraine – which, clearly, it is not (yet).

Those who have a better understanding of internal German politics might be able to make some sense out of this, but there does not seem to be any obvious political advantage in ceding the high ground to the UK for its otherwise fruitless Challenger initiative.

Even if Scholz does now permit Leopards to be sent to Ukraine, the UK will be seen to have taken the initiative, as indeed will be the case if he refuses permission for the transfers.

Untypically, Germany seems to have adopted a lose-lose stance, unless it is running a game plan that is so obscure that no one but the chancellor realises what it is.