Maybrit Illner: Olaf Scholz gives Schröder tips – and avoids topics

The Chancellor says it over and over again. He’s been repeating it for days, and this sentence also falls in his solo with Maybrit Illner: “It’s important that we don’t fool ourselves.” Olaf Scholz (SPD) speaks the painful truths. Far more civilians will lose their lives – also more soldiers; many of them are still very young. According to the chancellor, there is a risk of a “dramatic escalation, a complete invasion of Ukraine”. The head of government agrees with the citizens that the terrible times will become even more terrible: “The longer the war lasts, the worse it gets.”

Scholz, who just returned from a visit to Israel the day before, is pale. He looks touched. He knows what many feel: there is no way in sight to stop the aggressor, Russian President Vladimir Putin. The Chancellor and many others fought to avert this tragedy. So far in vain. At best, Scholz’s call for a ceasefire promises to gain time for new diplomatic attempts. Nobody can say exactly what they might look like at the moment. Neither does the prime minister. His motto: “Don’t stop trying.”

It was not even a week ago that the chancellor proclaimed a “turning point”: arms deliveries to Ukraine, far-reaching financial sanctions against Russia and 100 billion euros extra for the German armed forces represent a radical change that is unique in recent decades. And on that evening at Illner’s, it sometimes seemed as if the war in Ukraine had triggered a change in Olaf Scholz himself.

Anyone who quickly saved an image of a slow speaker with a chronic tendency to refuse to answer after the start of the “new chancellor” can now begin to ponder. Scholz’ answer to an Illner question is often shot out in a split second. Could Germany have prevented this war with earlier decisions to change course? “No”. Did the Germans support Ukraine too late and too little? “No.” Is it purely a private matter what kind of relations ex-Chancellor Gerhard Schröder maintains with Russia? “No.”

Schröder as the aggressor’s buddy

The Schröder issue is highly sensitive for social democrats. The former chancellor, once dubbed the “comrade of the bosses,” now appears to have committed himself to the role model of “the aggressor’s buddy.” The SPD leadership asked Schröder yesterday to give up his posts at Gazprom and Rosneft.

For (successor) successor and party friend Scholz, Schröder’s behavior is difficult to bear. Because it harms the country that he led for seven years, and above all it weakens the fight against Putin’s unprecedented act of violence. “I don’t think it’s right for Gerhard Schröder to hold these offices, and I also think it would be right for him to resign,” Scholz said coolly. He wants to leave further urging to friends of Schröder.

Scholz is clearly sorted. He knows what to say and what he prefers to leave verbosely unanswered, even in changed times. It is normal for no coalition to trumpet information about internal friction. In the current situation, however, less banal questions often determine the limits of talkativeness: a thoughtless word can put people in Ukraine or Russia in mortal danger.

However, Scholz is also cautious when it comes to the “admission of mistakes” section. And at the end of the interview, the boss makes a few statements about the consequences of the invasion for the ambitious plans of the traffic light government, which his critics should consider repeating.

“Maybrit Illner” is not talking about saving

Doesn’t everything indicate that people in Germany have to adjust to a life with less prosperity? In Illner’s words: “What will there be no money for, Mr. Scholz?” A torrent of words from the chancellor follows. With the 100 billion euros in special funds for defense, it was prepared in such a way “that we have all the projects that we have described for better coexistence in Germany, for progress, for more justice in the coalition agreement, for more education, that we all can and want to pursue these projects,” he says. The keywords “stable pension level”, “better protection for children”, “better care system”, “tenants” are also mentioned.

In recent weeks, Scholz has often only communicated painful decisions when he thought the time was right. Two Sundays earlier, he could hardly have counted on a majority from his own people for the huge defensive effort on Sunday. It was similar in Europe: A European alliance for the rapid admission of refugees would have met with fierce resistance before the tragedy in Ukraine began.

So when would be the right time to communicate cuts from the coalition plans? There is already a contrast between the chancellor and the vice-chancellor. Robert Habeck (Greens) expects significant consequences for the economy, and he addresses this offensively. Habeck hasn’t even ruled out the possibility that the climate issue could literally become secondary as the world catastrophe continues. More correctly: his run, Putin’s run.

The most painful question is only circled

But these days there is a far greater taboo than the question of any losses in this country. Again and again the guest and the hostess approach this point on this evening at Illner’s. The West is helping Ukraine with weapons, money and tough sanctions against Russia. But the Chancellor left no doubts about one principle: “Everything we do is about preventing a direct confrontation between NATO and Russia.” Ukraine is not part of this alliance. It is about averting the danger of a third world war.

A convincing “exit strategy” to get Putin to turn around has not yet been found, admits Scholz. “Anyone who thinks at this point that there is a button you can press and then the problems will be solved should have let us know earlier,” says the chancellor.