When a nation is considered a party to the war is clearly regulated. But the Russian president obviously doesn’t care much. Does that mean German caution is obsolete?
Andriy Melnyk may be primarily the Ukrainian ambassador in Berlin, but he is also a man of clear words when it comes to the – not always diplomatic – naming and evaluating of politics, its protagonists and attitudes.
The Chancellor still resents Ukraine’s uninviting of President Steinmeier? An “offended liverwurst”, . The AfD rejects sanctions against Russia? “Bye”, . Germany at risk of being dragged into the war by supplies of heavy weapons? “Complete nonsense”, . “For Putin, Germany has long been a war party.”
For real? With the German U-turn, now also supplying heavy military equipment to the Ukraine, the question has gained new importance. In the future, Ukrainian soldiers will also be trained on weapon systems in Germany. There is growing concern that Russian President Vladimir Putin could use the growing military aid as an opportunity to expand his campaign – ultimately to include Germany.
The Crux of War Participation
A fueled corresponding fears. In it, legal experts stated that military aid for an attacked state is permitted. “One would only leave the secure area of non-warfare if, in addition to supplying them with weapons, there was also a question of instructing the parties to the conflict or training them to use such weapons,” is the very cautious conclusion of the report.
This sentence alarmed some. Germany supplies weapons and also teaches the buyers how to use them – is the republic leaving the “area of non-warfare” as the report says?
The paper, dated March 16, does not give a clear answer. The report only comes to the said cautious conclusion. Referring to the equally cautious statement of an international law expert in an interview: “It remains decisive to consider the individual case,” said Pierre Thielbörger on March 12.
It would also be wrong, says Markus Krajewski, international law expert and general secretary of the German section of the International Law Association. The report was not a “highlight”, kept very brief and a little superficial, he was quoted as saying by the . Nevertheless, one can answer the question of when training foreign soldiers means that they become a party to the conflict.
According to Krajewski, location is key. “If German soldiers would travel to Ukraine and help the soldiers there to fire on their targets, then they would take part in combat operations,” the international law expert told the “Süddeutsche Zeitung”. The Bundestag’s decision to only train Ukrainian soldiers “in Germany or on NATO territory,” “almost in dry runs,” is not a problem. It’s impossible to misinterpret that as a “posting,” as he told the paper.
But what does that mean?
One threat, two conclusions
Who is at war and who is not is . However, Russia’s president has declared it a waste of time with his war of aggression, which violates international law. This presents Ukraine’s allies with a dilemma: the aggressor from Russia (also) decides when the threshold for formal entry into the war has been crossed.
Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) is aware of the dilemma. “There are principles of international law, but they don’t help,” he said.
Does that mean it doesn’t matter if Germany supplies even more heavy weapons and thus throws all careful consideration overboard? The chancellor doesn’t see it that way. “In fact, we shouldn’t have any illusions about Putin,” he said. “Nevertheless, it would be completely wrong to talk yourself into a rage.”
Putin is unpredictable, and the situation is correspondingly serious – everyone seems to agree on that. Different conclusions are drawn from this.
In view of the Russian threatening gestures that a third world war could ensue, some warn against further arms aid for Ukraine. Several celebrities expressed this concern to Chancellor Scholz.
The others, on the other hand, are sticking to military support. “If we didn’t do anything, the suffering of the Ukrainians would be much, much worse” (Bündnis 90/Die Grünen). By supplying your party friend Anton Hofreiter as heavy weapons, Putin is committing “a criminal war of conquest or aggression” that must be stopped.
Military experts consider a nuclear expansion of the war unlikely. Former Federal President Joachim Gauck described the relevant statements by the Russian Foreign Minister as . Nonetheless, the threats are received with concern. Also from Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Chair of the Defense Committee. But the FDP politician says: Germany must take a stand, including with arms deliveries – in order to comply with international law.
“Like the rabbit in front of the snake”
“Of course the situation is extremely serious,” said Strack-Zimmermann. Nevertheless, she recommends staying calm. “If we sit like rabbits in front of a line because of these verbal threats, then we will be paralyzed and do nothing.” The narrative of the Third World War, “which was deliberately launched by Putin,” should therefore not be adopted as one’s own.
She also emphasizes that Germany is not a party to the war, since no German soldiers would set foot on Ukrainian soil. “That is central,” said the FDP politician. “But of course we are biased. If Ukraine is ruthlessly attacked in violation of international law, we too must take a stand.” This is also done by supplying military material.
“It is important to understand,” said the defense expert: “The question of whether Vladimir Putin defines us (…) as a war party is something Putin decides for himself.” International law interests him “not the bean.” But as nations “that accept the law, it is all the more important that we abide by it.” That means doing what international law clearly defines: “Anyone who is attacked may defend themselves, and the neighbors may support them with the appropriate material.”
Sources: , (expert opinion of the scientific service), , “Süddeutsche Zeitung” ( / / ), “Tagesschau.de” ( / ), ,
Source: Stern
David William is a talented author who has made a name for himself in the world of writing. He is a professional author who writes on a wide range of topics, from general interest to opinion news. David is currently working as a writer at 24 hours worlds where he brings his unique perspective and in-depth research to his articles, making them both informative and engaging.
