Why Germany must change its spots and send the Leopards

Can the German leopard change its spots? Last February, just days after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Chancellor Scholz said yes. He argued that the “Zeitenwende” (new era) would lead to a fundamental change in its post-Second World War and Cold War foreign policy, particularly regarding Russia. He then spent most of 2022 prevaricating.

Germany’s Leopard-2 tank has become the symbol of Berlin’s reluctance to fully commit to the defence of Ukraine. A large-scale Ukrainian counteroffensive, or defence against a renewed Russian offensive this year, needs modern battle tanks, and the Leopard-2 is regarded as the best for the job. There are 2,300 of them in Europe and several nations are willing to give them to Ukraine. However, this requires German re-export licenses which are to date unavailable.

Germany’s hesitation will be a major issue at today’s meeting of 50 defence ministers at the Ramstein Air Force base to coordinate future military aid to Ukraine. Three things appear to be holding Scholz back. The first is the argument about the Second World War, which says German tanks should not be operating in the places where 80 years ago they inflicted so much terror. However, “historical guilt” has a sell-by date, especially as the tanks would be fighting against a similar sort of terror in the shape of Putin’s savagery. The second argument is that allowing the Leopards in would risk escalating the crisis. There is indeed the risk that if Putin sees he is about to lose he will escalate, but the counter argument is that a renewed drive on Kyiv is an escalation, and that appeasing the Kremlin only feeds its aggression.

The third point is one less discussed in Germany – the economic factor. Berlin has accepted that its policy towards Russia of ”Wandel durch Handel” (change through trade) was a “bitter failure”. Even the invasion of Crimea in 2014 did not change the relationship. Germany increased its energy dependance on Russia and signed off on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. This is because Germany’s economy is based on manufacturing and export and Russia was a major customer. Berlin has done a good job in reducing energy reliance over the past year, but it still seems keen to retain economic ties with Moscow and this may be a factor in its reluctance to allow the export licenses for its tanks.

It is unfair to say Germany has been supine in the face of Putin’s aggression; it has sent missile launchers, infantry fighting vehicles, and anti-aircraft systems as well as several billion euros in aid. But it has always dragged its heels and had to be pressured into action. As Ukrainian foreign minister Dmytro Kuleba put it – “First they say no, then they fiercely defend their decision, only to say yes in the end”.

Yes to Leopard? Some analysts say Germany will agree if the Americans send their own M1 Abrams tanks as well. If so, that’s not leadership, it’s following. The Americans are by far the biggest contributor to Ukraine’s defence, proving once again that Europe cannot take care of business in its own region. Just this month Washington announced that on top of the tens of billions in weapons and aid it has already provided it was sending 50 Bradley fighting vehicles (BFVs). To its credit German is hosting the training on the Bradleys for Ukrainian personnel. The course normally would be six months to a year, but time is running out and the Americans are hoping to have the BFVs in theatre in May.

By then we will be well into spring, by which time the fighting will have intensified. Ukraine says it needs at least 300 tanks to go on the offensive although fewer may do the job. It certainly needs dozens to mount a defence against the hundreds of thousands of troops Moscow looks as if it intends to throw into the meat grinder within a few weeks. The Leopard-2 is highly manoeuvrable and has thermal optics allowing much greater visibility of targets at night. Britain’s Challenger 2 tanks, 14 of which London is sending to Ukraine, have similar equipment.

Scholz is under pressure from within his own coalition government to act. The Green Party has been notably hawkish in support for Ukraine and argues in favour of both granting export licenses and sending Germany’s own tanks. A compromise at Ramstein could be to allow some countries to send tanks and offer support in training but stop short of sending any from the Bundeswehr.

Scholz needs to find his inner Adenauer. As West Germany’s first Chancellor (1949-1963) Konrad Adenauer had little time for trying to play both sides in the Cold War. He was an Atlanticist who embedded the Federal Republic into the fabric of Western institutions. However, since the end of the Cold War Germany has consistently taken a soft line with Russia, even as Putin’s despotism became apparent.

A few weeks into the Ukraine war, support was about saving the country in the short term. That has worked. Now it is about the long term. Russia can probably outlast Ukraine in a long war. It has a population of just under 146 million against Ukraine’s 41 million. Putin is willing to sacrifice as many of them as necessary to save himself. As Stalin is quoted as saying – “Quantity has a quality all of its own”. He knew, and Putin and Zelensky know, time is a weapon. The longer the war goes on, the more likely it is that some countries will tire of supporting Ukraine and try to force it to accept “peace” on Moscow’s terms. That would be a defeat for the whole of Europe.

Quality is also a weapon – as the supremacy of NATO arms has shown. The Leopard 2 is quality. Go West Scholz. 

Write to us with your comments to be considered for publication at letters@reaction.life