Thread by @hem_day

🇩🇪🇷🇺⚡️ Providing weapons & financial aid to Ukraine, makes Scholz's statement that Germany is not participating in the war technically (i.e. legally) correct but de facto completely consistent. Is hiding behind legal fictions a long-term solution?
1/9
#ukrainewar #ukraine #scholz

Russia has generally better weapons than Ukraine and is fighting an existential #war. Providing increasingly lethal #weapons to Ukraine would not be consistent with Scholz's stated goal of not escalating the situation.
2/9

It should be seen as a futile effort to change the military balance in favor of Ukraine and could ultimately lead to a more violent and destructive conflict with #Russia.
3/9

If Russia is determined to respond to any perceived threat regardless of the cost, providing more lethal weapons to Ukraine may only serve to increase the death toll and suffering without having a significant impact on the outcome of the conflict.
4/9

The fact that Scholz wants to have direct talks with #Putin to end the war implies that he recognizes that Germany is not just a neutral observer but has a stake in the outcome of the conflict.
5/9

Rather than providing more lethal weapons, other diplomatic or economic measures would be much more effective in resolving the conflict, such as diplomatic negotiations, that that neither Germany nor the rest of the collective West wants to hold at present
6/9

The only explanation for Scholz's actions isthat Germany, as an occupied country since 1945, has no autonomy in its foreign policy. The BND is nothing more than a branch of the Pentagon.
8/9

Regardless of Scholz's intentions, whether he is acting in good faith or not, the inconsistency of his statements remains unchanged, whether he is a hostage of US foreign policy or actively contributing to it.
9/9