She is one of the loudest supporters of Ukraine, the FDP’s top candidate for the European elections and a kind of traffic light rebel against Chancellor Scholz – at least when it comes to Russia. In an interview with ntv.de, Strack-Zimmermann explains why she doesn’t find his arguments regarding Taurus valid.
ntv.de: Ms. Strack-Zimmermann, after Chancellor Scholz’s government survey this week, did you understand why he doesn’t want to deliver a Taurus to Ukraine?
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann: We have known for ten months that Ukraine wants the cruise missile. The Chancellor could have made a decision immediately after the first request. Instead, he let the debate continue. Now he will hardly be able to catch her. It’s too politically charged for that. And to say: “Basta, I’m the chancellor and that’s why it’s like this,” that won’t work.
We actually thought that the Chancellor was allowed to do just that.
He has the authority to make directives, but still has to explain his decision. However, if you give a different reason every week why you decided against something, that doesn’t really make sense.
If his ultimate goal is to maintain control of this far-reaching weapon, isn’t that a legitimate argument?
Of course, you have to deal with all eventualities. The many reasons that have been given little by little, that we don’t have enough of the system, that it is not ready for use, that it cannot be reproduced quickly enough, or that German soldiers are needed to support it on Ukrainian soil, are all been refuted. It’s also not really helpful if you drag your partners in France and Great Britain into the domestic German discussion as key witnesses and spill internal details at the same time.
You mean he revealed that the British and French have their own people on the ground?
Whatever the Chancellor has hoped for, it is not good, because together we are called upon to protect our Europe. His actions are likely to be a harbinger of the federal election campaign. He probably wants to be perceived as the chancellor of peace, like Gerhard Schröder, who took a clear position in the Iraq war. But I am much more worried about the statement by SPD parliamentary group leader Rolf Mützenich, who actually said in his speech that he wanted to freeze the situation in Ukraine. This is frightening and reminds us of the unsuccessful appeasement policy of the last decades. Freezing conflicts in order to avoid having to deal with them acutely is irresponsible. We know that as soon as unresolved conflicts thaw again, they will once again become a huge source of uncertainty for the next generation.
But this argument that without German soldiers you would give up control and in the end you would no longer be able to prevent the Ukrainians from perhaps attacking Moscow with the Taurus…
We should stop pushing Russian narratives. The Ukrainians are reliable partners and know that this is the only way our cooperation can work.
But who knows what they would do in a desperate situation with their backs against the wall?
Ukraine is fighting bravely, but needs our support and that of other European partners in every respect. Humanitarian, economic and military. Ukraine will not jeopardize this. It’s not really wise on our part to keep describing the situation as hopeless. I would like to remind you that it is also about our peace in freedom. If Putin succeeds with this imperialist attack, it will not be the last war in Europe.
US media such as the New York Times and CNN recently reported that Russia was seriously considering using nuclear weapons in the fall of 2022. As the armed forces were cornered by Ukraine, senior military officials are said to have discussed the nuclear option.
When the use of a nuclear weapon is threatened, it understandably causes great uncertainty in the West. And that’s exactly what this threat is aimed at.
What makes you so sure?
The Russians will not use nuclear weapons. Using them would cause serious harm to themselves. It was historic that US President Biden and Chinese President Xi made it clear to Putin at the G20 summit in Indonesia that he should not even think about using this weapon, otherwise he would also make an enemy of China. From then on, at least at this volume, this threat was off the table.
During the government survey there was an exchange of blows between Olaf Scholz and CDU politician Norbert Röttgen when the Chancellor suddenly called him by first name…
I found that strange. We are in the plenary hall of the German Bundestag and not in the canteen. Mr. Röttgen wisely did not address this personal tone, but continued to address Mr. Scholz as Mr. Federal Chancellor.
Scholz accused Röttgen of having knowledge but not saying it publicly. In other words: that Röttgen was demanding Taurus delivery against his better judgment. As chair of the Defense Committee, do you have any idea what the Chancellor meant by that?
I don’t know what Mr. Scholz could have meant either. This assumption is already strong talk. There are only facts and they are crystal clear on the table.
Could there be an announcement from Washington not to deliver the Taurus?
Definitely not. I was in the USA and had many conversations there. For the Americans, the security situation in the Indo-Pacific is of even greater importance. That’s why the Europeans have a free hand. By the way, the Americans especially expect this from us. And many other European countries also expect more leadership from Germany.
Why?
We are a strong country in the heart of Europe.
According to surveys, Scholz has the majority of Germans on his side with his no to Taurus.
I trust every citizen to concern themselves with this issue. Full of concern, but also full of hope that the war in Ukraine will end soon. There was also initially no majority among the German population in the discussion about the delivery of the Leopard main battle tank. It is our job in politics, as long as we hold this mandate, to make decisions and explain to people why we made this decision this way and not otherwise.
The Taurus leak was a spying success for the Russians. You have already spoken out against firing the generals involved – because that was ultimately Putin’s goal. But what remains then? Just a raised finger?
We are exposed to hybrid attacks and have been for years. The Russians want to unsettle us on the one hand, but also show us off. Even if the interception of this phone call was self-inflicted and definitely should not happen, we cannot fire capable generals because of it. This is exactly what Vladimir Putin’s strategy is based on. Why else would he publish who and when he had what he listened to? It will be important to be technically highly advanced in the future, but also to make people aware that they can always be the target of Russian espionage.
Have you personally changed your behavior?
For example, I no longer use the WiFi in hotels. You shouldn’t allow strangers to involve you in confidential conversations. This also affects all of our employees. The harvesting of information is subtle. Chatting can also take place at a club on the weekend to build trust. You really don’t have to hear the fleas coughing everywhere, but a little less naivety would be good.
On Thursday you voted together with the Union again on the Taurus issue. Do you no longer care about faction pressure?
You know my opinion, I won’t change anything and will behave accordingly.
Ms. Strack-Zimmermann, since the end of January you have been the FDP’s top candidate for the European elections on June 9th. Then they will move to the European Parliament. By chairing the Defense Committee you are actually giving up your dream job.
How do you know this is my dream job? (Laughs) I really enjoy doing it, but there will also be interesting challenges waiting for me in Brussels. I will continue to focus on defense and security – just in a different place. Working in Brussels is very abstract for many people. It’s time to explain more, also from a political perspective. As journalists, you can support this and report on it and thereby stimulate interest in European politics.
Like you, the CDU is now calling for its own defense commissioner. What is he actually supposed to do?
It was not the CDU that suggested the desire for a security commissioner, but rather the Free Democrats, and this has been the case since the attack on Ukraine. It’s nice that Commission President Ursula von der Leyen wants to take this up, if she ever becomes Commission President again. Even though she was Defense Minister in the Federal Republic of Germany for six years, she did not even put the issue of common security and defense on the Commission’s table. A commissioner for security and defense could bring states together and strive to better coordinate national armies. Not every nation has to have every capability. You can also complement each other very well. We can see how successful this is in the close cooperation between Germany and the Netherlands. In the future, military material should also be procured more jointly. This creates synergies and relieves the burden on national budgets.
Europe is currently under pressure – migration, growing right-wing populists, hybrid attacks from Russia. What about the EU?
The European Union has never been more at risk than it is today. The attack on Ukraine, illegal migration, the rise of populists. All of this is connected. If Putin prevents grain from being exported from Ukraine, 400 million people will be affected, mostly in African countries. They will be forced to leave their homeland and will most likely make their way to Europe. Putin is using this form of hybrid war to put additional pressure on Europe. Europe must find answers because this situation plays into the hands of the populists. They are counting on the pressure of migration to become so strong that the elections will turn out in their favor.
Aren’t you afraid of being away from the window when they disappear to Brussels?
Why should I? You can open a window wide, and that’s what I plan to do. It is a great privilege for me that the FDP has nominated me as its top candidate for the European elections. I am a convinced European and believe that we can only meet all the challenges in Europe together. If I can contribute to this, I’m happy about it.
Frauke Niemeyer and Volker Petersen spoke to Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann