Shady Ray

Basically, the Green Party of Germany came out of the 1970s anti nuke movement, which essentially just adopted all forms of nuclear as evil. Their entire identity as a political movement is based on this perspective and they - being typical obstinate Germans - refuse to recalibrate. It is completely part of German culture now, no matter how intrinsically stupid it is. There has been organized resistance to nuclear since the 1950s, but Chernobyl and then Fukushima cemented it within the national discourse. Over the years, the position spread to the Social Dems, and then, due to some quirks of German politics, was even adopted in some corners of the Center Right CDU with Merkel's kneejerk reaction to Fukushima. It is a stupid position, but it is deeply enshrined now in the national psyche. One of the weirder quirks of Germans, along with scat porn and an undying affinity towards the Hoff/Knight Rider/Baywatch, is bringing up Chernobyl to a German...every one of them who was around then will instinctively tell you where they were when it happened, as the weather pattern blew fallout over East Germany and Bavaria, and then it rained. They act like it was literal acid falling from the sky from which they had to flee, and it is part of their personal/familial lore. Like some type of bizarre 9/11 experience that was hundreds of miles away. Fucking weird. Anyway, here is the summary of electricity origin from Stadtwerke München (City Utilities - Munich) that came with my annual power bill yesterday. SWM is essentially the only provider here. You can disregard the middle rows, as those are simply packages for business users/voluntary programs focused on renewables/gas. The top row shows how Munich was powered, the bottom shows how Germany as a whole was powered. Gas supply goes out, ol' Shady gonna be all kinds of fucked. Green = Renewables not financed from the state eco surcharge Yellow = Renewables financed from the state eco surcharge Blue = Natural Gas Light Grey = Coal Dark Grey = Nuke

German Greens gonna have a conniption over this, but this is the way...

El Pais has published what they claim to be the written responses that the US provided to Russia a couple of weeks back: https://elpais.com/infografias/2022/02/respuesta_otan/respuesta_otan_eeuu.pdf

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/29/boris-johnson-to-visit-ukraine-region-and-hold-call-with-putin-next-week This is just stupid. Boris is completely flailing at home and can add absolutely zero value to inserting himself into an already tense situation. After the past week where there are increased grumblings in certain quarters of Europe that the Anglosphere is exaggerating the threat - or at least fanning the flames in the media - it doesn't look good for a politician who is absolutely scorned across Western Europe - particularly in France and Germany - to come bouncing into an extremely volatile situation. The audacity and cynisim of doing this is remarkable. His entire party is turning on him over "partygate" (which is set to only get worse now that the official investigative report is coming out) and now he feels that his completely chaotic existence is going to help. Macron, who seems to have actually had the most productive calls this week with Russia via his video call with Putin on Friday, has to be particularly miffed, given how terrible the French-British relationship is right now. Boris is also scheduled to have a direct call with Putin and the last thing anyone needs now is one more individual negotiating channel with him, particularly one run by Boris.

Hopefully this can be taken as at least a small, tiny, positive sign. I mean, in Lavrov-speak this is the equivalent to pillow talk:

Yeah, I do want to make clear that while my position is certainly critical of Ukrainian governance and I personally would not like to see it joining the EU or NATO any time soon, I certainly do not think that their shortcomings warrant Russian aggression. Their sovereignty should be respected just like any other country does with respect to illegal acts of aggression. I think we are just at a really difficult situation where there is not a clear way forward, as this is one of those times where military escalation does not work in our favor. And this is a position that is somewhat unique for us from a foreign policy standpoint. Interesting article out yesterday in the NYT detailing Russian military capabilities. Providing Yahoo link due to paywall. https://news.yahoo.com/russias-military-once-creaky-modern-124721425.html

Quoting myself to say that I posted the wrong video here. The one I actually saw earlier was in German, so i will try to find an english source on this once it trickles out.

I am hesitant to post this, as it goes against my role as Doomsayer of the Dnieper, but this is actually a pretty significant development on the localized Ukraine issue. The Europeans/Russians have been pushing for Kiev and the D/LPR leadership to sit down and discuss directly. To date, Kiev has actively resisted this. German radio reported that Kiev has now agreed to meet directly to find a way forward and now France 24 is saying the same. The4 Parties agreed to reconvene in Berlin next week to discuss further de-escalation. It’s a small step in the grand scheme, but it’s a significant one nevertheless.

Meh, I can understand the position of the Canadians having difficulty knowing who they were meeting numerous times, but the other example I gave showing the particular value of Azov to the Ukrainian armed forces remains. The US designated them as a "neo-nazi paramilitary militia" in 2015 after John Conyers and Ted Yoho pushed through a resolution on the matter. The Pentagon then actively lobbied a compliant Defense Appropriations Committee to remove that exact Conyers-Yoho amendment from the 2016 miltary budget, over the strenuous objections of the Wiesenthal Center and other Jewish organizations, who absolutely went apoplectic after learning of it. If they had no significant value other than being a few hundred dudes on the front lines, the Pentagon wouldn't have done that. They are the tip of the spear, so to speak, and it is a bit of a stretch to think we are morally above training and funding extremists to accomplish geopolitical goals we have done that more times that we can count. But we should at least be honest about it as a country when we make the decision to enable that type of element, instead of rationalizing it away as though they aren't a very real and serious problem. We have had years of giving Ukraine billions of dollars in direct aid and even more in weapons. A much wiser position would be to have condition military aid to Ukraine on a system of sticks and carrots relating to demonstrable improvement re their far-right problem. But by cutting them off in congress and then actively rehabilitating them via Pentagon pressure, we escalatd them above reproach when it came to their behavior, making them stronger within Ukraine. I think we could have used the seven years since that time to encourage reform on this issue. But ultimately, what's in the past is in the past and war is an ugly business. It is just another version of FDR's "he may be a bastard, but he's our bastard" when referring to Somoza, and the issue isn't really Azov or their fellow travellers anymore, but rather the issue at hand. But you did make another point that I found really interesting and would love to hear you expand on it. Specifically, you said: "First, because these problems are endemic to a nation that has an active conflict with Russia, that has been more less manipulated by Russia for all of its existence, and where Russia advances these problems as a matter of strategy. Second, because none of them can be meaningfully addressed until Russia is no longer an existential threat or puppet master. In this light, it’s clear that these are all excuses and not reasons for Germany’s hesitance to recognize that problem ONE is Russia. Put out the fire before calling the exterminator." This is a great insight. And I think there is a lot of truth in this insofar as having Russia on one's doorstep in an aggressive posture certainly is not the ideal environment for reform. But a genuine question from a Geopolitical Realism perspective: How does that ever change? From my viewpoint, we are looking at a situation where the best case scenario here is a de-escalation in the form of some vague diplomatic solution where Ukraine is essentially dragged along in limbo with some pipe dream of eventual NATO or EU membership, while Russia gets concessions on other matters like arms control or troop deployents. And the worst case scenario is an all out destruction of the Ukrainian state. But in either form, it doesn't resolve the issue that you identified: Russia is always going to be positioned there physically...it ain't going anywhere. And IMO for the foreseeable future the Russian state is going to have this type of revanchist view towards Ukraine. So, and again, genuine questin for you...short of all out war in which we physically attempt to wrest control of Russia's ability to assert coercive power on Ukraine, what can we do to create a situation where Ukraine has the breathing room to get itself together? And is that even possible? I genuinely don't know but would love to hear your take. And I think that goes to a lot of the analysis of this conflict...we can all see that there is a problem, but as long as Russia wants Ukraine more than we do, is there a true option?

Oh, I agree. Far and away the most important issue keeping the Germans in line in opposing involvement is by far the fuel, both at the voter and the politician level. But I assure you, the domestic German distaste for the hard right extremism in Ukraine is very real on the narrow issue of weapons supply. Right out of the gate the Germans in 2014 pushed the Ukrainians to clean that up, and literally no progress has been made, and that is an element of the poltical calculus by our betters. But yeah, the fuel supply is by far the big one.

Brand new poll numbers re German population's views on weapons to Ukraine: For reference: SPD = Social Democrats; Center Left (Senior Governing Coalition Party) CDU/CSU = Christian Democrats; Center Right (Primary Opposition) Greens = welp, they are the Greens (Minor Governing Party) FDP = Free Democrats...think Elon Musky/Ron Paul-ish urbanites who like to get high and are good at stonks (Minor Governing Party) AfD = Alternative fur Deutschland (Far Right...opposition, dig brown shirts) die Linke = The Left (opposition, descendants of DDR commies) Berlin (dpa) - A clear majority of Germans are against the supply of German weapons to Ukraine. In a survey by the opinion research institute YouGov, 59 percent of those surveyed agreed with the Federal Government's position not to provide the country with weapons to defend against a possible attack by Russia. Only 20 percent were in favor of arms deliveries. 21 percent did not provide any information. Ukraine wants Germany to provide warships and air defense systems for defense purposes, among other things. The federal government has so far only promised 5000 military safety helmets. Ukraine has criticized this as a "pure symbolic gesture". The ambassador to Berlin, Andrij Melnyk, spoke of a "drop in the ocean". Kiev's mayor Vitali Klitschko even called the commitment an "absolute joke". Both Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) and Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock (Greens) have ruled out the supply of lethal, i.e. deadly weapons. This Thursday, the Bundestag will debate the Ukraine crisis and the German role in the efforts to de-escalate with Russia. Rejection among Green and FDP voters the weakest The majority of the supply of weapons is rejected by voters of all parties represented in the Bundestag. This attitude is most pronounced among the supporters of die Linke (71 percent) and the AfD (67 percent). This is followed by the voters of the largest governing party SPD (61) and the largest opposition party CDU/CSU (56). Resistance to arms supplies is still lowest among supporters of the Greens (55) and the FDP (54).

I broadly agree with this. Russian propaganda drastically overstates the numbers of actual neo-nazis in the Ukrainian military. One of our best “intel for hire” agencies that we use puts the size of Azov as approx 3,500 now, as they have grown in recent years, but either way, it is certainly no more than that. But their existence is much more complicated than a few hundred neo-nazis standing on the front lines of the Donbass. Let’s go back to the article from the National Post in Canada. The Canadian military actively - a full year in advance of training activities - plotted and formulated a way to directly train Azov - a group that their own records show they considered to be neo-nazis, while keeping said training from Canadian/Western media, and even going so far as to generate a protocol to diffuse the situation if the press ever DID get wind of it. A year in advance. If Azov was merely a bit-player in the overall Ukrainian military, then Canada would not have made such efforts - essentially abandoning their moral convictions - to work with them. The payoff in doing so had to be significant. Same goes for the US…if Azov was insignificant and just some bit-player, the US Congress wouldn’t have risked the political fallout of removing them from the designated terrorist list, as military victory over Russia would be just as likely by arming the remaining 90-someodd percent of the Ukrainian military. The reason this type of politically risky behavior has occurred is because while indeed smaller in number, they are the key to any type of organized resistance in Ukraine. They are the “tip of the spear”, and no one disputes this. So, therefore, they are the ones who will be getting the high-tech weapons, they will have access and control over local populations as a result, and they are the ones who will be completely unmanageable if Ukraine collapses internally. Which, mark my words, it will. But stepping away from the discussion on their value to the Ukrainian military to the much more important issue to the Germans: let’s look at the internal, domestic impact of these neo-nazi paramilitaries in Ukraine right now, which is largely fueled by these exact same groups. Over the last five years, some of the shit that has gone on in Ukraine - if widely circulated in the US - would destroy any semblance of optimism that this country is anywhere even close to becoming a functional democracy. The Right Sector, Azov, C14, The National Militia - which let’s face it, are all just different branding for the larger neo-nazi fascist network in Ukraine - and others have systemically asserted what can only be described as brown-shirtism across large swathes of Ukraine, particularly in large population centers like Kiev and Lviv. In short, in an effort to placate these groups, the Ukrainian state has completely surrendered its monopoly on violence, even going so far as to literally sign agreements with them for the creation of a “Municipal Guard’ that can legally patrol the streets...patrols which frequently result in atrocious acts of violent, neo-nazi rage. This is not good. And while it is known abroad, albeit not adequately discussed IMO, when the natural progression towards Ukraine’s internal “troubles” occurs, these groups are poised to inflict absolute hell on the Ukrainian populace. This is 1930s brown-shirtism in its absolute, replicative form. For a comprehenisve, detailed view of this, I highly recommend the Atlantic Council's piece on this - the most pro-NATO/EU of all think tanks: "Ukraine's Got a Real Problem with Far-Right Violence (And No, RT Didn't Write this Headline)" https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/ukraine-s-got-a-real-problem-with-far-right-violence-and-no-rt-didn-t-write-this-headline/ Also, this Reuters article from 2018 has a very accurate section on this. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cohen-ukraine-commentary/commentary-ukraines-neo-nazi-problem-idUSKBN1GV2TY I am separating out the most damning sentence from behind the Quote function: C14 and Kiev's city government recently signed an agreement allowing C14 to establish a "municipal guard" to patrol the streets; three such militia-run guard forces are already registered in Kiev, and at least 21 operate in other cities." This is complete insanity. Human Rights Watch has also recently written about how out of control these street patrols are: https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/11/29/radicals-target-roma-people-ukraine And while Poroshenko is now gone (although my estimation is that he is primed to return to power when the fallout of the current situation plays out), current president Zelensky has not taken any meaningful steps to resolve this out of fear for his own presidency. In fact, this “reformist” Zelensky even continued the notorius fascist Avakov’s tenure until Avakov resigned a few months ago out of his own volition, setting the stage for what many see as the early stages of an organized coup in league with the ascendant Poroshenko. Regardless, the fascist right still exerts massive levels of control at the street level in Ukraine, they still exert massive control within the hierarchy of the Interior Ministry - and thusly, the Ukrainian military - and no Ukrainian Govt can govern without at least their tacit acquiescence. So when one simply applies Occam’s Razor to the question: “If these groups cause such massive, massive PR obstacles for Ukraine in the eyes of critical European states like Germany in gaining acceptance and political support, and if their influence is simply an overstatement generated by Russian propaganda, then why does the Ukrainian state continue to allow them to effectively act as extrajudicial paramilitary groups operating with complete impunity across the country, along with actual, legally-recognized, formal ties with the Ukrainian intelligence services, and why - at least until his voluntary departure - was the Interior Ministry for years headed by one of their most notorious allies? If they were weak, then why not end their access to power?” The only reasonable answer is that they are, in fact, not weak and inconsequential…in fact, in a domestic sense, they are very, very powerful in the overall clusterfuck that constitute Ukrainian domestic politics. That Reuters article said it all: Presidents fear their administrations can't withstand getting cross with them. Furthermore, the sanctuary that Ukraine passivity/deference creates re neo-nazism is very dangerous to the larger world. I point to a 2022 article in Newsweek, where even the western media is beginning to acknowledge openly what Germans have long known: Ukraine has become a training ground for foreign neo-nazis, many from the US, to come and learn the tricks of the trade, including the very groups that have designs on our own institutions in the US. From that article a few weeks ago, which I highly, highly recommend everyone read if you would like to see a great dissection of the ties between the extreme right movements that we see in the US and the neo-nazis in Ukraine: https://www.newsweek.com/ukraine-war-draws-us-far-right-fight-russia-violence-home-1665027 At the risk of being Debbie Downer, the true position of the German government, which they can’t really come out and say, is that the idea of providing weapons to Ukraine is akin to pointing a garden hose at a raging industrial fire and is currently nothing more than a PR stunt by western allies for their own domestic consumption. It is far too little, far too late. The Russian air superiority is so massive, and so designed for this exact conflict, that Russia is simply going to rain hell down upon the Ukrainian front lines with essentially no deterrence capable of diminishing Russian air superiority, potentially inflicting damage from the air deeper into the area east of the Dnieper. The Russians have no incentive to actually expend any energy slogging through ground invasion until the Ukrainian resistance are completely demoralized or obliterated. So none of these weapons are going to make much of a difference, because the Germans do not see the Russians as preparing for an actual occupation. But what the German government DOES see, and which I also agree with, is that whether a Russian attack comes or not, the state of Ukraine OUTSIDE of the breakaways is primed to descend into civil war with one another. In fact, its foundation is shaking right now without so much as a shot being fired and I would put this likelihood at a probability, not just a possibility. And it is THAT which the Germans are trying to inoculate themselves against. The PR catastrophe of these notorious right wing militias gunning down innocent protestors with Hechler and Koch arms or Krause-Maffei self-propelled artillery would be incomprehensible here. Zelensky’s indictment of former president Poroshenko for treason, and Poroshenko’s in-your-face, defiant return to Kiev to face the charges last week, has set the stage for the Pro-EU/Pro-NATO/Pro-Western wings to turn on each other, which will be carried out to a very large extent by the neo-nazi /far-right street gangs that patrol certain urban areas of the major cities. These noises are already being made in local statements and increasingly hostile rhetoric…all at the precise time Ukraine SHOULD be uniting against a common enemy. But they are so dysfunctional that they can’t even do that.People in the West suffer from this great delusion that two political parties who hate Russia must, therefore, be aligned and friendly. Well, these two movements are not. At all. And there are smatterings of lesser parties that will be in the mix, as well, with questionable moral tendencies and massive predispositions to corruption. I will leave it with this: we looked at expanding operations into Ukraine two years ago as part of a German Federal Government incentive program to bring certain types of industry to Ukraine to help wean Ukraine from their ever-expanding dependency on the German tit. We were looking at multiple spots in the west of the country. It would have been a great financial move for us if we could nail down the operational hurdles. We hired our standard, well-known consultants who specialize in analyzing risks for large corporations seeking to expand into new countries. I have personally overseen over a dozen of these types of analyses over the years and I can say I have never seen one come back essentially saying, “y’all motherfuckers are insane if you do this.” The results were essentially: 
 1) Terrible governance; 2) Massive culture of corruption, specficially supply chain ops will be unable to perform without violating German and American anti-corruption laws 3) Failing infrastructure with little chance of modernization, with or without western investment at the governmental level 4) High potential for domestic unrest fueled by extensive far-right elements. We didn’t even move to secondary explorations of the proposed expansion. C-Suite killed it the same day that they read the findings. It was terrible. So just to be clear, I do not believe the existence of these groups warrants a hands-off policy, per se. But I do think that the West needs to seriously contemplate the long-term fallout of arming these groups to the teeth in the dead center of Europe.

Lawyer, but been in an in-house govt relations role for quite a while now. I help formulate and manage government relations strategy for a large German multinational in a highly regulated industry. Basically get paid to read political/regulatory tea leaves in Germany and Europe in an industry that is very exposed to this fallout from this conflict. Not in one of the immediately identifiable industries like Energy or Defense, but in one very exposed nevertheless. I have direct reports scattered around European capitals with a few in Moscow, so I get a lot of local, informed insight from very capable former ex-govt people as part of the job. Happy to contribute in a small way to the interesting content on this site...God knows I have a karmic duty to do so given how much entertainment Surly and TOS provided me over the last decade or so. Plus, I don't get a chance to interact with other Americans on this subject very often, so it is nice to be able to do that.

Looks like the US has delivered its written response to the Russians. Details of the response aren't going to be released, but the tone over the next couple of days will be very telling. https://www.dw.com/en/nato-us-send-written-response-on-russias-security-demands/a-60567276

I think the Nazi piece is the least "front-and-center" in people's minds, so therefore, the least of the drivers...but I do think it is very much in the front of the mind of important politicians who are going to have deal with potential blowback of this. But the energy supply is far and away the biggest thing on people's minds with respect to getting involved, and therefore the risk of being completely adverse to Russia. Power supply issues will shake Germany to its core. We are not prepared for it, nor is our massively industrial-based economy. So I don't think the Nazi issue will be used as a justification by anyone if Russia goes, as no one believes that the majority of Ukrainians are Nazis deserving Russian aggression...but the Nazi piece is very significant in the narrow parameters of the issue of weapons supply. There is a direct, easy-to-make link there and it is something that opposition politicians could easily drive home if shit goes bad over there within Ukrainian domestic affairs, which I think most German officials know is the inevitable outcome here, whether Russia goes or not. In fact, it hasn't really been a topic in any of the big papers since this thing started a few months back, but it definitely was over the past few years. But I don't think anyone here will justify any aggression by Russia on those grounds. Re France, I agree. They are using this situation ver, very effectively in terms of Continental politics at the moment. If Macron makes progress today in these meetings in Paris with France, Germany, Ukraine and Russia, and if that can continue to a peaceful resolution without aggression, he will have a lot of momentum to get what he wants with respect to this kind of double-barrelled EU that he envisions; specifically with French as the leader on a common EU military/foreign policy, and Germany retaining its chokehold on EU economic and monetary matters. And if he doesn't succeed, and Russia goes anyway, he is still using this very well to elevate himself into the void left by Merkel over EU politics. He has been seen as a competent mid-atlanticist by the Western European chateratti. The double-edged-sword for the US if they French take that lead, yes, the Europeans will start to be more disposed to using military muscle, but they will also actively crave chances to "go their own way" and demonstrate independence from the US. The spirit of de Gaulle is never that far away from that crew over there.

Yeah, IMO that move by the German government is complete horseshit. They got around it by claiming that Egypt only played a tangential role in the Yemen conflict, as they were not actively involved and were essentially acting in the same way as the US was vis a vis the Saudi-led campaign...specifically that the Egyptians were indirect participants and not directly involved in hostilities. But that is a stretch, IMO, and the new government is supposedly stopping sales to Egypt. But you are right...that is a bizarre outlier.

It is driven by a few things. First, Germany has a long standing, codified govt policy of not delivering arms to conflict zones unless it has a formal security agreement with such a country, mainly through NATO. This, of course, arises out of German post-WW2 pacifism. Secondly, there are historical complexities within the German identity of doing anything that can be seen as fomenting/contributing to war in that particular stretch of land. The German psyche simply does not want to be involved in this, as in the German mind, the area between the Dnieper and Stalingrad WAS World War 2. That is what the German mind immediately goes to when that conflict is brought up…it isn’t D-Day, it isn’t the Western Front, it isn’t the fall of Berlin, it isn’t the Nazi occupation of Western Europe…it is fighting Russians within the space between those two geographic points that is where the complete trajectory of the German existence changed. So even on top of a relatively “peacenik” culture, the geographic history there is one of high significance. Thirdly, the Germans do not view the Ukrainians as allies. This is a misconception in the US. They view Ukraine as a source of massive corruption, immeasurable chaos, unpredictable, and essentially merely a “friend-of-a-friend”, with the common friend being the US. I am being quite literal when I say that literally every single summit, supportive statement, transfer of billions of Euros from the Germans to the Ukrainians is done out of one, single consideration and that is as a nod to the relationship with the US, which the Germans do value. The average German citizen, the German state, and German industry want nothing to do with Ukraine in any way whatsoever. Germany will kill any effort whatsoever to integrate the Ukrainians into either EU or NATO. Fourthly, it would go a long way in pushing Germany into an actively adverse camp from Russia, which is not want Germany wants. German sees this event as fleeting and that good, productive, profitable relations with Russia will pick up where they left off once this dies down. By actively arming Ukraine, that becomes much more difficult from a PR perspective. And finally - and this is a very, very sensitive point both within Germany - the images of German weaponry in the hands of certain Ukrainian front-line troops will be a public relations disaster here that no government here will be able to withstand. The background here is simple…a significant percentage (but by no means a majority) of the most effective fighting forces on the Ukrainian side are open neo-nazis. This fact is massively overstated and exploited in propaganda by the Russians, but it is also significantly downplayed by the Americans and Brits and in related English-language media coverage. Specifically re the Azov Battalion, although there are others, which is a very large conglomeration of very effective troops numbers estimated now to be the size of two brigades, is one of the most effective fighting forces in Ukraine, and many of its members are openly Neo-nazi. A couple of years ago they were officially absorbed as a distinct unit within the larger Ukrainian military, but they have a high degree of continued autonomy and even with all their ideological transgressions, the Ukrainian military would be at a huge disadvantage without them. They are particularly effective military units. But, that said, Azov fights officially under the Banner of the Wolfsangel, which is a nazi symbol that is illegal in Germany. They march annually commemorating the 14th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS, they are adorned with Nazi regalia, they venerate Nazi-Collaborator Stepan Bandera, and they are vocal in their affinity for many tenets of National Socialism. Their ex-leader/political head, Andriy Biletsky, who was actually the former Deputy of the Ukrainian parliament AFTER the war which made him famous as a neo-nazi, and still commands significant influence in the Ukrainian Right has even talked about their duty being “to lead the White races of the world against a final crusade against the Semite-led untermenschen.” So basically, this is a very effective fighting group made up of some very, very bad people. The Guardian had an article just after the war in 2014 about how much of a connundrum this is for the Ukrainians: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/10/azov-far-right-fighters-ukraine-neo-nazis In fact, the German Ambassador to Ukraine even had to issue a formal statement last April condemning the Ukrainians for continuing to allow marches commemorating the SS Galicia, particularly since those marches had reached Kiev (they used to just occur in the west of Ukraine, such as Lviv). The highly influential German public broadcaster, ZDF, ran stories on primetime here about how significant Neo-Nazism was in Azov Battalion and a few other special forces units, and they posted pictures of these battalions wearing SS regalia, adorning their military gear with the Swastika, Totenkopf, SS runes, Wolfangel, etc. The Canadians are dealing with their own scandal relating to this right now, in fact, and as you can see in the Ottowa Post, the scandal is not ONLY that NATO advisors were knowingly training Neo-nazis, it is that THEY KNEW about it over a year before meeting with them and were actively trying to find ways to keep it from the press as part of their plans in lead-up to the meeting. You will also see images in both articles that come from some of the TV programs put out by German public broadcaster, ZDF. I don't want to post them myself, as that shit can get dicey here. https://nationalpost.com/news/national/10-3-podcast-canadian-officials-under-fire-after-meeting-with-ukrainian-battalion-unit-linked-to-neo-nazis https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/canadian-officials-who-met-with-ukrainian-unit-linked-to-neo-nazis-feared-exposure-by-news-media-documents Even American politicians like the late John Conyers and current rep Ro Khanna have raised serious concerns about this. The truth is that probably no more than 15% of the overall Ukrainian army are Neo-nazis, but a significant percentage of the most effective elements of the Ukrainian forces are. The JPost article I posted below gets into this in depth, and addresses the Simon Wiesenthal Center's deep concerns over this. I do want to note that I am somewhat uncomfortable getting into this, as it is frequently exploited by Russians to broadly condemn the entirety of the Ukrainian military as Neo-nazis, so I will leave some reputable, familiar American links below to explain some of this in better detail. And I am not saying that the Russians are correct here by any means in asserting that this is all of the Ukrainian’s viewpoint…but it is certainly there and it is known by the Germans. The Nation article is very well-sourced and particularly damning. Ukraine's Neo-Nazi Problem: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-cohen-ukraine-commentary-idUSKBN1GV2TY https://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/US-lifts-ban-on-funding-neo-Nazi-Ukrainian-militia-441884 https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/neo-nazis-far-right-ukraine/ https://www.jta.org/2018/04/29/global/nazi-symbols-salutes-display-ukrainian-nationalist-march There are endless reports of this. You can take from it what you like, and I am not going to argue about how widespread this ideology really is, but in all honesty, the Germans are very, very uncomfortable with this. Not only because of the geo-strategic issues relating to Russia that I touched on above, but because anyone who actually follows this understands that it is not just a possibility, but a probability, that Ukraine collapses internally in the very near future given the external pressures, resulting in some kind of civil war...and what will the Germans be seen to have done? Armed Neo-Nazis who turn weapons on other Ukrainians. To the Germans, this is a powder keg where they can easily envision news stories of civil war in Ukraine, with neo-nazis holding freshly produced German weapons. Not good, Bob. Not good. I mentioned in an earlier post that I frequently visit the cemetery of my wife's family to tend to traditional, German customary duties towards dead relatives' graves. Well, one side of the family is buried about 50 yards from the above referenced Nazi-Collaborator Stepan Bandera in one of the most idyllic well-known cemeteries in town. The grave is CONSTANTLY adorned by Ukrainian nationalists with imagery that is illegal under the German Strafgesetzbuch (prohibition on Nazi imagery) and the cemetery authorities have to come out weekly to clean it all up. Every, single, week. It is awful. But my point in saying that is that the correlation between the Ukrainians and that ideology is not a huge stretch for the Germans, because, frankly, they see it themselves in graffiti and news stories. In fact, you will sometimes hear, "and what when this falls into the hands of the Banderites?"...it is a real consideration here. And, in my opinion, if the US starts to push too hard on this the Germans will start to run english-language stories in the media pointing this out to take the heat off. The only reason they haven’t specifically mentioned this is out of deference to the US, but the groundwork is already laid domestically. The Germans know that this element is significant in certain pockets of the Ukrainian forces.

Top comment on German twitter right now is "People may laugh at this, but it is going to be quite an accomplishment for the Bundeswehr to find 5,000 working helmets!"

I think it is very likely that the US and the French/German/Italian "consortium" are getting closer to a potential “post-invasion” sanctions package that is digestible for the consortium, but mainstream German-language media is explicitly reporting this morning that NS2, O&G and bank sanctions remain firmly off the table for the Germans, as well as weapons shipments to Ukraine. The English-speaking media seems to be interpreting the result of the discussions between Macron and Scholz yesterday as indicating some movement from the Germans, but I really don’t see how they are getting that from the press conference they are referring to. I listened to the whole thing yesterday and Scholz really didn’t say anything that he hasn’t already said; mainly that Russia should de-escalate, serious consequences of invasion, diplomacy is the only way blah blah. He was extremely firm in defense of Germany’s blocking weapons to Ukraine. It was just same old shit. But both of them kept coming back to a commitment to continuing to working directly with the Russians to resolve this without increasing the chance for large-scale military hostilities. What is also being left out in English speaking newspapers is just how much the French and Germans (and Josef Borrell, chief diplomat of the EU) see the US and UK as overdramatizing the immediate risk of war by evacuating embassies. Translation of the top story from today’s national daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Gazette, above the fold both online and in print edition: French senior officials also leaking to local journal/pundits that their position is that there is unsupported "alarmism" in the Anglosphere: Call that the legacy of the WMD fiasco, but I just don’t see anyone getting closer to a unified, robust military deterrent here. The French and Germans clearly do not agree with the US intel analysis, a feeling which was also referenced in local media a couple of days back after CIA Director Burns and Olaf Scholz had a unannounced meeting last week in Berlin that got essentially zero coverage in English-langauge media. Der Spiegel reported that it was a “tough meeting” discussing the existing US intel between CIA Director Burns, Chancellor Scholz, and the head of the German BND (equivalent to CIA). But I do think we may be moving into the deal-cutting phase. Something feels like that, IMO. We will see after the US delivers its responses to the Russians, which apparently the US has asked to remain secret upon Russian receipt. The Russian diplomatic response to that will speak volumes. Final point of note, French, German, Ukrainian and Russian technocrats will sit down today for the first time since this whole thing started in 2021. This is part of the Normandy Format, which has not been particulary productive, and which begat the poorly adhered-to “Minsk II” agreement, but it is significant in the sense that this is the only forum in which purely multi-lateral discussions occur with the potential belligerents. Good summary of this in today's Foreign Affairs Morning Brief: https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/01/26/france-talks-russia-ukraine/

Not only does he own one, he rocks it when he meets the boss.

There are definitely different positions depending on country. Germany obviously is the most dependent on Russian fuel, while many of the others have existing coal/nuclear capabilities which of course results in different outlooks. From the German perspective, it is much more layered than simply viewing it as a gun to the head and is actually really complicated, but I am stuck in a four hour call that I have nothing whatsoever to do with, so I will give it a shot. The Germans have been buying fuel from Russia since the first half of the Brezhnev era, with a huge increase in the percentage of total energy supply starting in the early 80s and continuing to date, so this is simply part of economic life here. And not only has the fuel been reliably supplied, the transactional relationship between the two countries is highly functioning and could even be classified as “excellent”. The Russians know how to sell gas, and the Germans know how to buy gas, and most importantly, the Russians and Germans know how get deals done with each other (and that is not just in the energy sector). So, regardless of what has been going on in the larger geopolitical world, for 50 years, this bilateral trading relationship has not suffered, and, in fact, has only become more streamlined and workable. So in that light, there is comfort in past performance and there is not a widespread fear that Russia would be predatory to us…and that remains the view of most Germans even in light of current events. WRT the immediate circumstance, the entire “gun to the head” calculus depends on how you view Putin’s objectives here. The US foreign policy establishment/media seems to wholeheartedly believe that Ukraine would simply be the first domino to fall on Russia’s path to reconstituting the USSR. In Germany, very few people believe this…in the government or in the citizenry. And I would say this is the case elsewhere in Western Europe. In fact, the idea that Russia is going to even try to occupy Ukraine is widely seen as absurd. That’s the real reason why Admiral Schönbach’s video and subsequent dismissal was so significant…it wasn’t that he was presenting a viewpoint contrary to the German political class, it was that he was saying the actual viewpoint of the political class out loud, for all the world to see. And everyone here knows that he was. And the headlines from the big national papers here today have been very, very supportive of him for speaking what the Germans believe to be the truth. The German people understand completely that the media class and the political class do a song and dance for the international stage that is not an actual representation of how they will act in the form of public policy. So as long as the actions of the government remain neutral or positive towards maintaining the status quo, which in this case is reliable supply from Russia, the talking heads and politicians can do what they want to keep Brussels or DC off their backs. And of course, all political power flows from the electorate, and so that is what ultimately matters. For all the stereotypes of Germans being matter-of-fact, plain spoken and orderly, they are a very sophisticated electorate and there are certain blurred social constructs between the politicians, media and electorate that are just baked into the culture. We are seeing this play out now in the "wink and nod" that accompany every political statement…”We absolutely respect Ukrainian sovereignty and NATO, while also understanding that diplomacy and our economic ties with Russia are blah blah blah…”. That “while also” is what the Germans pay attention to. They don’t give a shit about what Scholz has to say publicly to keep the country from being called Nazis in the UK tabloids. Now, at the risk delving too much into the dry world of German political analysis, I think understanding the situation here will be important in following the developments in Europe over the next two weeks, because the whole "Germany is scared and caught in the headlights" narrative that the US talk shows like to claim is completely and totally regarded. Germany knows EXACTLY what it is doing here. It just happens to be opposing the US stronger than it has in recent memory. In my professional capacity which involves a lot of tea leaf reading in Brussels and Berlin, we are deeply plugged into tracking the unique machinations of the German political/media apparatus and how it works. Our industry is very regulated and susceptible to domestic and EU political trends, which are constantly monitored, as those trends determine a lot of things internally for the company. Given the infinitely more complex political calculus of a multi-party parliamentary system, opposition political parties here do not just instinctively oppose every position of the other side, which is noticeably the case in the US. However, in Germany, you will frequently see opposition parties actively supporting the government position in efforts to stay aligned with the expectations of their respective constituencies, and, just as importantly for the mainline parties, to prevent the fringe party from their respective right/left flank from stealing support on a particularly popular issue (AfD on the far-right, die Linke from the left as successors to the old DDR communists). So in formulating our own govt relations strategy in a certain situation, “we use this one simple trick that all our reptilian overlords hate”: the single best way to determine the political mood of the country is to follow the behavior of whichever centrist/mainline opposition party is out-of-power. That’s all you need to do to determine which direction the debate is trending. And over the last two days here, it is undeniable that the main opposition, the Center-Right Christian Democrats/Social Union, are not only supporting their rival Social Democratic Party of Germany government in word and deed on the Ukraine issue, but they are providing their rivals with political cover to continue down this path of being “non-aligned” as long as he needs it in order to keep this from negatively impacting Germany. This isn’t because they are nice, cooperative guys…it is because the position of the German people in the privacy of their own homes are absolutely opposed to upsetting this particular status quo. And if the status quo is going to change, it will be due to Germany's efforts and Germany's timeline, not by an external force like the US or Ukraine. And in the German eye, this is not an EU issue. This is not a NATO issue. This is a Russian and Ukrainian issue and so long as it stays there, there really could not be fewer fucks given. And that brings me to a really important issue that stays out of the media due to the hesitancy of the German political/media class to risk being castigated in the international press: The German people do not see Ukraine as a friend, ally or “partner” in any way. And certainly not in any way more than Russia. Russia may not be a friend or an ally, but they are absolutely a “partner” in the German mind. Ukraine is none of those three things. The Germans NEVER wanted Ukraine in NATO, and even pushed publicly that the 2008 Bucharest announcement never occur, but they allowed themselves to be overruled by the Americans and Brits at the time. They are NEVER going to allow them into the EU. They absolutely didn’t support weapons systems in the east, and so the US did it outside of the alliance. And at each step of the way they said, “You are going to create a situation for war over there”…and every time it was done anyway. So now, here we are, and in the German mind, correctly or not, they were right and that what they absolutely predicted in continuing to expand towards Russia has come true, and yet the Americans now expect Germany to escalate even more. That simply is not going to happen, and I estimate that if the US continues to push the Germans in the public sphere you are going to see the Germans become much, much bolder in voicing this position, risking the perception of a unified West even more. Plus, Ukraine has an abhorrent PR strategy with respect to Germany...I cannot count how many times they have brought up National Socialism in response to being declined German weapons. It has happened regularly for years, and it is a terrible strategy. "No guns from you, Germans? ok then, you children of nazis!" is not a good strategic angle. Their Ambassador to Germany threw it out publicly twice last week, and their Foreign Minister did the same. Every time they do it, the response amongst Germans is one of complete disgust and deeper commitment to letting them fend for themselves on other items like foreign direct aid, which they COMPLETELY depend on. You cannot bulldoze a German...they are relentlessly stubborn and self-deferential people. So the question that actually came up here yesterday on some of the political talk shows reflects this: "If we all know that they aren't anywhere close to meeting minimum requirements of joining NATO anytime soon, and if they have continued their corruption and wholesale theft of our gas and the infrastructure funds we have provided them year after year, and if agreeing to our already existing position of not allowing them to join will prevent a potential land war a few hours away, then why aren't we open to formalizing this?" The “worst case scenario” that is discussed here is what I personally believe to be a highly likely outcome if it ever actually goes hot: Russia will use such a situation to demonstrate overwhelming full-spectrum dominance on its southwestern flank as a message to the West, and it will then impose neutrality upon Ukraine as a condition for Russia not continuing to completely destroy the infrastructure and the remaining functionality of the Ukrainian state and Russian withdrawal from hostilities. Russia will impose neutrality, formalized federalized autonomy for the Donbass (but NOT independence), and an updated understanding with the West relating to Black Sea drills…all in exchange for Kiev’s understanding and the American acknowledgment that this is the price for peace in Ukraine. And the dirty little secret here is that this is a result that Berlin and Paris and many of the smaller EU entities in their orbit like Austria and the Netherlands would absolutely support if hostilities actually kicked off. So, in light of my earlier point re opposition behavior, here is the translation of yesterday’s statement "on the record"of Markus Söder in the widely-ready Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. Söder is the very powerful Minister President (governor/resident king) of Bavaria. For context, if not for the fact that Söder is a Bavarian, he would be the current Chancellor. There is a semi-formal agreement between the Bavarian Christian Social Union and the larger, federal Christian Democratic Union, that Bavarians have their own independent Christian Democratic Party in exchange for not running for the Federal Chancellery. But that said, he is extremely, extremely popular nationally and is one of the top 2 power-brokers in the overall infrastructure of the German Center-Right and is certainly an atlanticist to some degree. As you can see, he's now moving towards a Russian position on Ukrainian membership in NATO...the Germans will never openly support an open-ended ban on Ukrainian accession, but with Söder saying this, I would guess that they are signaling the overall openness of the Germans to a loooong term, formalized pause on NATO expansion. The significance of this is that now Söder, along with the head of the larger Germany-wide Christian Democrats, Freidrich Merz, have now formally come out telling the government that they will not face any organized political fall-out in continuing to dig their heels in. And, in the alternative, if they bow to American pressure here, they'll have nowhere to run for PR cover domestically. This is hugely important support to a new coalition that is far from stable.

This is slowly turning into a huge diplomatic shit show with everyone going their own way. First, in the biggest story of the weekend in national German papers, the head of the German Navy, which I assume is a made up of a few rusty boats on the North Sea, had to step down yesterday after being caught on camera in India essentially saying what most believe the German Government is actually thinking...specifically that the ministries do not fear that Russia is going to invade (he calls it "nonsense") and that "Crimea is gone...it will never come back. This is a fact". He then goes on to discuss the importance of showing more respect to Putin due to Russia's status as a great and historical power and says over and over "we need Russia, we need Russia". Plus some weird religious stuff regarding his own Catholicism. Here is the Deutsche Welle article on it in English, along with the video of some of his more significant statements: https://www.dw.com/en/german-navy-chief-schönbach-resigns-over-comments-on-putin-crimea/a-60525709 And now the Austrian Foreign Ministry is publicly insisting that Russian oil and gas, as well as NS2, are explicitly excluded from any sanctions, which of course will make the Germans (and likely the French) happy. https://www.welt.de/politik/ausland/article236411619/Ukraine-Konflikt-Oesterreichs-Chefdiplomat-will-Gas-aus-Russland-Sanktionen-ausklammern.html

Macron floating new security pact between EU and Russia, and heading to Berlin on Tuesday for direct talks re Ukraine with Scholz. He's using this to make progress towards his goal of a Europe with "strategic autonomy" from the US. https://www.dw.com/en/macron-proposes-security-pact-to-make-europe-a-power-of-the-future/a-60482625 https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/german-chancellor-discuss-russia-with-frances-macron-tuesday-2022-01-21/