2024-03-16 19:36:42
Ukraine would urgently need Taurus missiles to destroy Russian supply routes. But the German government is hesitating. Image: imago-images.de
Analyse
The German Chancellor has reiterated his rejection of a Taurus delivery to Ukraine. According to T-Online research, there might be a reason for this that was not previously publicly known.
16.03.2024, 20:3616.03.2024, 21:08
Daniel Mützel / t-online
An article by
It was probably the most impressive scene in this week’s Taurus debate in the Bundestag: Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD), visibly touched, personally addressed CDU foreign politician Norbert Röttgen following he asked a question regarding the delivery of Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine .
Scholz says to Röttgen in front of the camera:
“But what annoys me, dear MP, dear Norbert, is that you know everything and engage in public communication that is based on the fact that your knowledge is not public knowledge. I don’t think that should be the case in a democracy.”
It wasn’t just those present and the audience of the live stream online who asked themselves what the Chancellor might have meant. The country has been discussing the transfer of German precision missiles to Ukraine for over nine months. The Chancellor remained silent on the subject for a long time until he recently publicly presented reasons for why he had decided to deliver the Taurus.
What secret knowledge does the Chancellor mean?
Essentially, Scholz is concerned with maintaining control over the targeting of the cruise missile, which can fly over 500 kilometers and thus – theoretically – all the way to Moscow. In order to maintain control, the participation of German soldiers would be necessary, which is why delivery of the Taurus was ruled out. “That is a limit that I do not want to cross as Chancellor,” Scholz reiterated his no on Wednesday.
Scholz was accused of not trusting Ukraine. The next day, in an ARD interview, Röttgen denied having any “special knowledge” and accused the Chancellor of using fear “as a means and instrument of his enforcement.”
But the reference to control by Germany is apparently only part of the truth. According to information from Watson media partner T-Online, there is another important factor that plays a role in the Chancellor’s Taurus no.
By accusing Röttgen of possessing some kind of secret knowledge, Scholz himself hinted at what it might be. It is regarding information classified as secret, which has now been made available to selected members of the Bundestag for the first time.
The secret department on the Taurus system
According to T-Online information, something crucial happened in the special meeting of the Defense Committee on Tuesday. In the first part, the committee members first questioned Federal Defense Minister Boris Pistorius, who had been summoned, regarding the Air Force’s wiretapping affair. A second, secret part was regarding Taurus, in which sensitive details regarding the Taurus cruise missile were shared with members of a Bundestag specialist committee for the first time.
The Inspector General of the Bundeswehr, Carsten Breuer, who was also invited, gave a 20-minute presentation on the most important facts regarding the Taurus: In addition to operational capability and number (according to estimates, the Air Force has around 600 Taurus), Breuer should also be aware of the particular risks of a delivery for security interests of Germany have spoken.
The German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius (l.) and Inspector General Carsten Breuer.Image: keystone
A person familiar with the process reported to t-online that some MPs “jaws dropped.” “After Breuer’s lecture, there was initially silence in the room. Even those who usually make demands loudly no longer had any questions.” A committee member and Taurus supporter told T-Online following the meeting that he had “had doubts for the first time” and wanted to reconsider his position on a delivery.
Something of this can also be felt in the interview that the defense policy spokesman for the CDU/CSU, Florian Hahn, gave following the ARD meeting. Hahn, who likes to urge the Chancellor on the Taurus issue with strong words, speaks calmly, differentiatedly, almost as if he had to rearrange his thoughts.
What did Breuer say?
The problem with target programming
The inspector general apparently informed MPs in detail that the use of the Taurus was more complicated than many previously assumed. In order to use the cruise missile sensibly, enormous amounts of data are necessary.
It was already known that the target programming of the Taurus weapons is complicated. The “central mission planning” (ZMP), the technical and operational process for entering destinations and route guidance, consists of numerous different source data such as altitude measurement points, vector data, satellite images and raster maps in order to enable the Taurus to have the most precise flight route possible. The ZMP system was developed by the German company ESG, which was absorbed into the defense electronics company Hensoldt at the end of 2023.
“The operational capability of the German armed forces” is at stake
These are not gigabytes or terabytes, but rather extremely large and complex amounts of data that obviously have to be processed by special technical systems. However, it is said that these technical systems only exist to a limited extent. If these were also transferred to Ukraine as part of a Taurus delivery, they would no longer be available to the Bundeswehr. A capability gap would arise that would seriously affect the “operational capability of the German armed forces,” according to a person familiar with the matter.
A Taurus cruise missile of the KEPD-350 type, issued by Taurus Systems GmbH in Schrobenhausen, Bavaria.Image: imago-images.de
It is unclear what type of systems these should be. Neither the Taurus manufacturer MBDA nor the Federal Ministry of Defense would like to comment on this when asked. It is also questionable how many of these systems are available, how long it takes to replace them and why they are so difficult to procure. It is a “technical bottleneck” that cannot be replaced for a long time, according to a person familiar with the matter. “If we deliver this capability, it will no longer exist for us.”
The situation is not comparable to the delivery of the 18 Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine, which the army has to wait until 2026 to replace. “The Taurus are one of our most powerful weapons in the air-to-ground domain, almost approaching strategic capabilities.”
It’s regarding “elementary questions of national security,” according to a person familiar with the matter. In Breuer’s lecture, the MPs were given a “price tag” for the security of the Federal Republic, which everyone involved must now be aware of.
Important to know: Taurus is available in two versions
A decisive factor here is obviously how the Taurus is used: in its “stripped down” version with less data or in its intended form with all the additional features. If the Taurus exploits all of its advantages, it can fly low to a height of up to 15 meters, where it can better fly around or under enemy air defense positions.
However, it is said that these systems are required for this precise navigation using four different systems and the modeling of the route and the exact destination (accurate to within a few meters).
The Taurus might be sent to Ukraine without any additional capability, including a shorter training period for Ukrainian soldiers. But then the Taurus would be more intended to serve as a supply for the less powerful British Storm Shadow cruise missiles. Both variants are possible, with their respective advantages and disadvantages.
Military expert Fabian Hoffmann distinguishes between “simple” and “extended mission planning” at Taurus. For the latter, an appropriate technical infrastructure must also be in place, says Hoffmann. This makes training of Ukrainian soldiers on the system still possible, but delays it.
Clues in the Luftwaffe leak
References to the complex mission planning as well as the different uses of the Taurus can also be found in the leaked conversation between high-ranking Air Force officers. A lieutenant colonel speaks of “target data that ideally comes from satellite images” because the highest precision, namely below three meters, can be achieved with this. “The [Zieldaten] We have to process it in the first set in Büchel, where the Air Force has an air base.
Elsewhere, the officer explains that the modeling calculation time doubles to twelve hours by feeding in the more precise satellite data, and that this requires a data line “that can do this.”
Is Germany defenseless without Taurus?
The information given to MPs at the committee meeting on Tuesday had little visible impact on the subsequent Bundestag debate and the vote on the Union motion.
However, they can shed more light on the Chancellor’s calculations as to why he insists on his veto. For example, when it comes to a worst-case scenario: If Scholz hands over part of the Taurus and its technical equipment to Ukraine and it loses the war, Russia might be on the NATO border in western Ukraine, while Germany has given up a core military capability . A “lose-lose” situation.
As a result, Germany would be even weaker militarily than before. The Chancellor would be responsible for this. Since the Taurus systems, as is now being emphasized from all sides, are not game changers, but would only bring tactical advantages, Scholz might think: Why supply a weapon that is not decisive for the war for Ukraine, but for Germany is a massive impairment of its deterrent ability means?
Conclusion: It remains a question of balancing
Ultimately it remains a political question. The hurdles to delivery might be eliminated. Germany might also send the “premium version” of the Taurus to Ukraine and accept the risk to its own security. The CDU/CSU, the Greens and the FDP, who also sat in the said committee meeting, are apparently prepared to accept this risk.
If you follow the argument of the strongest Taurus supporters, this also makes sense: If the thesis is that Ukraine is also defending Germany’s security from the Russians, giving up a nuclear military capability can be justifiable.
The Chancellor made this assessment differently. Scholz does this, as he always emphasizes, by pointing out that he took the oath of office as Chancellor to ensure the security of the Federal Republic of Germany. The fact that he is doing this purely for domestic political reasons, as many of his critics accuse him, seems doubtful in light of the information that has now emerged.
Sources
1710623685
#Olaf #Scholz #doesnt #deliver #cruise #missiles #Ukraine