Developing. We are publishing this article as it is being written. Please check back for updates
1) “Dominic Nicholl, US ex-general wants to give Ukraine maximum-range missiles that can strike deep into Crimea; Joe Biden is considering sending the shorter-range cluster munition variant of the missile, rather than the 190-mile range version,” The Telegraph, September 24, 2923 (5:40p);
2) Marcel Görmann, “Putin: Seine Armee probt Nuklearangriff aufs Kanzleramt – Geheimdienste warnen Scholz; Atomwaffen-Gefahr in der Hauptstadt? Offenbar will Putin, dass Kanzler Scholz genau weiß, dass er auf den Knopf drücken kann,” Der Westen, de 21. September 2023 (10:32 Uhr);
Title of story in English
“Putin: His army is rehearsing a nuclear attack on the Chancellery – secret services warn Scholz; Nuclear weapons threat in the capital? Apparently Putin wants Chancellor Scholz to know exactly that he can press the button,”
3) Richard Kemp, “Ukraine must now take the war into Russia; US ballistic missiles could be a game-changer – but only if Kyiv can target enemy territory, The Telegraph, September 24, 2023 (8:00pm);
Vladimir Putin is the world’s greatest master of nuclear threats. Aware of Barack Obama’s weakness in the face of nuclear threats, he quickly learned that Joe Biden was equally terrified of his nuclear tbreats.
Putin has found that these threats are his most effectivecweapon in his war against Ukraine and the West. Biden as a result appears to have internalized Putin’s nuclear threats.
As a result of his fear of putin’s nuclear threats, Biden has prohibited tge use of U.S, supplied weapons against targets in Russia ptoprt, the transfer of fighter jets to Ukraine, and long-range artillery rockets known as ATACMS, which are launched by tge HIMARS artillery units.
He also prohibited the transfer of other advanced weapons and weapons systems, such as armored troup carriers, modern tanks, and Patriot missile sysems, until under increasing pressure from NATO allies, he repeatedly gave way. In each case, however, he did so only after great delays which had serious consequences on the battlefield and in the defense of cities and infrastructure from aerial atack.
Putin has also been extremely effective in intimidating German Chancellor with his nuclear threats. In the latest development, he allowed Russian communications to be intercepted that revealed Russian forces were practicing nuclear strikes on Chancellor Schols office and otger strategic targets in Germany.
Due to the West’s silence on these matters, no one points out to Putin, Scholz, Biden and the world that NATO has also targeted multiple targets in Russia, surely including tge Kremlin, and that if Putin were to launch an attack on Schol’s office, it would surely be his last day on this planet, as it would be the last day for hundreds of millions of people in Russia and NATO countries.
How Putin has been able to get away with his nuclear threats without Western countries pointing out the obvious, is a great mystery and important element in tge efficacy of his threats.
It is quite understandable why the U.S. and NATO would not want to engage in excalating rounds of nuclear threats. That is not to say, however, that low-key reminders of what’s involved in Mutually Assured Destruction or MAD, and to call upon Russia to cease its nuclear threats.
Putin deploys his nuclear threats in response to reverses on the battlefield or the perceived threat of impending actions by the Allies.
The deployment of German Taurus cruise missiles in Ukraine would be a game changer, as suggested by Ukraine’s recent success in using British long-range Storm Shadow missiles. Germany has an ample supply of Taurus missiles, and could therefore supply Ukraine with large numbers of tbe missiles.
With Biden’s apparent agreement to supply ATACMS to Ukraine, Scholz can no longer hide behind American refusal to furnish long-range missiles to Ukraine.
He is exposed. He is justifying further delay in authorizing the transfer of Taurus missiles on the ground that there are serious constitutional questions involved relating to whether the transfer must be authorized by the German parliament (Bundestag).
Bundestag approval would not be required for Germany to come to the defense of a NATO country attacked by Russia, as tge NATO Treaty already authorizes such action.
Imikarly, the United Nations Charter authorizes Germany to come to tge fefense or Ukraine, or any NATO country for that matter.
Scholz is also reportedly concerned over tge fact tgat German officials might need to input targeting information into the missiles, and that this would make Germany a party to the conflict with Russia.
As we hace pointed out, since 1945 this way of thinking about military action taken in exercise of the right of collective self-defense under Article 51 of tbe U.N. Charter is completely wrong.
Nations are no longer parties to conflicts or wars (outside the narrow field of international humanitarian law).
What we have under contemporary international law is be prohibition of the use of force, on the one hand, and the right of individual and collective self-defense in response to an armed attack.
The U.N. Charter authorizes Germany to assist Ukraine by providing targeting information, as the United States had been doing for some time.
Moreover, the German Constitution or Grundgesesetz provides in Article 25 that Germany will be governed by general international law. This includes Article 51 of tbe U.N. Charter. So it is hard to see what constitutional law questions Scolz says he is grappling with. Walter Pistorius, the German Defense Minister, has come out in favor of the transfer of the Taurus missiles to Ukraine.
Scolz, like Biden, must overcome his fears of Putin, and authorize be transfer of the Taurus missiles.
The goal, it must be remembered, is to defeat Russian aggression and barbarism in Ukraine.
The Trenchant Observer
A selection of the best articles from The Trenchant Observer is published once or twice weekly in the Trenchant Observations newsletter on Substack.
You may subscribe here,