this statement by scholz caused criticism. it was called a gift to russian propagandists.uss arose after german chancellor olaf scholz said that british soldiers were helping the ukrainian armed forces launch long-range storm shadow missiles. some even accused the head of the german government of drinking abuse of secret intelligence. as , for example, the former head of the defense committee of the british parliament, tobias ellwood, claims, with such statements scholz only wants to divert attention from himself, since he himself does not yet want to transfer the mute to kiev. long-range taurus missiles criticized scholz in germany, in particular, the representative of the opposition party of the christian democratic union on foreign policy, norbert rötgen, called scholz’s statements that allegedly not only british, but also french soldiers participate in the launch of stormshadow missiles from the territory of ukraine. scholz was wrong and acted irresponsibly when he stated that the british and french military allegedly controlled long-range stormshadow missiles, which w

, well, i almost everything in scholz . because during the time of chancellor schmitt , the military budget of the federal republic of germany was 4% of gdp, we had the most powerful army in germany, with up to 400,000 soldiers. there, we were ready to fight with the soviet bloc and to hold this attack for two or two weeks under nuclear strikes, while the americans threw their divisions across. atlantic, there is nothing now , that is, and further, i finish, that is, further they propose this concept, that is, to freeze, as they say, the conflict in order to show that they are such peacemakers, at the same time, they absolutely do not explain, and why, well, even if scholz somehow forces ukraine to sign an agreement there that we will cease fire, but how to guarantee it later, that is, if tomorrow russia... starts to violate it, as they violated a bunch of such agreements, what to do further, all the military experts with whom i talk in berlin say, well , we have two experiences of such a frozen conflict, these are korea and germany, that is, when the gdr, eastern and western, in bot

, it is understandable to create contradictions between the military scholz and german politicians to such a contradiction and accuse of violating these secret agreements, well, they are not official, no one made promises, but such a channel of warnings they existed and scholz refrained from transmitting, motivating, perhaps , the deployment of a more powerful confrontation with the russian federation and the involvement of the war in this very model against, even war. that's why everything was revealed in general. it worked in the interests of russia to unbalance the situation between politicians and the military in germany, and it is clear that now scholz is trying to justify himself, he is trying to assert again that we will not hand over the army, well, we understand that scholz does not want to hand over the tauruses, and not because scholz so greedy or bad, but we understand what kind of ultimatums he could have been given in the kremlin, and we can assume that maybe it was also operative. on the part of bundeswehr employees, if they were discussing such things in such a place u

scholz, and why then is scholz against providing these missiles to kyiv, so as not to annoy moscow, becauseops, the kerch area is a very, very important detail of this war, well, i am there for me... now i am in kyiv and i think all ukrainians understand why ukraine especially wants these missiles, because they probably would be the most effective weapon against this kerch bridge, that's why german officers say that they know from the ukrainians that they want this missile for that, well, but... now, unfortunately, in germany, such the situation is that there is a majority of voters who are in favor of military aid for ukraine, but at the same time, the majority of people there are questioning against the supply of this taurus missile, because there was such an impression, well, well, such an opinion, that it would involve germany in this war. and well, in principle, scholz simply expresses this general public opinion, well, that is, not general, but the majority of people still believe that it is not necessary to hand over these weapons to ukraine, because it will allegedly be the beginnin

will scholz himself survive?al situation in germany is clearly not in his favor, but the animal fear is still stronger. taurus missiles won’t bring any good to germany itself, because technically you won’t have to launch them yourself. it is this scholz that scares the french and british with their scalps and at the same time, stormshade is watered. these are very long-range weapons and what the british and french are doing in terms of tracking targets and escorting them cannot be done in germany. anyone who has dealt with this system knows this. and while he says one thing, the bundeswehr is developing another, and this time in practice. in germany the recording has already been recognized as authentic, that is, once again german generals are planning military operations in russia using the most modern air-to-ground missile weapons, and they are doing it in cold blood, working out in detail and hoping to evade responsibility, so that germany would not get it for it, the meeting was chaired by the commander of th

let’s do it we’ll freeze the whole thing, but in reality this is a much more serious question, what scholzurse, in the conditions of today’s world , including germany, when everything is possible... financial principles that have always been the basis of the existence of the german state, violation of them threatens not just some problems, mutual sanctions, the selection of some funds from german enterprises, it can destroy in a very short time, all these main, all these pillars on which the german state rested, here this is financial stability, this feeling that it is property, it is impossible... hitler's germany, when the germans can talk about it no less, when well, maybe he is not entirely correct, but they began to take away property from the jews, but there was such a period when they did not touch, then they decided this whole matter in their favor, we remember very well, i know this story very well, they took everything away, they took it away... germany was defeated, the victors came and the story of the restoration of germany began, this was especially true, it was the end of th

, but they say that scholz’s successor, if they castling, maybe just pistorius, and pistorius got such board, that's it this wiretapping, that is, after this his political career would no longer work out, but if it had worked out, he would be a much more dangerous person than scholz, that is , even without holding early elections in germany and or the next ones, they could change chancellor, because scholz is unpopular there against the backdrop of these farmers, strikes, protests, we would have a new person, most likely... defense minister pistorius, who would be responsible for german foreign policy, so this person was dunked a little, that is today at the spd no longer has any prospects of somehow retaining power, most likely they will leave, but the cdu, the csu have risen, this is a party that worked much better with putin, there are fittings or something, that is , in principle, there may be some kind of situation with them bridges will be built, well, faster. confirmation of your words is that in germany itself they are not so much discussing how the germans are planning attacks

on the other hand , the spd, olaf scholz's party, the social democrats are obviously behind the defeat of ukraine, they wish ukraine a defeat, then you have to understand that these people deliberately, absolutely... do not wish ukraine a defeat, they do not wish ukraine a total defeat, because, well, this is something that is not very good, and it will lead to some unexpected consequences, but it is necessary to mean that from their point of view it is scholz, mutsynich is different, this conflict, as they repeatedly call it, must be frozen, which means the defeat of ukraine, because it is a loss of control over the territories, it remains a threat of continued invasion of russia. and why they, or do i think they changed their minds like that, did scholl change their minds, or have they always been like that, just not as vocal about it as you are now quoting it, i don't think they have had a strong change of heart, they obviously started talking more frankly about that, well, here is an epoch-making speech, this is a speech the day before yesterday in the bundestag by the leader of th

olaf scholz to transfer one or another weapon to ukraine.derstand why, as of now, olaf scholz does not have such a desire. well , of course he explains it, he says that they can fly to moscow, but maybe, well , if, maybe it's fear, but maybe there are some other reasons. well, unfortunately, germany is known, the german government is known for finding many reasons why those other weapons cannot be transferred, because of what, and... germany's reputation has suffered in recent years, although germany, i would like to remind you, is the second largest supplier of arms to ukraine, and of course we are grateful to them for that, er, i would say that here it is a certain complex of reasons, first of all, it is the fear of escalation , it's real, and uh, and and and for germany it 's actually more important, this argument is more important than for other countries, they fear the involvement of their country, which... a man's war, they fear more than france and britain, which , who possess nuclear weapons, germany does not have its own nuclear wea

scholz, because you are absolutely right, firstly, the constitution does not, the fundamental law, asl to participate in hostilities abroad, this requires permission from the bundestag, this is the first, second, there is a decision or there is a very serious basis prepared by the scientific committee of the bundestag on what is considered german participation in hostilities abroad, absolutely right. the last very short question, today there was a shooting in berlin, but there is anti-terrorism there. activities against fragments of the red army, that is , something like that, something they call it, yes, yes, this is very interesting story, a few days ago, mrs. klette was caught, this is one of those three militants of this raf group who were still on the run, who committed many terrorist attacks in the eighties and early nineties, it turns out she lived, by the way, she lived very close to me , maybe i even saw her somewhere on the street, she lived in berlin, was walking there with a dog, but they found her by chance on the internet, following her footsteps, they went to look for h

let's remember. accusations that were made against federal chancellor olaf scholz, improper handlingts that were intended for his personal information, and then some of these documents were confidentially found in a trash heap, actually near the chancellor’s house, we remember this scandal, there were other examples , well, i can say that, for example, on board. plane of the federal chancellor, there was no control over us, well, i was not a journalist with the special services and have nothing to do with it, but any person simply question, did you leave something there? i didn’t leave anything, we just rejoiced at the huge portions that were served to us, but what am i talking about, no german counterintelligence, german did not exercise control over those accompanying the russian delegation, which took advantage of this. by plane, by movement , nothing, we moved freely throughout the cabin of air force one, the air force, germany, this was the ninety-eighth year, there were other examples when senior officials in the system of the german ministry of defense and the german ministry

scholz is increasingly becoming a security threat to europe.ning european deterrence against russia. french president manuel macron deliberately draws no red lines. this strategic ambiguity is intended to make the west more unpredictable for russia. not a bluff or some kind of nonsense that the president of the fifth republic , macron, blurted out. this is actually a debate that is unfolding right now in nato, whether to send or not? in what quantity? and what kind of contingent will it be, what are non-combat missions, nato and non-combat missions, a nato chef will come to ukraine, obviously all this is nonsense. cica said delightfully on this topic, the slovak prime minister: if we send, the only thing that remains for us is to sit on the balcony, take whiskey, watch a cigar, well , i mean, and then quickly explode, the west cannot... the west cannot provide modernized missile systems without western soldiers, thereby this becomes a new aspect of escalation to ukraine. the west sees that despite significant assistance, despite anti-russian sa

the question is, are question. -- scholz. the question is. are we — question. -- scholz.r or— question. -- scholz. the question is, are we at war or not? - question. -- scholz. the question is, are we at war or not? that - question. -- scholz. the question is, are we at war or not? that is l is, are we at war or not? that is the question. and we seem to be half in, half out. i the question. and we seem to be half in, half out-— in, half out. i think all of his faults, macron _ in, half out. i think all of his faults, macron does - in, half out. i think all of his faults, macron does have i in, half out. i think all of his i faults, macron does have that strategic— faults, macron does have that strategic clarity of really deeply understanding that european security now passes through kyiv, that this may not— now passes through kyiv, that this may not have been the case, you know, _ may not have been the case, you know. years _ may not have been the case, you know, years ago, but now, it is the case _ know, years ago, but now, it is the case and — know, years ago, but now,

actually, as chancellor olaf scholz said about it earlier. the weapon, which is even the most powerful, is a jet. the heimer installation is capable of much more than the taurus, but with a maximum range of 500 km, if used incorrectly can get into a certain goal somewhere in moscow, so this is a weapon where the questions of what we will do with it and how to use it cannot be solved simply by slogans for our own encouragement, it is the government in germany that decides whether to provide such weapons to ukraine or not, while the german the parliament previously called on the government to provide ukraine with a long -range weapon system, but in that case it was not specifically about the taurus, only in general terms to provide long-range weapons. taurus missiles can fly twice as far as missiles that have already been transferred to ukraine by britain and france. 500 km is the range of taurus, while stormshadow and scalp are 250 km. actually, there was an expectation that after britain and france , germany would transfer long-range missiles

scholz, but they tried to save face and put on a good face.erman cabinet said that the summons of the german ambassador to the carpet at the russian ministry of foreign affairs was not a surprise for them. this is a long-planned meeting and conversation. this is probably why german chancellor scholz, immediately after his ambassador’s visit to the foreign ministry , found a new reason not to deliver. scholz said that to control the rocket pieces in order to they didn’t accidentally fly through moscow, the german military would have to, directly in ukraine, the participation of german soldiers in the war with the russians is excluded, at least for now it is excluded, look. “i have already said that i don’t think this is a good idea, we are the country that provides the greatest support to ukraine in europe. this year our budget is 7 billion euros. no other budget in the european union has so much, yet there are debates between the countries about individual weapon systems. you cannot transfer a weapon system that has a significant range and you

chancellor scholz revealed what many had no doubt about.of missiles supplied to ukraine. scholz discussed his fears regarding the transfer of german taurus missiles to kiev, at the same time he attached allies who saw... the german chancellor as the wrong person. former british defense minister wallis, who was about to leave politics , called scholz’s behavior that from the point of view of european security, he was the wrong person, doing the wrong job and in the wrong place. echoed the head of the parliamentary foreign affairs committee, alicia kearns. scholz's comments are wrong, irresponsible and a slap in the face to allies. we have a choice, either we give ukraine what it needs, or we see even more bloodshed and a complete failure of deterrence. scholz must send the taurus missiles and stop holding back european security. a year ago, when they squeezed germany to agree to supply leopard-2 tanks to ukraine, it got to the point that it is not... generally accepted that by talking about sending troops to ukraine, he set everyone up at on

scholz publicly reassured the german population several times.eral chancellor of germany, i will not be sending soldiers bundeswehr to ukraine. there is a nuance here, in the matter of sending german soldiers, the last word. there are enough deputies of the bundestag, parliamentarians beating the military drum, as well as experts in the country who believe that talk about attacks on the crimean bridge against other targets is absolutely normal. i think it’s completely natural that the kerch bridge was mentioned in the conversation. the point of supplying taurus, which many policy experts, including those from the government coalition, are calling for , is precisely to strike a blow at russian supply routes, command centers and so on. everything to push through supplies to kiev. after the explosion of macron's dangerous statements trying to rule out any possibility of scholz sending troops to ukraine, many in europe are talking about a deep split along the paris-berlin line, and yet, what is the likelihood that this is just a game of good and bad

there, despite the small number of advantages in the direction of not delivering the taurus, that is, scholz , inside germany, that is, people already understand, no matter how they feel about russia there, yes how they need to treat it, they understand that the taurus cannot be delivered, firstly, it will not change anything, secondly, to deliver it, well, they just don’t look at how russia will react to it, they know that the german people will ... scholz, apparently, is trying somehow save, at least, i don’t know whether it’s playing for time or not, but it’s noticeable, the officers discussed all this, it’s just clearly noticeable here. that the bundesfer is working against the will of the government, against scholz and, accordingly , completely against the will of the people, well, let's see how long they can do this. sergey, this is such an interesting version, do you think it has a right to life? it could be that this leak could have been inspired by scholz himself in order to still refuse under this pretext supplies of taurus, to say, well , they say, the information has leaked now,

will carry out scholz’s instructions without opposing it, this means that scholz’s line is receivingct in the direction of non-participation or possible participation in the war, in this case there will be attempts to keep germany on the edge, then the next step is already an abyss, so here this. this is a very important moment, and in parallel with this, there is such a general as ben hodges, whom you all know very well, he once again made such an interesting statement, he said, if ukraine loses, then the first loser will be germany, well, i’m very i was surprised, of course, by these words, firstly, what right does a retired general have, who is on german territory, and should have been in the united states a long time ago, and yet he gives instructions and says that germany will lose, and i... today i understood what we’re talking about, it’s about the fact that hodges would really like germany to lose, so he ’s pushing germany to participate, realizing that germany has no further chance to survive, germany only has a chance to survive in one, if they pursue an independent policy,

this is an attack on scholz. because in this conversation for almost 40 minutes, she mentioned that scholz was using incorrect information about taurus. he proceeds from the fact that it is irrational to use taurus in ukraine. and this phrase of the military appears. as an element of pressure on scholz. for scholz, it is much more important what his generals discuss, one of them in a general position. they discuss disloyalty to the current chancellor. one of them says that scholz is a fool because he does not send taurus. and we need to create such a presentation. we must show that we want, we must taurus put this is a direct political disobedience of the military to the civilian leadership of the country. he just stated that if the taurus... had been deployed earlier a year ago, then crimea would have already been subordinated to kyiv a year ago, so it is necessary to supply the taurus. well, you know, it's really hot in german, in the german media, in connection with this downpour, and they are really discussin

and we are also observing another reaction, this is the reaction of comrade scholz, very correct, which with the old communist greetings, thus showing us, conveys to the dances, you know what, comrades french and british, let’s do it yourself, we have already gone, us every time they killed, and every time you gave a goon from dunkirk somewhere there, as usual, we won’t go, thank you, let’s go without us, and of course, i think this reaction, i think, will now also be more and more common among other europeans. states squeeze out of themselves drop by drop, they, they are very they are well aware, but there the baltics don’t care, they have the mindset of lemings, germany, many there, the czech republic, for example, some other hungary, countries, all this is completely unnecessary, they understand well that they will be the main victims of this conflict , because simply no one will notice them, in their place that same radioactive desert could really remain, why do they need this in principle, or something, really well done, you can also call them kremlin agents, he himself said: “i wo

and macron, because macron is now taking over the leadership, and scholz, on the contrary, wants toelay, so he is very careful in their statements and especially in their actions. do you think there is really a conflict between them? well, first of all, it must be said that... these conflicts are not like that, this is a normal process for europe, i would say, because these are the two most influential countries in continental europe, france and germany, and as a rule they cooperate, but they sometimes have such conflicts, and now the situation is a bit strange in the sense that there is no more help to ukraine, not only in absolute numbers, but in terms of percentage of gdp, and this also applies to military aid for for ukraine, if you believe the official figures, but not macron's rhetoric less, she is more like, well, progressive , aggressive, i don't know what to call it, better, well, she is more... pro-ukrainian, but so far this is not reflected in the figures for support for ukraine, and that's why this is a bit strange situation , the german rhetoric, it is much worse, you c

what exactly did olaf scholz say after the meeting with macron and tusk at the meeting held in berlin. let's listen. it is clear that we support ukraine, and it is also clear that we ourselves are not at war with russia. our common goal is to ensure effective protection of ukraine against russian aggression. we will use surplus profits from russian assets that are...frozen in europe to finance the purchase of weapons for ukraine. a crystal-clear signal is received in moscow. the russian president should know that our support for ukraine will not stop. well, i wish it would scholz spoke not only about the frozen assets, but also that the frozen assets could be used for the purchase of long-range taurus missiles, which should come to ukraine. that is why, in your opinion, mr. valentine, scholz, despite all the rhetoric. enough of such an aggressive , i would say, or macron's leadership rhetoric, that still, well, every time they make excuses that they cannot give us these taurus missiles, there was a vote in budnystaz yesterday, they failed this vote, the germans say that we we can't do

, there is another aspect, it is an attack on scholz, because in this almost 40-minute conversation itoned that scholz uses incorrect information about taurus , he proceeds from the fact that taurus...

which is a positive thing, because someone should have taken such measures a long time ago, olaf scholzhas a tendency to speak loudly but without much consequence, while macron's actions in the past have also not always matched his rhetoric, so it remains to be seen whether his recent statements translate into concrete action. as for britain, despite its lack of military resources, it still possesses significant financial capabilities. foreign secretary cameron recently visited germany to negotiate the purchase of long- range missiles. we see that britain remains active and seeks to play a leading role in current efforts, but the future remains uncertain. despite a lot of talk, there have been no significant positive actions that would affect the... front with the exception of the purchase of ammunition by the czech republic, so we are currently in a period of uncertainty, well, colonel, do you personally believe that, for example, president macron can to sign this or that decree, maybe not only president macron, maybe even some european leaders, maybe great britain will agree, yes, whe

scholz has the lowest rating of a chancellor in history.ing to all polls, the germans are against increasing arms supplies to ukraine and are in favor of a diplomatic scenario for ending the conflict. that is why scholz chose the strategy of the world chancellor. he is also driven by a deep-seated fear of russia. scholz is guided by the position that russia should not win, and ukraine must not lose. as part of this strategy, kiev is given enough weapons to survive, but not to win. ukraine. is entering a new phase of the war with russia, where it needs to dig, dig, dig, writes the wall street journal, the publication talks about the transition to deep defense in the ssu and the construction of new fortifications in the avdeevka trap. now they have to dig trenches under continuous shelling, ukrainian militants are forced to simultaneously dig in and repel russian attacks, the sss reports. although to build defensive lines began last november, the results of this company are extremely. ukrainian fighters complain about the cramped conditions;

so far, scholz is against it, so this will be a duel between macron and scholz.ll, we'll see what comes of that, too. you see, two wings, so to speak. of european global politics, they are probably equal, who is the most beautiful wing, in principle, it is not difficult for us to understand, i think it is macron after all, but will it be useful now , i think, scholz looked at himself in the mirror like this and says, but i didn't please you, and perhaps scholz also has his own inner beauty, also very important, although i do not know, we do not objectify them, nor discuss beauty directly. well, i don't know what to tell you , after i confessed my love to, you know , to whom, ursuli fonder vtr, i think that basically we have long gone beyond, you know, normal commentary work, so what, tetyana, thank you, i still wanted to ask tetyana, in brussels, the same farmers are constantly on strike, and in principle from time to time throughout the european union, what is the general attitude towards ukraine, or? they are talking, they are talking now publicly in brussels a

pistorius and call for an urgent meeting of the parliamentary defense committee for chancellor olaf scholze scandal after the publication of negotiations between german officers 4 days later is still gaining momentum. however, the german government is primarily concerned with criticism not opposition, but alliance allies. and for good reason , iceberg, what is even more worrying is that russia has identified germany as the weakest link in the north atlantic alliance, and german chancellor olaf scholdz as a useful idiot, they may be right, given the position scholz and his party take in this matter. scholz once again stated that he is not going to provide long-range missiles, out of fear that the ukrainian armed forces will try to attack the crimean bridge with them, and now to german deputies. such a solution seems adequate, because in the event of a terrorist attack , the officers’ conversation made public will cease to be just one of the possible scenarios. meanwhile , the american press doubts that the taurus will have any impact. on the situation of ukrainian troops. the new york times

example finland tried to show the hesitant scholz.d weapons, however, the finns do not have long-range missiles. but if you consider that the chancellor once... to strike our territory they choose what they think are the most effective means of destruction, they started talking about the possibility of sending nato military contingents to ukraine, but we remember the fate of those who once sent their contingents to the territory of our country, but now the consequences for possible interventionists will be much more tragic. they must ultimately understand that we also have weapons, and they know about it, there are also weapons that can hit targets on their territory, and that they are coming up with everything now, which scares the whole world, that all this really threatens a conflict with the use of nuclear weapons, which means the destruction of civilization. why don’t they understand this, or what? if the answer is taken to be pentagon chief austin’s statement that if ukraine is defeated, nato will have to fight with russia, then

i think that competition is good, and then, how can these people... not compete, scholz is one of theaders of the european left, they were gathering, it seems to me, today, with their manifesto before the election, they want to win elections, they need additional votes in the european parliament, they don't have many heads of the government, and the main figures are the prime minister of spain, pedro sanchez, and the federal chancellor of germany, olaf scholz, because these are the largest countries of the european union, which are led by left-wing leaders, there are centrists, and their leader is emmanuel macron. in fact, this is a completely different political force , which is in the center of the spectrum, so to speak, and they also need to prove their importance, especially the situation when in france the far-right and far-left always win in the elections to the european parliament, there are right-wing radicals, and some of them , which supports in ukraine, this camp is headed by george meledi, and she still needs to fight with those right-wing radicals, because these are two c

please , by the way, scholz may part with the post of chancellor next year, especially since elections elections in france are not yet brewing and macron still has looming until the twenty-seventh year he may serve as president , here an interesting conflict is developing on the margins of the european space between two the leaders, so to speak, of the two locomotives of europe , germany and france, against the backdrop of such an information outlet, in my opinion, which has now formed in recent days in europe, that is, the usa, their establishment. well , i focused on the primaries of american parties, on the upcoming elections, on discussing biden’s cognitive abilities , on discussing the supreme court’s decision on trump. that is, they have a completely different agenda, both the european leaders and their own ukrainian case fall out of it, so if we now look at the latest days, taking advantage of this inattention of the united states to europe, macron last week carried out such an information provocation, we all watched it, when he essentially imposed his agenda on europe, and a ve

scholz looked at his neighbors and decided that the image of a frightened liverwurst was still closercial video message in which he practically swore and swore that there were and would not be any nato soldiers in ukraine, and there were no allies. they allegedly support the liver chancellor. we don't want a war in russia against ukraine turned into a war between russia and nato. we agree on this with our allies. this also means no german participation in the war. to put it bluntly, as chancellor of germany, i will not send bundesfer soldiers to ukraine, that’s true. our soldiers can count on it, and you can count on it. macron was supported only by estonian prime minister kaja kallas, the leader of the army. 7,200 people, announced that it was considering every possibility to defeat putin. we shouldn't be afraid of our own strength. russia announces one or another step of escalation, but defense is not escalation. andrei vladimirovich, given what is now being made public regarding scholz, that is, when his military is doing things directly opposite to what he says, doesn’t it turn ou

well, olaf scholz is forced to be there, and there, and there, and there, he doesn't like it. this oneoney is the first person there, and macron is the first person there, and meanwhile the biggest aid comes from germany, and scholz can’t stand it, he says, but you could at least send more weapons, by the way, i don’t know, you know that before the meeting in the elysee palace, journalists asked macron's advisers, and why, of course, this meeting is not in berlin, you can explain to us yourself french journalists. well, it is true, france is very seriously helping ukraine, but germany is more, but president macron is not only talking about the possibility of troops, he is talking about the fact that other countries should help more germany, more ukraine, meaning germany as well , that is, in fact, it is about the fact that macron is the leader of the process, and indeed, if you are the leader of the process, you are simply obliged to raise the stakes, and how can you raise the stakes in this situation. such a statement, of course, you can't even imagine, khrystyna, what kind of emotion

germany's leader, olaf scholz, warns israel's prime minister about the �*terribly high costs' of thear in gaza. we cannot stand by and watch palestinians risk starvation. that's not us. that is not what we stand for together. hello, i'm lukwesa burak. in the last hour president putin has claimed a fifth term in what was an inevitable election landslide. exit polls say he had a record 88 % of the vote. speaking at his campaign headquarters, president vladimir putin said his win will allow russia to become stronger and more effective. he thanked the citizens who went to the polling stations, expressing gratitude in particular to those whom he called warriors on the line of contact, referring to the front line of the war in ukraine. translation: in this connection i would like to _ translation: in this connection i would like to thank— translation: in this connection i would like to thank first _ translation: in this connection i would like to thank first of - translation: in this connection i would like to thank first of all, - would like to thank first of all, citizens of the russia,

also says, look, this annoys me, says scholz, because germany provides the largest amount of militaryid of military equipment, and it is true, because when we mention there about ammunition, remember sumpti. about armored vehicles, it seems that everything is true, but these things are related to the missile, it is also unclear against this background, because even britain says: "let's buy your taurus from germany for our arsenal, and the storm shed in larger quantities let's transfer it to ukraine, in this way we will strengthen the ukrainian potential, everything is fine, even this proposal for some reason is not interesting to scholz, and neither am i. only the very end on this topic, we will finish it already, because there are still important topics, 0.25% of the gdp of the eu countries for military aid to ukraine, this is such an initiative is important, i want to tell you that it is a lot, because only the gdp of germany is 80,900 billion euros, well, that is, count 1% of these eight trillion, that's 80 billion, let's say, let it be, but that's only germany, and there's also...

secret information, they called scholz the wrong person, for the wrong reason.chancellor olaf scholz said british troops were helping ukraine fire long-range missiles at russian forces. the extraordinary row erupted after scholz said he would not hand over the long-range tauru missile to kiev because it would require the help of german troops on the ground. he argued that following the example of great britain and france, his country would become participant in the war. the tory party called the comments dangerous, irresponsible and... very much an ally of the ponat. he was also accused of giving vladimir putin a reason to escalate. former defense minister ben wallis said scholz's behavior showed that from a european security perspective he was the wrong man, doing the wrong job at the wrong time. time and time again, germany was the last to help ukraine. at every stage they had to be forced or embarrassed into doing something. this is not leadership, following. former minister tobes elwood stated: this is a rampant abuse of data, deliberate, designed to distrac

scholz, mr. chancellor of germany, because to come out with such a statement today, believe me, it is really a huge step, and i think that the french president has just shown leadership and convinced, and most importantly, convinced his partners in the key economy of the european union, to go for the confiscation of ... profits and direct to whom it is not easy to direct , here and there it was crystal clear, clearly announced by the chancellor of germany that they are going to purchase weapons for the armed forces of ukraine, that is the main thing, now about missiles, i am telling you as a person who led and continues to lead directly negotiations with german partners, we will solve the issue in the near future, only one thing, i have already said about it, i can repeat it, it will not be sent directly to ukraine, but through one of the third parties. countries of our key partners, but the issue of long-range , concrete-piercing, high-precision missiles , whatever their name, but including germ

which are allegedly in russian for scholz.ime when the series about taurus is running, germany transfers shells to ukraine almost everywhere, almost every week, transfers cheetahs, transfers a lot of other weapons, not only taus, we are fixated on something about taurus, because they fly well, germany does not transfer taurus, we were answered by missiles similar to taurus, scalpel and what... transmitted by great britain and transmitted by france, so we cannot say that germany does not help ukraine, there is indeed a series going on, and probably this series is distracting attention, and the public is certain, and enemies from what is happening , whether germany will hand over tauruses to ukraine, i think that it will, the fact is that... how many of them are there in germany, is there enough of them , it seems there were 300 tauruses that were decommissioned are already obsolete, sure they had to do a mod with it there. russians, that is, technically they were not ready to counter modern means of reb, radio electronic intell

is also firing at everyone, scholz says, wait, wait, if we deliver taurus, yes. to france, then scholzse missiles, which means that not only are there british special forces there who are guarding zelensky or holding him hostage there, as you wish, the conversation is about the fact that the french are directly involved, asking goals, and scholz said this, sorry, but this is a scandal, there was a response from britain, in germany they say that scholz is crazy, what is he doing with these statements. rötgan said that it is generally not clear why scholz did this, that is, he admitted participation already the french british military, who are taking part in the conflict, are targeting targets. accordingly, now if we look at the field of jurisdiction, it turns out that if a blow comes to crimea, even from a western point of view, that’s how felix or michael tries to say, then it seems like you know, such a gray space, well, it seems like this is the territory of ukraine, which their point of view is occupied by the russians, god forbid such a missile flies into belgrade, even from their

, we have scholz, let’s give scholz, yes, let’s give scholz.such long-range weapons systems that would be associated with the use of german soldiers, including outside ukraine, is excluded; this is a line that i, as chancellor of germany, do not want to cross. paragraph 80 of the german criminal code states that if. if someone did something from the territory of germany, war will emanate, then the minimum punishment applies or life imprisonment. accordingly, if at least one bundesfern soldier is sent to ukraine in the hierarchy and a missile is sent to russia, then, in principle, scholz, pistorius, or people on the street go to prison. when i say that i don’t understand this position of scholz, i say why, because well, he is absolutely not consistent, yes, he is a person. who at all times supported all these anti-russian actions, sanctions and statements, everything, everything, everything. now we are talking about missiles, he says: no, but he stipulates where the soldiers of the german army will be present, if they are present, i am against i

though. 0laf scholz there. its planned military operation in the city of rafah in southern gaza, where more than a million people are taking refuge. i assured chancellor scholz that our goal in eliminating the remaining terrorist battalions in rafah goes hand—in—hand with enabling the civilian population to leave rafah. it is not something that we will do while keeping the population locked in place. in fact, we will do the very opposite. we will enable them to leave because our consideration for reducing and minimising civilian casualties has guided us and will continue to guide us in the future. 0ur correspondent, mark lowen, who is injerusalem, gave us his analysis of the conference. well, germany's chancellor, 0laf scholz, is keeping the pressure up on benjamin netanyahu over more humanitarian aid getting into gaza, but also over israel's plans to send its military into rafah in southern gaza, where about 1.4 million gazans are sheltering, more than the more than half of the entire population of the gaza st

in this matter, scholz, despite the growing pressure from the allies, is still cautious.ect the idea of ​​the french leader to send military personnel from europe to the conflict zone. and in order to push this position, one of the main russophobes, polish prime minister tusk, came to the berlin meeting. sergei khalashevsky will continue this. a half-forgotten political union, the waymore triangle, where. france, germany and poland are walking and which the poles are trying their best to revive, the poles are bursting at the seams, the current berlin attempt to measure macron and scholz, who are cursing from ukraine, is already the second in a row, the first was in february, when tusk flew to paris. in fact, macron and scholz are today trying to pretend that relations between berlin and paris are stronger than ever, as if those same ones never existed mutual accusations, who helps ukraine more, who less, who is ready to send their troops there, who calls it complete stupidity, but tusk was invited for... extras and demonstration of that same european unity. there are, of

scholz, for example, is a black swan, this whole gift, because there was not a single sign, well, it’black swan, which, maybe it is launched, black, well , then go ahead, i, well, no, well, i’m one of them because i didn’t want mine, well, you well, you went into this one of the arguments, yes, but most analysts believe that scholz played a game with the bundestag. you, that you have a version in brackets spoiler, i have it, that i do not rule out that it was scholtz who organized this one, no, i have two versions, the first one is that scholz organized it, and this is also a response to the french who responded to him came this week, to the british , who put it down to the second version - this is british, because singapore is there, this is the place where they graze, and if the recording was made in singapore, then it’s more likely the british, but look, now they’ll give us back wall street journal, yeah. look, they write that this leak now reduces the likelihood that germany will supply taurs missiles , the british wanted germany to supply taurs , they pushed them, they have alrea

scholz in german, herr scholz, we are ready to receive your specialists in truskavets, it’s safe thereeps who escaped from kyiv, and that’s it, let they will program it and come back, is it so... such a complex mechanism that justifies the non-transfer of these weapons, well, this is one of the options, but here it is necessary to understand that the main, if not the main, main idea in this argument is that that it's not just a one-time thing a one-time action, yes, they programmed it and went , so it’s like permanent control over these missiles, especially since, well, if we have them... we understand that there are many goals, and this means that either these germans have to which we will use them, and we will if we wish and if there is a sufficient number and if we have the opportunity, we would shoot them every day , sit here constantly, for which we need the permission, well, of the same bundestag, and well, one thing, when it comes to the transfer missiles, it's a different matter when it comes to a military mission, that is i think that the germans in this case have this thresho

and how to do it so that they are not noticed, because scholz doesn't like it. the americans and the british are already there. one of the generals said that it would happen anyway. direct participation, that is, they understand what they are talking about, and in one of the exchanges it sounds like, well, there are guys in civilian clothes from the usa, it was directly said, so i don't know how to say it, how they will explain to their population, well, i don't know, at the moment it seems that the german... population doesn't have to nothing to explain, because all these theses didn't work, in short, that's how the whole operation was, that 's how, you know, they stole some negotiations, threw them into the media, did a lot of pr, and now it's sad, because they found out that again the discussion that they wanted, they really wanted a discussion about how it will be, how everyone will be afraid of nuclear weapons, but again, grief, because they are not afraid of nuclear weapons. weapons as the russians would like. listening to the conversation, you can hear th

before chancellor scholz reacted with scandal. suho, without any specifics, promised to look into this serious incident. at the same time, judging by the statements of the german authorities, they are not concerned about the content of the recording, but the fact of the leak itself, because there is no doubt about the authenticity of the audio file. repeated the german ministry of defense. about miscalculations and consequences alexander khabarov. german chancellor olaf scholz broke his silence and spoke out about the recording of conversations of high-ranking german military officials, discussed the idea of ​​launching a missile strike on the crimean bridge. while in rome, scholz said that he had given instructions to thoroughly look into everything. this is a very serious issue, so it needs to be done very carefully, very intensely. to quickly clarify, according to information from the bilt publication, as soon as the scandalous recording was published, germany tried to block its distribution on social networks, but a few hours

to ukraine, and this is almost a direct clash between nato and russia, scholz’s personal rating leavesdesired, but more than half of the germans agree with the chancellor and do not support the transfer of this type of weapons, fellow party members of the head of government are even ready to close eyes to the fact that scholz actually lied to parliament, explaining the refusal to kiev. if this doesn't suit someone. discussion of attacks on the crimean bridge, this is another reason to remember that taurus can to fly to the moscow agglomeration, and scholz officers - it’s not just a matter of fact that he doesn’t want this. here, of course, we have to find out whether the bundeswehr is doing this on their own initiative? then the question is, how controllable is the bundeswehr, or is it? part of the state policy in the federal republic of germany, both of them are very bad, both of them once again emphasize the direct involvement of countries, the so-called collective west, in the conflict around ukraine, and although it has long been confirmed that the ukrainian armed forces are helpin

scholz terribly angered his partners.ferred to the fact that the missiles supplied to ukraine by the french and british, and guided by their specialists, were, in general, handed over to the allies. but the germans say they cannot send their personnel. let everything take its course, especially since the ukrainians will spray moscow with the product received from... schulz and his social democratic fellow party members understand that the historical trail forces germany to be more careful than others. other german parties, from the greens to the cdu, no longer seem to think so. they paid for the past. in russia , meanwhile, they remembered the relatively recent past. almost 34 years ago , a final settlement agreement was signed in moscow. germany. the agreement on the final settlement with respect to germany was signed on september 12 , 1990 in moscow, as a result of lengthy negotiations in the 2+4 format. on the one hand, it was signed by the winners of world war ii, the ussr, great britain, france and the usa, who renou