1) Cristian Segura (Kiev), “Olaf Scholz asegura que Ucrania está analizando cómo puede negociarse la paz con Rusia; El canciller alemán insiste en un discurso menos beligerante con Moscú que el del presidente francés,” El País, el 28 de marzo 2024 (actualizado a las 12:55 EDT);

2) Sozialdemokratische Historiker kritisieren Russland-Politik der SPD; Eine Gruppe von Historikern um Heinrich August Winkler rechnet in einem offenen Brief mit der SPD ab. Deren Argumente seien ‘erratisch und nicht selten faktisch falsch’,” Die Zeit, den 27 Marz 2024 (Aktualisiert am 27. März 2024, 19:57 Uhr);

3) “‘Hochgefährliche Realitätsverweigerung’: Historiker üben scharfe Kritik an Russland-Politik der SPD-Spitze; Eine Gruppe von Wissenschaftlern um Heinrich August Winkler geht in einem offenen Brief hart mit der SPD-Spitze ins Gericht. Sie werfen ihr unzureichende Solidarität mit der Ukraine vor,” Tagesspiegel, den 28. März 2023 (13:14 Uh);

Analysis

Olaf Scholz and the Social Democratic Party (SDP) are leading Germany down the path of appeasement of Russia.And as the leading country favoring appeasement, Germany is operating as a major brake on the efforts of the EU and NATO countries to provide the advanced weapons systems and ammunition it needs.

In both NATO and rge EU, major decisions relating to Ukraine can only be taken by unanimous vote. Consequently, as the leading country favoring appeasement, Germany in effect blocks critical actions by these actors that would supply Ukraine with the military assistance it so desperately needs.

The leader of the SPD faction in the Bundestag, Rölf Mützenich, recently advocated a “freezing” of the conflict in Ukraine with a settlement to be worked out later. Anyone who has been following the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine understands that Mützenich was essentially calling for capitulation by Ukraine.

While Defense Minister Pistorius and Chancellor Scholz distanced themselves from this proposal, Scholz continues his hard line on the road of appeasement–no Taurus missiles, slow and begrudging supply to Ukraine of other weapons systems.

Scholz reminds this observer of no one so much as Neville Chamberlain, the Conservative prime minister of Great Britain until May 1940 when Winston Churchill took over the job.

Chamberlain clung to the belief until the very end, in May 1940), that a negotiated agreement could be reached with Adolf Hitler, even after Hitler tore up the Munich Pact which led Chamberlain to declare he had achieved “peace for
our time”.

Scholz is a follower, not a leader. He has been following the pro-Putin and pro-Russian elements in his party, the SPD, with careful attention to tge party’s chances in the next federal elections, where the SPD is challenged by pro-Russian and pacifist oar ties on the left, as well as the Alternative for Germany (AFD) party on the far-right, which is also pro-Russian.

Scholz is a modern Chamberlain, not a Churchill. Just as Chamberlain followed tge appeasement sentiments that were dominant in the Conservative party in 1940, Schilz follows (ir us careful not to antagonize the pacifist and pro-Russian elements on the left, particularly within the SPD.

He us alao following the opinion polls, which show a majority of Germans support his cautious and deliberate approach, on tge road to appeasement of Russia. As Cristian Segura reports in El País, his latest comments urging a softer tone than Emmanuel Macron’s toward Russia, and negotiations with the Russian dictator.

It is hard to imagine Winston Churchill basing his biggest decisions on public opinion polls, or prevailing opinion in the Conservative Party. Instead he led, and resolutely set out to change both public opinion and support for standing up to Hitler within his party.

Today, in German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, we have a leader very much like Neville Chamberlain. On the road to appeasement. Following the public opinion polls and strong factions within his party.

One does not discern a leader with the qualities of leadership Germanu, and Europe and the world, so desperately need at this perilous moment in time.

1) Andriy Kermak, “The Oil Weapon Against Moscow; In 1986 the U.S. and Saudi Arabia raised production. That move contributed to the Soviet collapse, Wall Street Journal, March 26, 2024 (4:09 pm ET);

2) Jesus A. Nuñez Villaverde, “La batalla de las refinerías: nuevo foco de tensión entre Kiev y Washington; Estados Unidos ha hecho saber a Ucrania que no ve con buenos ojos los ataques a instalaciones de hidrocarburos,”El País, el 23 de marzo 2024 (05:40CET);

3) “The battle of the refineries: new focus of tension between Kiev and Washington; The United States has made it known to Ukraine that it does not welcome the attacks on hydrocarbon facilities,” El País, March 23, 2024 (95:40 CER);

1) Britta Sandberg (Paris), “Bodentruppen für die Ukraine: Und wenn Macron recht hat?” Der Spiegel, den 21. Maärz 2024 (20.11 Uhr);

1) Editorial, “Ukraine must not be hamstrung; Two years into the bloodiest conflict Europe has seen since the War, the West should have realised by now Ukraine is in an existential fight, The Telegraph, March 23, 2024 (6:00 am);

This makes it all the more extraordinary that the United States has reportedly called on Kyiv to stop its own attacks on Russia’s energy infrastructure. Such strikes mark one of Kyiv’s few recent military successes, wiping out around 12 per cent of Moscow’s overall oil production. Yet the White House is said to be concerned that if Kyiv keeps hitting Russian facilities, global oil prices will increase sharply.

1) Alister Heath,”Western civilisation is being driven to oblivion by the false prophets of ‘diversity’; The woke revolutionaries reject real equality in favour of a permanent revolution against fairness and merit,” The Telegraph, March 20, 2024 (7:10 pm);

1) Charles Michel, “Si queremos la paz, debemos prepararnos para la guerra
Es necesario reforzar nuestra capacidad de defender el mundo democrático, tanto por Ucrania como por Europa,” El País, el 19 de marzo 2023
(5:00 CET);

1) Guillaume Perrault, “Accords de Munich : Daladier n’était pas un lâche; GRAND RÉCIT – En septembre 1938, le président du Conseil, «lâché» par Chamberlain, s’est résigné à abandonner les Tchèques pour éviter que la France n’entre en guerre seule contre Hitler et Mussolini. Daladier voulait gagner un répit pour préparer la nation au conflit, qu’il savait inévitable, ” Le Figaro, le 16 mars 2024 (mis à jour hier à 14:30);

1) Trump–bob-prosecution and delay, two years of impunity

2) Ukraine: Avoiding Defeat in the Spectator War

3) Gaz: Complicity in ar crimes and afaikure to use power to force Israel to change course

Common elements;

1. Avoid confrontation

2. Failure to use hard power

3. Follow tge politics, don’t lead

4. Words but not deeds

5. Disastrous foreign policy judgent

6. The least bad alternative

7. Kamala Harris and the Democratic bench

8. The Politics of Impotence at a turning point in history

1) Isabelle Lasserre, “Les divergences entre la France et l’Allemagne sur la guerre créent de nouvelles fractures en Europe, Le Figaro, le 15 mars 2024 (20:58);

2) Ronan Planchon”‘En utilisant l’arme nucléaire comme outil de dialogue stratégique, la France pousse la Russie à négocier’,” Le Figaro,le 15 mars 2024;

Par
Publié hier à 17:08, mis à jour hier à 20:16

3) J. Michael Luttig and Laurence H. Tribe, “Supreme Betrayal: A requiem for Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment,” The Atlantic March 14, 2024;

1) Daniel Hannan, “The Church of England is replacing its Christian nature in a fit of woke frenzy; A new holy trinity of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion has usurped the old, The Telegraph, March 9, 2024 (5:00 pm);