Europe planning Abraham Accords II

According to the Tehran Times, France, Germany, and Britain intend to join the 146 countries recognizing Palestine as a state, contingent upon significant concessions from Iran, including its recognition of Israel and a halt to support for resistance groups in Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq, and Syria.

The initiative proposed by France and endorsed by Britain and Germany aims to offer additional protections for Israel but does not establish any conditions to safeguard Palestinians against Israel's apartheid policies in the occupied territories, its massacres in Gaza, the abuse of Palestinian prisoners, or the growing number of illegal settlements in the West Bank.

If the initiative is implemented, the European trio will align with their counterparts in Norway, Ireland, and Spain, who became the latest group of European countries to recognize Palestine as a state earlier this year. While the May decision drew fury from the Israeli regime, it failed to stop the ongoing suffering of Palestinians in Gaza and the occupied territories.

According to information gathered by the Tehran Times, White House officials have expressed their support for the European plan as they view it as a continuation of the 2020 Abraham Accords, which led to recognition of Israel's sovereignty over Palestinian territories by some Arab and African nations, including the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco, and Sudan.

Saudi Arabia was on the verge of joining the accords before the outbreak of the latest round of Israeli onslaughts in Gaza. 

Some critics in Europe and the US have warned that even if Iran were to acknowledge Israel and distance itself from the resistance, Israel would not be granted the security it desires. Rather, the move would reinforce the regime's unlawful practices and hinder any prospects for a genuine peace process. They highlight that the Abraham Accords did not stop the successful Hamas operation on October 7, when Palestinian fighters seized control of several Israeli settlements for hours and took some Israelis to Gaza.

Sources have told the Tehran Times that voices averse to the initiative believe Western leaders should recognize and respect Palestinians’ rights, instead of turning to regional countries to strengthen Israel’s hand. 

The Tehran Times understands that besides the perceived impracticality and ineffectiveness of the initiative, some in Europe and the United States also believe that Iran is highly unlikely to acquiesce to Europe's demands.

Nevertheless, the leaders of France, Germany, and Britain intend to promote the initiative in the future as a way to vindicate themselves following months of intense criticism regarding their support for Israel’s devastating campaign in Gaza. 

Europe intends to throw the ball in Iran’s court and blame it for the crisis in Gaza after Tehran rejects the initiative, the Tehran Times was informed. Rather than a genuine attempt at peace, Europe’s proposed recognition of Palestine is a calculated move to shift blame onto Iran. 

In the past 10 months, over 40,000 Palestinians have lost their lives as a direct result of Israeli attacks on the besieged enclave. War experts say at least 100,000 more people will end up losing their lives, due to the complete decimation of medical centers in Gaza, as well as an acute shortage of food, clean water, and medicine.

 

Can Germany ease Israel-Hezbollah tension?

German Federal Intelligence Service (BND) Deputy Director Ole Diehl met with Hezbollah's second-in-command, Deputy Secretary-General Sheikh Naim Qassem, on Saturday evening, the Hezbollah-affiliated Lebanese news organization Al Akhkbar reported on Tuesday.

The meeting in Beirut was the second time the two officials met, as in January, the two met to discuss the Iranian proxy's attacks on the Jewish state.

According to the sources, “the session's atmosphere was positive.”

The discussion reportedly centered on the rising tensions between the Lebanese terror organization and Israel and how a full-scale war could be avoided.

The German envoy reportedly presented the Israeli desire to return the displaced residents of the North to their homes and that it would wage war on Hezbollah if necessary in order to accomplish this goal.

On Monday, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said that the residents of northern Israel "don’t feel safe to go to their homes" and that Israel had "lost sovereignty" over the northern portion of the country due to Hezbollah's attacks.

Diehl reportedly added that a mistake made by either party could result in a war between the two sides.

In response, Al Akhkbar reported that Qassem said any discussion of Hezbollah ceasing attacks on northern Israel was linked to the achievement of a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip.

Qassem's response echoed his comments to Diehl in January, where the Hezbollah deputy secretary-general reportedly "refused to discuss anything before Israel stops the war on Gaza. He urged Germany to put pressure on Israel to stop its aggression."

 

Iran Oil Show 2024 opens today

Despite all the propaganda against Iran oil industry's international successes and its energy diplomacy approach, the growing number of foreign oil companies’ presence at the 28th Oil Show is a clear sign of rising trust in Iran’s oil industry.

Director of the 28th Iran International Oil, Gas, Refining and Petrochemical Exhibition, known as Iran’s Oil Show 2024, Gholamreza Jamali, made the remarks during a press conference on May 06 in Tehran adding the exhibition opens its doors to the public on May 08.

Jamali said that 1750 oil industry related companies, including 250 foreign companies from 12 countries including Russia, China, Germany, France, Japan, Belarus, India, Canada, Italy, Turkey, Austria and Argentina shows that Iran’s oil show is not only one of the largest oil exhibitions at home but also in the West Asia region.

The great achievements of Iran’s oil industry over the last two years, is due to the support of the Minister of Petroleum, Jamali said at the press conference.

A number of companies failed to take part in this year’s oil exhibition mainly due to lack of appropriate infrastructures expressing hope improvement in the facilities to provide proper conditions for participation of all companies in the next rounds of oil exhibitions.

Elsewhere in his remarks he said, a number of world high-ranking officials have been invited to participate at the opening ceremony of the exhibition.

According to him, while during last year’s oil exhibition, just 2 thousand square meters had been allocated to accommodate foreign companies, this space has been expanded this year so that the foreign companies’ exclusive space reaches 5 thousand square meters.

 As far as it concerns allocating spaces, the organizers have decided to pay attention to the arrangement based on upstream, midstream and downstream activities and the halls and booths locations are somehow related to the subject of value chain in the oil industry

In order to support the technological innovations in the oil industry, an especial space has been allocated to the knowledge-based companies, technological companies, universities and start-ups, he also said.

Pointing out that numerous side events that will be held on the sidelines of the exhibition, the director of the Tehran Oil Show 2024 announced that many of these events would lead to the signing of contracts and memorandums of understanding in the oil industry, resulting in boosting production with economic results.

Jamali noted that providing appropriate conditions for direct connection between private and public sector activists is one of the main functions of the oil exhibition every year, which often faces some obstacles over the year due to the existence of administrative bureaucracy.

Announcing the slogan of this year's oil exhibition as "Oil industry, production leap, technological optimization", he said, "At this year’s exhibition we will reveal some equipment for the first time which is very important in view of meeting domestic needs and exporting to other countries."

The International Oil, Gas, Refining and Petrochemical Exhibition as the main and most important oil event in Iran is held annually by the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) with the support of the Petroleum Ministry.

The Petroleum Ministry’s subsidiaries including the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC), the National Iranian Gas Company (NIGC), the National Iranian Oil Refining and Distribution Company (NIORDC) and the National Petrochemical Company (NPC) have an active presence in the event.

Iran Oil Show 2024 is being held from May 08 to May 11 at Tehran International Permanent Fairground.

Nicaragua asks ICJ to end German support of Israeli

Nicaragua has asked the International Court of Justice to order Germany to halt military arms exports to Israel and to resume its funding of the UN Palestinian refugee agency UNRWA, saying there is a serious risk of genocide in Gaza.

Nicaragua's agent ambassador Carlos Jose Arguello Gomez told the court Berlin had violated the 1948 Genocide Convention by continuing to supply Israel with arms after ICJ judges ruled it was plausible that Israel violating some rights guaranteed under the genocide convention during its assault on Gaza, Reuters reported. 

He told the judges that Berlin was ignoring its obligations under international law by continuing to provide military assistance to Israel.

The German government rejected Nicaragua's allegations.

Berlin is one of the major arms exporters to Israel, sending 326.5 million euros (US$353.70 million) in military equipment and weapons in 2023, according to Economy Ministry data.

 

 

 

 

Who Supply Israel Murder Weapons?

Over 9,000 Palestinian women have been killed since the start of the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip. Mothers have been the largest share of Israeli killings, at an average of 37 mothers per day since October 07, 2023.

The numbers above, from the Palestinian Health Ministry in Gaza and the Red Crescent Society respectively, only convey part of the suffering experienced by 2.3 million Palestinians in the Strip.

There is not a single section in Palestinian society that has not paid a heavy price for the war, although women and children are the ones who have suffered most, constituting over 70% of all victims of the ongoing Israeli genocide.

These women and their children are killed at the hands of Israeli soldiers, but they are murdered with US-western supplied weapons.

We are told that the world is finally turning against Israel, and that the west’s nod of approval to Tel Aviv to carry on with its daily massacres may soon turn into a collective snub.

This claim was expressed best in the March 23 cover of the Economist magazine. It showed a tattered Israeli flag, attached to a stick, and planted in an arid, dusty land. It was accompanied by the headline “Israel Alone”.

The image, undoubtedly expressive, was meant to serve as a sign of the times.

Its profundity becomes even more obvious if compared to another cover, from the same publication soon after the Israeli military conquered massive Arab territories in the war of June 1967. “They did it,” the headline, back then, read. In the background, an Israeli military tank was pictured, illustrating the west-funded Israeli triumph.

Between the two headlines much, in the world and in the Middle East, has changed. But to claim that Israel now stands alone is not entirely accurate, at least not yet.

Though many of Israel’s traditional allies in the west openly disown its behavior in Gaza, weapons from various western and non-western countries continue to flow, feeding the war machine as it, in turn, continues to harvest more Palestinian lives.

Does Israel truly stand alone when its airports and seaports are busier than ever receiving massive shipments of weapons coming from all directions?

Almost every time a western country announces that it has suspended arms exports to Israel, a news headline appears shortly afterwards, indicating the opposite. Indeed, this has happened repeatedly.

Last year, Rome had declared that it was blocking all arms sales to Israel, giving false hope that some western countries are finally experiencing some kind of moral awakening.

Alas, on March 14, Reuters quoted the Italian Defense Minister, Guido Crosetto as saying that shipments of weapons to Israel are continuing, based on the flimsy logic that previously signed deals would have to be ‘honored’.

Another country that is also ‘honoring’ its previous commitments is Canada, which announced on May 19, following a parliamentary motion that it had suspended arms exports.

The celebration among those advocating an end to the genocide in Gaza were just getting started when, a day later, Ottawa practically reversed the decision by announcing that it, too, will honor previous commitments.

This illustrates that some western countries, which continue to impart their unsolicited wisdom about human rights, women’s rights and democracy on the rest of the world, have no genuine respect for any of these values.

Canada and Italy are not the largest military supporters of Israel. The US and Germany are. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, in the decade between 2013 and 2022, Israel has received 68% of its weapons from the US and 28% from Germany.

The Germans remain unperturbed, even though 5% of the total population of Gaza has been killed, wounded or are missing due to the Israeli war.

Yet, the American support for Israel is far greater, although the Biden Administration is still sending messages to its constituency – majority of whom want the war to stop – that the president is doing his best to pressure Israel to end the war.

Though only two approved military sales to Israel have been announced publicly since October 07, the two shipments represent only 2% from the total US arms sent to Israel.

The news was revealed by the Washington Post on March 06. It was published at a time when US media was reporting on a widening rift between US President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

“That’s an extraordinary number of sales over the course of a pretty short amount of time,” a former senior Biden Administration official told the Post. Jeremy Konyndyk reached the obvious conclusion that the “Israeli campaign would not be sustainable without this level of US support”.

For decades, the US military support to Israel has been the highest anywhere in the world. Starting 2016, this unconditional support exponentially increased during the Obama Administration to reach US$3.8 billion per year.

Immediately after October 07, the weapons shipments to Israel reached unprecedented levels. They included a 2,000-pound bomb known as 5,000 MK-84 munitions. Israel has used this bomb to kill hundreds of innocent Palestinians.

Though Washington frequently alleges to be looking into Israel’s use of its weapons, it turned out, according to the Washington Post, that Biden knew too well that Israel was regularly bombing buildings without solid intelligence that they were legitimate military targets”.

In some ways, Israel ‘stands alone’, but only because its behavior is rejected by most countries and peoples around the world. However, it is hardly alone when its war crimes are being executed with western support and arms.

For the Israeli genocide in Gaza to end, those who continue to sustain the ongoing bloodbath must also be held accountable.

 

Germany on wrong side of history again

For a state visit, Friday's visit by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to Germany is remarkably low key. He was scheduled to meet German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier and then have dinner with the chancellor, Olaf Scholz.

Apart from the intense security in the centre of the capital — the same level as precautions taken for US presidential visits — the German government hopes Erdogan's visit will pass with little notice. That's because this event couldn't come at the worst time for Germany.

Relations between President Erdogan and successive German governments have been difficult for years, with spats between Berlin and Ankara regularly breaking out. When German government spokespeople mention the phrase difficult partner you know they're talking about President Erdogan.

The Hamas atrocities in Israel on October 07, and Israel's subsequent retaliation in Gaza, have left Germany and Turkey on opposite sides of the conflict. Over the past month the Turkish president has become increasingly strident in his criticism of Israel.

He has refused to condemn the killings and hostage-taking by Hamas, referring to the group as liberators. Hamas is classed as a terrorist organization by Western allies, including Germany.

He has also appeared to call into question the Jewish state's existence by saying that Israel's own fascism undermined its legitimacy.

Jewish leaders in Germany have accused Erdogan of fuelling antisemitism with such comments and there have been calls for the German government to cancel the Turkish president's visit.

For Germany, historical Nazi guilt for the Holocaust means that support for the state of Israel is non-negotiable and a key cornerstone of Berlin's foreign policy. When asked in a news conference earlier this week about President Erdogan's comments Chancellor Scholz called them absurd.

Both Olaf Scholz and former Chancellor Angela Merkel have repeatedly called Israel's security Germany's Staatsräson, or reason of state, a vague term German leaders use to express the idea of unwavering German support for Israel.

But as Israeli attacks on Gaza intensify, and the death toll rises, that principle is coming under strain.

After the initial shock of the Hamas attacks, German mainstream media is increasingly also portraying the humanitarian suffering in Gaza, leading to a growing unease about Israel's actions.

On German streets outrage at Israel's actions is growing and pro-Palestinian demonstrations have been held most weekends since October 07. Germany has large Arab diaspora communities with links to, or sympathy for, people in Gaza. Support for Palestinians is also traditionally a totemic issue for some German left-wing groups.

There are fears that any comments about the conflict by President Erdogan during his visit could inflame tensions. But Germany and Turkey need each other. Germany is an important trade partner for Turkey. It also is home to the world's largest Turkish diaspora community and is an electoral battleground for President Erdogan. He is popular with some German-Turks.

Around three million people of Turkish heritage live in Germany, with half of them still able to vote. In May a majority of Turkish voters in Germany who took part in the election put their cross by Erdogan.

Berlin, meanwhile, needs Turkish help to control migration from the Middle East. Chancellor Scholz is hoping to revive a refugee pact with Turkey to send back asylum seekers and wants more Turkish support for the West in Russia's war in Ukraine.

Behind closed doors on Friday those issues were to be discussed. But the German government would be more nervous about what President Erdogan might say in public.

It was in May, after Erdogan's re-election as Turkish president, that Chancellor Scholz issued the invitation to Berlin. He probably now wishes he hadn't.

 

First commercial ship leaves Ukraine port since February 2022

According to Seatrade Maritime News, Joseph Schulte is the first commercial ship to leave Odessa port of Ukraine’s Black Sea ports on Wednesday, since the beginning of the war in February 2022.

The 9,400 teu Joseph Schulte, owned by German company Bernard Schulte and had been operated by MSC, which has been docked in the war-torn port of Odessa since the conflict in Ukraine began left for Turkey, ostensibly under ballast.

In July the Russians refused to renew the agreement that allowed bulk vessels to operate the grain corridor, exporting foodstuff to maintain populations in the Middle East and Africa.

In bringing that agreement to an end Russia effectively renewed its blockade of Ukraine’s Black Sea ports for commercial as well as military shipping. The departure of the Hong Kong flagged Joseph Schulte from Odessa will test Russia’s resolve to maintain that blockade.

On 13 August a Russian Navy vessel, fired warning shots across the bow of the Palau-flagged Sukru Okan, with troops boarding and searching the bulk carrier.

Nevertheless, Daniil Melnychenko, an analyst at transport consultancy Informall, based in Odessa, told Seatrade Maritime News, “The expectations are that Türkiye flagged ships that were stuck here in Ukraine since the beginning of the war will also leave the big Odessa regional ports.”

According to Melnychenko many of the bulk carriers that have been docked in southern Ukraine are Turkish flagged vessels, so the departure of the container ship has heightened expectations that others will follow.

VesselsValue reports suggest that the Joseph Schulte vessel, which MSC has confirmed is no longer in its fleet, will first call at the Luk Sintez Oil Terminal to load bunkers. It will then sail to the Turkish port of Ambarli on the north shore of the Marmara Sea, on the European side of Istanbul, to offload the few containers on board and for inspection.

Melnychenko added that the vessel will likely be crewed by a mixture of Turkish and older Ukrainian men, over 60-years-old.

Canada slaps fresh sanctions on Iran

Canada has slapped new sanctions on Iran, accusing it of destabilizing the region and backing Russia’s conflict in Ukraine, and also targeting the drone and aviation sectors of the nation.

In a statement released on Tuesday, Global Affairs Canada said seven additional individuals had been added to the federal government’s growing list of sanctions aimed against the Iranian nation. It was the 13th round of measures to be presented since October 2022.

“Today’s sanctions list 7 individuals involved in activities that gravely threaten international peace and security or that constitute gross and systemic violations of human rights in Iran,” the GAC statement read.

Ali Akbar Ahmadian, who was appointed Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council in May, is on the list. He is a former commander of the navy division of the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC).

Two representatives of the Iranian company Imen Sanat Zaman Fara, which produces equipment for the nation’s Law Enforcement Command, are also sanctioned.

Four executives of aviation companies that manufacture drones are among the other individuals targeted by new Canadian penalties.

GAC purportedly said, “The sanctions build on Canada’s efforts to press Iran to address the legitimate grievances and interests of its citizens and impose costs for its destabilizing behavior abroad.”

These people are prohibited from entering Canada and any assets they may have in the country will be frozen as a result of the penalties.

The additional sanctions, Canadian Foreign Affairs Minister Melanie Joly claimed, “Send a clear message to Iran that Canada will not tolerate any violations of human rights.”

So far, Ottawa has sanctioned 170 Iranian individuals and 192 Iranian entities, according to its federal government.

Back in July, Nasser Kanaani, the spokesman for the Iranian Foreign Ministry, said that Iran had reacted to the recent European Union sanctions against Tehran over the alleged provision of drones to Russia, underlining that it did not provide Russia with drones for use in the Ukraine war.

Kanaani also noted, “It has been officially announced many times, the allegation that Iran exported drones to Russia in order to use them against Ukraine is a baseless accusation.”

He added, “Any attempt to link the war in Ukraine to the bilateral cooperation between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Russia is an act with purely political goals.”

Referring to the clear and frequent opposition of the Islamic Republic to the war in Ukraine, Kanaani emphasized the need to speed up efforts to stop the war through diplomatic means.

“Unfortunately, the West, with political motivations and resorting to false and unproven claims, is trying to continue using the ineffective and failed policy of imposing sanctions against the Iranian nation,” he added.

Kanani stressed that Iran reserves the right to take countermeasures against the sanctions of the European Union and its members.

Additionally, he asserted that the United States and its European allies have frequently used unilateral sanctions as “an illegal tool” against the Iranian nation.

“Resorting to sanctions is illegal, is a violation of the legal rights of the Iranian nation, and is a violation of human rights,” he said.

Kanaani was referring to the sanctions that have been put in place against Iran over the years by the United States and its European allies - France, Britain, and Germany - particularly after the Trump administration unilaterally withdrew from the 2015 nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), and launched a “maximum pressure” campaign against Tehran.

“We believe that three European countries failed to honor the JCPOA obligations as much as the United States did and should be held accountable,” he added.

He stated that after breaking the terms of the deal, they continue to level false allegations against Iran and impose unjustified sanctions on the nation.

“Iran reserves the right to show a proportionate, balanced, and serious response,” he noted.

  

Germany resumes oil imports from Iran

Germany has imported a significant shipment of crude oil or petroleum products from Iran for the first time in five years, according to the latest data by Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union.

Germany imported 69,737 tons of crude oil or petroleum products from Iran in March 2023 despite the US sanctions that ban any trade of energy products with Iran, IRNA reported.

The country's last import of Iranian crude was a 10,000 tons shipment in October 2018.

Germany's move comes at a time when the US government has yet to make any changes to its unlawful sanctions policy against Iran despite its claim of seeking a diplomatic solution to ease tensions.

Bulgaria, another EU member, also imported 147 tons crude oil or petroleum products from Iran in the first quarter of the year 2023, although the figure is relatively small, according to Eurostat.

The European Union’s total oil imports from Iran during this period, based on data by Eurostat, was 69,884 tons, a figure not seen since 2018 when the US withdrew from the historic nuclear deal with Iran, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

Now after five years, European refineries seem increasingly inclined to disregard U.S. sanctions, particularly in the wake of Russia’s military campaign in Ukraine.

 

Strikes cripple German rail network and airports

Rail workers went on strike across Germany on Friday, bringing national operator Deutsche Bahn's services largely to a halt, in the latest of a series of stoppages over pay in Europe's largest economy.

The walkout, organized by the EVG union, was due to run from 0100 GMT, though the train network was expected to be impacted for the whole day.

State-owned Deutsche Bahn said all its long-distance connections would be cancelled and that few commuter trains would run.

The EVG, which is negotiating on behalf of 230,000 workers, is seeking a 12% wage increase, or at least an additional 650 euros (US$715) per month. Deutsche Bahn has offered 5% and one-off payments of up to 2,500 euros.

Germany has witnessed some of its most disruptive strikes in decades since last year, when the war in Ukraine sent energy and food prices soaring, leading to union pressure for wages to rise in line with living costs.

High inflation has also exacerbated labour problems in sectors like aviation that have faced a difficult transition following the COVID-19 pandemic.

Friday's transport strike was set to coincide with a walkout at four German airports - Duesseldorf, Hamburg, Cologne Bonn and Stuttgart - by members of the Verdi union.

A strike at the first three locations on Thursday led to around 700 departures being cancelled.

 

 

Parts of China trip more than shocking, says German Foreign Minister

German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock on Wednesday described parts of her recent trip to China as more than shocking and said Beijing was increasingly becoming a systemic rival more than a trade partner and competitor.

The blunt remarks followed Baerbock's visit to Beijing last week where she warned that any attempt by China to control Taiwan would be unacceptable.

Beijing claims democratically governed Taiwan as a Chinese province and has never ruled out the use of force to bring the island under its control.

Baerbock also said China wanted to follow its own rules at the expense of the international rules-based order. Beijing in turn asked Germany to support Taiwan's reunification and said China and Germany were not adversaries but partners.

Speaking to the German Bundestag (lower house of parliament) on Wednesday about her China trip, Baerbock said some of it was really more than shocking.

She did not elaborate on specifics, although her remark came after she said China was becoming more repressive internally as well as aggressive externally.

For Germany, she said, China is a partner, competitor and systemic rival, but her impression is now that the systemic rival aspect is increasing more and more.

China is Germany's largest trading partner, said Baerbock, but this did not mean Beijing was also Germany's most important trading partner.

The German government wants to work with China but does not want to repeat past mistakes, for example the notion of change through trade, she said, that the West can achieve political shifts in authoritarian regimes through commerce.

Baerbock also said China had a responsibility to work towards peace in the world, in particular using its influence over Russia in the war in Ukraine.

She welcomed Beijing's promise not to supply weapons to Russia, including dual use items, though added that Berlin would see how such a promise worked in practice.

In a departure from the policies of former chancellor Angela Merkel, Olaf Scholz's government is developing a new China strategy to reduce dependence on Asia's economic superpower, a vital export market for German goods.

 

 

 

Largest strike brings Germany to a standstill

Airports, bus and train stations across Germany were at a standstill on Monday morning, causing disruption for millions at the start of the working week during one of the largest walkouts in decades as Europe's biggest economy reels from inflation.

The 24-hour strikes called by the Verdi trade union and railway and transport union EVG were the latest in months of industrial action which has hit major European economies as higher food and energy prices dent living standards.

Two of Germany's largest airports, Munich and Frankfurt, suspended flights, while long-distance rail services were cancelled by rail operator Deutsche Bahn. Striking workers wearing red high-visibility jackets blew horns and whistles through an empty Munich train station.

Employees are pressing for higher wages to blunt the effects of inflation which reached 9.3% in February.

Germany, which was heavily dependent on Russia for gas before the war in Ukraine, has been particularly hard hit by higher prices as it scrambled for new energy sources, with inflation rates exceeding the euro-area average in recent months.

Persistent cost pressures have pushed central banks to a series of interest rate increases, though policymakers have said it is too early to talk of a price-wage spiral.

Verdi union is negotiating on behalf of around 2.5 million employees in the public sector, including in public transport and at airports, while railway and transport union EVG negotiates for around 230,000 employees at railway operator Deutsche Bahn and bus companies.

In the hours running up to the strike, both sides dug in their heels, with union bosses warning that considerable pay hikes were a matter of survival for thousands of workers.

"Millions of passengers who depend on buses and trains are suffering from this excessive, exaggerated strike," a Deutsche Bahn spokesperson said on Monday.

Verdi is demanding a 10.5% wage increase, which would see pay rising by at least 500 euros (US$538) per month, while EVG is asking for a 12% raise or at least 650 euros per month.

Stranded passengers expressed both sympathy and unhappiness about the strike action.

"Yes, it’s justified but I for one never went on strike in my entire life and I have been working for more than 40 years. At the same time, in France they go on strike all the time about something," said passenger Lars Boehm.

EVG chairman Martin Burkert told the Augsburger Allgemeine newspaper on Monday that employers had not yet made a viable offer and warned that further strikes were possible, including over the Easter holiday period.

Deutsche Bahn on Sunday said the strike was completely excessive, groundless and unnecessary, and employers are warning that higher wages for transport workers would result in higher fares and taxes to make up the difference.

Monday's walkouts are part of waves of disruptive labour strikes in wealthy European countries in recent months including in France and Britain, where hundreds of thousands of transport, health and education workers are pressing for higher wages.

Protests against President Emmanuel Macron's pension reforms have sparked the worst street violence in years in France.

Commerzbank Chief Economist Joerg Kraemer said the economic impact of Monday's strike was limited so far but this could change if the strikes persisted over a longer time.

"The strike will strain people's nerves," he said. "But economically, the losses are likely to be limited to the transportation industry because factories will continue to operate and many employees will be working from home."

The head of the Bundesbank Joachim Nagel said last week Germany needed to avoid a price-wage spiral.

"To be clear, preventing inflation to become persistent via the labour market requires that employees accept sensible wage gains and that firms accept sensible profit margins," he said.

"Despite signs of second-round effects, we have not observed a destabilizing price-wage spiral in Germany so far."

Biden hosts German Chancellor to solicit support in Ukraine war

US President Joe Biden on Friday hosted German Chancellor Olaf Scholz at the White House, where the two leaders tried to project a united front in support for Ukraine as it enters the second year of a war against invading Russian forces.

Scholz last visited the White House in February 2022, when Russia was amassing troops along the Ukrainian border. Friday’s visit came after a year of war and as both leaders have sought to assure the Ukrainians and other allies that their respective governments will back Ukraine for as long as it takes to end the conflict.

“I want to thank you, Olaf, for your strong and steady leadership. I mean that sincerely. It’s made a world of difference,” Biden said during an Oval Office meeting. “You stepped up to provide critical military support. And I would argue, beyond the military support, the moral support you’ve given Ukrainians has been profound.”

Scholz added that it was important for Germany and the United States to aid Ukraine and “that we give the message that we will continue to do so as long as it takes.”

That message echoed what Biden has said repeatedly during the past year, including during a trip to Kyiv last month marking the anniversary of Russia’s invasion.

The two leaders did not respond to questions from reporters in the Oval Office, and they were not scheduled to hold a joint press conference that has typically accompanied foreign leader visits to the White House.

But continued support for Ukraine was likely to be at the top of the agenda for Biden and Scholz. The US and Germany, along with other Group of Seven allies, have for the past year attempted to coordinate on imposing sanctions against Russia to squeeze the Kremlin’s war effort, as well as military and economic assistance for Ukraine.

Biden and Scholz were initially not on the same page earlier this year over whether to send tanks to Ukraine, with Germany reluctant to Leopard tanks unless the US agreed to send Abrams tanks. Both countries eventually came to an agreement to provide the armored vehicles to Ukraine.

As the war enters its second year, maintaining support will be a major test for both leaders, and the US has warned that China is considering providing support to Russia in its war effort, though it has not yet done so.

Polls have shown softening support among Americans for providing additional aid to Ukraine, and US officials have deferred to Ukrainians to map out what they would accept for terms of ending the war. 

Half of respondents in a late February poll from Fox News said America should continue to back Ukraine through the end of the war, while another 46% said there should be a limited timeframe on US support.

 

World powers oppose Israeli settlement authorization

Foreign ministers of four European countries and Canada joined Washington on Tuesday in opposing a decision by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government to authorize nine Jewish settler outposts in the occupied West Bank.

The foreign ministers of Britain, France, Germany, Italy and the United States issued a joint statement voicing concern over the plans announced by Israel on Sunday.

"We strongly oppose unilateral actions which will only serve to exacerbate tensions between Israelis and Palestinians and undermine efforts to achieve a negotiated two-state solution," they said.

Later, Canadian Foreign Minister Melanie Joly said Ottawa also strongly opposed the expansion of settlements and added that such unilateral actions jeopardize efforts to achieve comprehensive, just and lasting peace.

On Sunday, Israel granted retroactive authorization to nine settler outposts in the West Bank and announced mass construction of new homes in established settlements, prompting US Secretary of State Antony Blinken to say he was deeply troubled.

Israel's foreign ministry had no immediate comment but Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, from the hardliner religious nationalist bloc in Netanyahu's government, said he wanted to go further.

"This is our mission. This is our doctrine," Ben-Gvir said. "Nine settlements are nice but it's still not enough. We want much more," he said in a video message.

Most world powers view as illegal the settlements Israel has built on land it captured in a 1967 war with Arab powers.

Israel disputes that and cites biblical, historical and political links to the West Bank, as well as security interests.

Since the 1967 war, it has established 132 settlements on land Palestinians see as the core of a future state, according to the Peace Now watchdog group.

Besides the authorized settlements, groups of settlers have built scores of outposts without government permission. Some have been razed by police, others authorized retroactively. The nine granted approval on Sunday is the first for this Netanyahu government.

Hussein al-Sheikh, a senior Palestinian official, welcomed the joint statement but added, "We demand that words be turned to deeds."

With tensions in the West Bank already high, the move has alarmed world powers which fear an even greater escalation of violence. Israeli forces have conducted near daily raids in the West Bank, pursuing a crackdown begun last year in the wake of a spate of deadly Palestinian attacks.

This year more than 40 Palestinians, including both militant fighters and civilians, have been killed by Israeli forces. At the same time, 10 people have been killed in Israel in two attacks by Palestinians.

 

Ukraine: Fighter jets to follow tanks

Ukraine’s breakthrough in securing heavy tanks from the United States and Germany has paved way for talks about sending the US F-16 fighter jets to Ukraine to defend its airspace.

The government of Ukraine quickly renewed its calls for world-class fighter jets after it secured the victory on tanks, arguing it needed the help to defend itself against Russia.

Shortly after the US announcement on tanks, Yuriy Sak, an adviser to Ukraine’s defense secretary, told The Hill that Kyiv would do everything possible to secure the fighter jets.

And Dymytro Kuleba, Ukraine’s minister of foreign affairs, tweeted Wednesday morning that Ukraine has new tasks ahead, naming western fighter jets as one of them.

ArmyINFORM, an information agency for Ukraine’s ministry of defense, also published an article Wednesday suggesting that Ukrainian pilots are already training in the US, but there has been no public announcement on such a program.

Asked to comment on the possibility of fighter jets going to Ukraine, National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby  on Wednesday said he had no news to share.

“Can’t blame the Ukrainians for wanting more and more systems,” Kirby said. “It’s not the first time they’ve talked about fighter jets, but I don’t have any announcements to make on that front.”

Kyiv operates a fleet of aging Soviet aircraft and has requested western, modern fighter jets since the onset of the war — but so far it has remained out of the nation’s grasp.

Supplying jets would be another escalation in terms of US support for Ukraine, and the Biden administration has been careful in offering support that might intensify the conflict with Russia — particularly with the fear of nuclear weapons hovering over the war.

Yet the supplying of jets seems much less unlikely after the Biden administration made a major u-turn by agreeing to send 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine. The administration did so to convince Germany to send Leopard tanks to Ukraine. Germany also gave its blessing for other allies to send the German-made Leopards to Kyiv.

Germany has expressed opposition to sending fighter jets to Ukraine.

“There will be no fighter jet deliveries to Ukraine. This was made clear very early, including from the US President,” Germany Chancelor Olaf Scholz said in remarks to his country’s parliament after the tanks decision. “This position has not changed at all and will not change.”

Despite such remarks, a number of experts think the supplying of jets to Ukraine by the U.S. is now likely to happen.

Ukraine has slowly secured more and more advanced weaponry from the US and European allies, and they say American-made F-16s will probably follow that same course.

Tomasz Blusiewicz, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution, said most of the concerns over sending the jets are probably over logistical questions, such as training and getting the aircraft and related systems delivered.

“I think it’s now really more down to the nitty-gritty, logistical servicing and delivery and training,” he said.

The fighter jets would make a huge difference in the skies over Ukraine in combat against Russian fighter jets, which are much more outdated than western aircraft.

Both Ukraine and Russia are currently using MiG-29 fighter jets and various different models of the Sukhois aircraft, which are extremely inferior to advanced western technology.

Those advocating for sending western aircraft to Ukraine also say the US public would accept it as a means to defend Ukrainian skies and protect civilians from Russia’s relentless bombardments.

Blusiewicz explained the fighter jets, which he described as “Guardians,” would be “even more of a game-changer” for Ukraine than the battle tanks.

“In terms of air superiority, western tech … is light years away,” he said. “And for Ukrainian civilians, it now becomes more realistic to make sure these drones and rockets don’t fall on them.”

The US-made F-15s and F-16s are the cream of the crop, but other advanced fighters such as the Eurofighter Typhoon, Swedish Gripens and French-made Dassault Rafale would all be decisive on the battlefield.

US lawmakers, most of whom have prodded the Biden administration to support more and more advanced weaponry for Kyiv, also appear to show early signs of supporting this next push for the fighter jets.

A statement released by Democratic, Richard Blumenthal, Sheldon Whitehouse, as well as Republican Lindsey Graham on Wednesday applauded the Biden administration for sending tanks to Ukraine but quickly pivoted to a push for fighter jets and long-range artillery systems.

“The combination of tanks, fighter aircraft, and ATACMS will help Ukraine confront the upcoming Russian offensive and go on offense in both the east and the south in an attempt to further erode Russia’s capability to continue fighting in Ukraine,” the statement read. “Let’s give the Ukrainians everything they need to win — now.”

Most of the concerns around supplying advanced weaponry before — from the HIMARS rocket launchers to the western battle tanks — revolved around escalating tensions with Russia. 

But an increasing number of voices say that after the tanks, the F-16s are not likely to be seen as more of an escalation. 

Asli Aydintasbas, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institute, told The Hill that Russia “defines everything as an escalation.” 

“In reality I think there are some guardrails that have been established between the United States and Russia and there is a tacit understanding not to cross the lines,” she said.

At the same time, Adyintasbas said the US still probably won’t supply the F-16s anytime soon.

“We know the reason why,” she added, “Escalation management.”

 

Biden to send 31 Abrams tanks to Ukraine

Finally, US President Joe Biden has agreed to send 31 M1 Abrams tanks to Ukraine, matching a German announcement to immediately provide Leopard tanks that Kyiv says are essential in their fight against Russia.

It must be kept in mind that the Abrams tanks are not expected to reach the battlefield for months related to the time needed to procure the tanks and carry out the training necessary for Ukrainian forces, senior administration officials told reporters Wednesday.

The decision to provide the Abrams tanks marks a stunning reversal for the Biden administration, which had previously argued they would be of little benefit to Ukraine.

But the decision to send the tanks helped get Germany to move forward with a separate effort to provide Leopard tanks to Ukraine, which the US had seen as benefitting Kyiv.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced Wednesday that Berlin would send Leopard tanks to Ukraine and allow for other European nations to also send to Kyiv the German-made tanks.

“Today’s announcement really was the product of good diplomatic conversations as part of our regular and ongoing close consultations with allies and partners on security assistance to Ukraine,” a senior administration official said, “Certainly very appreciative of Chancellor Scholz’s announcement today.”

Ukraine lobbied hard for US, Germany and other countries to supply the tanks, which it said would be critical to a spring counteroffensive against Moscow.

“So the tank coalition is formed. Everyone who doubted this could ever happen sees now, for Ukraine and partners impossible is nothing,” Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dymtro Kuleba tweeted.

A senior administration official, responding to a question over whether the delivery of Abrams was a precondition for the Germans to greenlight Leopards, said Biden and Sholz spoke several times by phone over the past month and that the tank discussion was part of an “iterative conversation” between the US and Germany.

“We have closely coordinated our security assistance with allies and partners throughout the conflict, including Germany,” the official said.

Biden spoke Wednesday morning with Sholz, French President Emanuel Macron and British Prime Minister Rishi Sumak, officials said.

A senior administration official said the US expects other nations to announce contributions of additional armored capability, including some that will be readily available for use on the battlefield in the coming weeks and months. 

The administration expects that Russian President Vladimir Putin will push for the Russian military to go on another offensive as the weather improves, another senior administration official said. The tanks decision is meant to help give the Ukrainians the the ability to retake, to reclaim their sovereign territory and that means everything that is recognized by international borders.

The British Ministry of Defense said in a recent intelligence assessment that Ukraine has liberated around 54% of the maximum amount of extra territory Russia seized since it launched its full-scale invasion on February 24, 2022.

Russia still controls around 18% of internationally recognized areas of Ukraine, including the eastern region of Ukraine, called the Donbas, and the Crimean peninsula, which Moscow seized in 2014. Their annexations have been rejected by the US and other international partners. 

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has said the full liberation of Ukrainian territory, and in particular Crimea, is necessary for any peace talks with Russia. 

The Biden administration has been careful in offering military support to Ukraine, wary of Putin threats to use nuclear weapons.

Russian ambassador to Germany, Sergei Nechaev, reportedly said in a statement Wednesday that Germany’s decision to approve the delivery of Leopards is extremely dangerous and takes the conflict to a new level of confrontation. 

Western support of advanced military capabilities is viewed as essential for Ukrainians to mount a counter offensive that could threaten Russia’s holding of the Crimean peninsula.

The senior administration official, responding to a question of whether the administration supports Ukraine retaking territory in the Donbas and Crimea, said that the US does not tell the Ukrainians where to strike, where to attack, where to conduct offensive operations.

“Crimea is Ukraine. We’ve never recognized the illegal annexation of Crimea,” the official continued. “But where the Ukrainians decide to go and how they decide to conduct operations in their country, those are their decisions to make.” 

It is expected to take months before the Abrams reach the battlefield. Training of Ukrainian forces for operating and maintaining the tanks is expected to take place outside of Ukraine, the officials said. 

A senior administration official described the coordination on tanks for Ukraine as an impressive display of unity nearly a year into the conflict, underscoring Biden’s focus on coordination with allies and partners. 

“The President has been extremely focused on the importance of alliance-unity, of Trans-Atlantic unity, and we have tried to make that a hallmark of everything that we have done for Ukraine throughout the 11 months of this conflict.”

German caution on Ukraine arms rooted in political culture

Germany became one of Ukraine’s leading weapons suppliers in the 11 months since Russia’s invasion, but Chancellor Olaf Scholz also gained a reputation for hesitating to take each new step — generating impatience among allies.

Berlin’s perceived foot-dragging, most recently on the Leopard 2 battle tanks that Kyiv has long sought, is rooted at least partly in a post-World War II political culture of military caution, along with present-day worries about a possible escalation in the war.

On Friday, Germany inched closer to a decision to deliver the tanks, ordering a review of its Leopard stocks in preparation for a possible green light.

There was still no commitment, Defense Minister Boris Pistorius rejected the suggestion that Germany was standing in the way and said, “We have to balance all the pros and contras before we decide things like that, just like that.”

It’s a pattern that has been repeated over the months as Scholz first held off pledging new, heavier equipment, then eventually agreed to do so.

Most recently, Germany said in early January that it would send 40 Marder armored personnel carriers to Ukraine — doing so in a joint announcement with the US, which pledged 50 Bradley armored vehicles.

That decision followed months of calls for Berlin to send the Marder and stoked pressure for it to move up another step to the Leopard tank.

“There is a discrepancy between the actual size of the commitment and weapons deliveries — it’s the second-largest European supplier — and the hesitancy with which it is done,” said Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff, a Berlin-based senior analyst with the German Marshall Fund of the United States think tank.

Scholz, an unshakably self-confident politician with a stubborn streak and little taste for bowing to public calls for action, has stuck resolutely to his approach. He has said that Germany won’t go it alone on weapons decisions and pointed to the need to avoid NATO becoming a direct party to the war with Russia.

As pressure mounted last week, he declared that he wouldn’t be rushed into important security decisions by excited comments. And he insisted that a majority in Germany supports his government’s calm, well-considered and careful decision-making.

Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on Wednesday, Scholz listed some of the equipment Germany has sent to Ukraine, declaring that it marks a profound turning point in German foreign and security policy.

That is, at least to some extent, true. Germany refused to provide lethal weapons before the invasion started, reflecting a political culture rooted in part in the memory of Germany’s own history of aggression during the 20th century — including the Nazi invasion of the Soviet Union.

“No German chancellor, of no party, wants to be seen out front in pushing a military agenda — you want to try all other options before you resort to that,” Kleine-Brockhoff said. “And therefore for domestic consumption, it is seen as a positive thing for a German chancellor not to lead on this, to be cautious, to be resistant, and to have tried all other options.”

Scholz does face calls from Germany’s center-right opposition and some in his three-party governing coalition to be more proactive on military aid; less so from his own center-left Social Democratic Party, which for decades was steeped in the legacy of Cold War rapprochement pursued by predecessor Willy Brandt in the early 1970s.

“Scholz decided early on that he does not want to lead militarily on Ukraine assistance,” Kleine-Brockhoff said, though “he wants to be a good ally and part of the alliance and in the middle of the pack.”

But the cautious approach drives allies crazy and raises questions over whether they can count on the Germans, Kleine-Brockhoff acknowledged.

Berlin kept up its caution on the Leopard tank even after Britain announced last week that it would provide Ukraine its own Challenger 2 tanks.

The hesitancy isn’t just an issue between Berlin and Kyiv, since other countries would need Germany’s permission to send their own stocks of German-made Leopards to Ukraine. On Wednesday, Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said Warsaw would consider giving its tanks even without Berlin’s permission.

“Consent is of secondary importance here. We will either obtain it quickly, or we will do the right thing ourselves,” Morawiecki said.

British historian Timothy Garton Ash wrote in The Guardian and other newspapers this week that to its credit, the German government’s position on military support for Ukraine has moved a very long way since the eve of the Russian invasion.

But he argued that the tank issue has become a litmus test of Germany’s courage to resist (Russian President Vladimir) Putin’s nuclear blackmail, overcome its own domestic cocktail of fears and doubts, and defend a free and sovereign Ukraine, and that Scholz should lead a European Leopard plan.

Whether that will eventually happen remains to be seen. Scholz’s government has insisted on close coordination with the United States, a possible reflection in part of the fact that Germany — unlike Britain and France — relies on the US nuclear deterrent.

On Friday, Scholz’s spokesman, Steffen Hebestreit, denied reports that Germany had insisted it would only deliver Leopard tanks if the US sends its own Abrams tanks. He rejected the notion that Berlin is trailing others and insisted it is taking the right approach.

“These are not easy decisions, and they need to be well-weighed,” he said. “And this is about them being sustainable, that all can go along with them and stand behind them — and part of a leadership performance is keeping an alliance together.”

 

US decides against sending tanks to Ukraine

A push to provide battle tanks to Ukraine is stalled after US officials this week expressed reluctance over difficulties in maintenance and training for the advanced tracked vehicle.

The US decision effectively prevents Ukraine getting tanks from other NATO allies as well, as Germany this week made clear it would only allow other countries to send German-made tanks if the US commits its own M1 Abrams tank first.

Ukraine has repeatedly asked for Western tanks to help in its fight with Russia, a topic that was front and center this week at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, and will again be in the spotlight at a gathering of top defense ministers for a Ukraine Contact Group meeting on Friday. 

German officials have been mulling allowing Ukraine to have its Leopard 2 tanks, with speculation that the US and Germany may announce a deal on Friday to finally grant Kyiv’s wish for heavy tanks. 

But the United States believes it just doesn’t make sense for Washington to send over the Army’s main battle tank now, Sabrina Singh, deputy Pentagon press secretary, told reporters Thursday. 

“It’s more of a sustainment issue,” Singh said. “This is a tank that requires jet fuel. . . .. The maintenance and the high cost that it would take to maintain an Abrams, it just doesn’t make sense to provide that to the Ukrainians at this moment.” 

Months of pressure on the United States and Germany to hand over battle tanks appeared to make headway this week with the new appointment of German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius as well as discussions on tanks at Davos and high-level NATO meetings in Brussels.  

Also viewed as positive momentum was the US, French and German commitment earlier this month to provide Bradleys, AMX-10 RCs and Marder fighting vehicles, respectively, the first time the countries have done so. 

But former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine John Herbst — who on Monday said it appeared that a deal to allow tank exports to Ukraine had been worked out between Washington and Berlin — told The Hill Wednesday that it appears a wrench had been thrown into the process. 

“There’s a game that’s been going on involving Berlin and the White House for months, which is the Germans would say ‘we’re not going to send any Leopards until the Americans sends Abrams.’ … The Americans say, ‘yes, we have no objection to Germany sending Leopards, we’re not gonna send Abrams.’ And then both countries get to avoid sending something they consider provocative to the Kremlin,” said Herbst, now a senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center. 

While the West hasn’t completely closed the door on committing tanks to Ukraine — with the United Kingdom last week announcing that it will send the nation 14 Challenger 2s — reluctance reigns on shipping other heavy tanks to Kyiv.  

Some experts agree the Abrams isn’t a prudent addition to Ukraine’s war effort at the moment due to the sheer amount of effort it would take to run it, said Jeffrey Pryce, a former Defense Department special counsel now at the Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies. 

“The Abrams is a majestic tank, but it comes with corresponding logistical and maintenance burdens,” Pryce told The Hill. “What we’ve focused on is providing Ukrainians with capabilities that they can effectively use in the short term, and the Abrams doesn’t seem to be in that sweet spot.” 

He also disagreed with assertions that the U.S. was shying away from the system due to fears of escalating the conflict, pointing to Washington’s commitment to send such high-tech systems as the Patriot missile defense system and Bradley Fighting Vehicles. 

“I think it’s just a judgment as to what’s most helpful, what they can most efficiently absorb and effectively use in combat in the middle of a war,” he said. 

Late Thursday the United States announced a major US$2.5 billion weapons package for Kyiv, to include 90 Stryker armored combat vehicles but no Abrams tanks. The military aid was announced ahead of a gathering of the Ukraine Contact Group at Ramstein Air Base in Germany, to be attended by Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Mark Milley and about 50 other top defense officials from NATO as they look to coordinate future lethal assistance to Kyiv.  

Leaders of Ukraine’s military, which until now have used Soviet-era tanks on the battlefield, insist more modern tanks are needed, and soon, as Russia appears to gear up for a renewed spring offensive. 

“There is no rational reason why Ukraine has not yet been supplied with Western tanks,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said earlier this month.  

On Thursday, Zelensky reupped the request, saying that the need for Western tanks is still a “pressing and very sensitive” issue for Ukraine. 

Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Tuesday that he expected further announcements on military deliveries to Ukraine to come out of Ramstein but would not comment on whether Washington is pushing Berlin to give the green light for Leopard tanks for Kyiv. 

“On the question of, of tanks, and for that matter, any weapons system, these are sovereign decisions for each country to make,” Blinken said. 

On Thursday, Singh echoed that message, noting that Leopards are easier to fuel and maintain. 

“Ultimately this is Germany’s decision. It’s their sovereign decision on what security assistance they will provide. So we won’t be able to speak to them, but I think that we are certainly doing what we can to support Ukraine in what they need,” she said. 

“We’re continuing to work with other partners and allies around the world to see what else can be provided to Ukraine, and that’s the whole point of tomorrow’s meeting,” Singh added. 

While the Biden administration has offered little detail of its conversations with Germany, the German side has been clear about wanting the US to make the first move on heavy tanks, a message delivered by German chancellor Olaf Scholz in a call with President Biden and in-person to an American congressional delegation in Davos. 

Finland, Poland and the Baltic states all possess Leopard 2s in their own stocks and have publicly endorsed shipping the vehicle to Ukraine, but need Germany’s permission to do so due to German components within the tanks.  

The impasse has angered a number of American lawmakers, including Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who on Wednesday tweeted for the two sides to “stop bickering.”

“This impasse needs to come to an end. The tanks need to go to Ukraine from BOTH countries as soon as possible.  The future of Europe and a rules-based world is at stake,” Graham wrote. 

And Senate Foreign Relations Committee ranking member Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho) on Thursday called for Germany to immediately allow Poland and Finland to contribute Leopards.  

The latest public statements from Berlin and Washington suggest Ukraine may have to keep waiting; however. All involved will be keeping a close eye on the meetings at Ramstein on Friday. 

 

“There’s a decision that’s going to have to be made and we’ll see if there’s an agreement at Ramstein,” Pryce said. 

EU Countries Lambast Gas Price Cap Proposal

European Union Energy Ministers locked horns on Thursday over a proposed gas price cap at 275 euros per megawatt hour (MWh), grappling over its effectiveness at that level and the impact on supplies and incentives to cut consumption.

The long-standing disagreements were holding up other policies to alleviate the acute energy crisis, such as the launch of joint EU gas purchases and a quicker permit process for renewables.

Diplomats said the 27 EU countries agreed on these two in principle but delayed formal approval until another meeting called for December 13, 2022 with proponents of a cap demanding a green light for all three proposals or none at all.

Polish Climate Minister Anna Moskwa called the 275 euro blueprint put forward by the European Commission a joke.

Belgium's Energy Minister Tinne Van der Straeten also chimed in, telling reporters, "The text that is on the table is unsatisfactory ... it doesn't clearly say if it will have an effect on prices."

Their Greek counterpart, Konstantinos Skrekas said a cap of 150-200 euros/MWh would be realistic.

"It could help us reduce gas prices and therefore reduce electricity prices, which is a major challenge in Europe this winter," he said.

Malta was also unhappy with the proposed ceiling. Energy minister Miriam Dalli said the strict conditions needed for the mechanism to kick in made it "next to impossible".

As many as 15 EU states want a set limit to contain energy costs after gas prices soared to record highs in August 2022, driven up by Russia cutting supplies to Europe in the wake of Western sanctions over Moscow's war against Ukraine.

But stiff opposition comes from a smaller but powerful camp led by Germany, the EU's biggest economy. Together with the Netherlands, Sweden, Austria and Finland, they say a cap could shift supply elsewhere and cut incentives to lower consumption.

The Commission proposed to limit the front-month price on the Netherlands' Title Transfer Facility (TTF) gas exchange if it exceeds 275 euros/MWh for two weeks and if the price is more than 58 euros higher from a liquefied natural gas (LNG) global reference for 10 consecutive trading days.

Dutch minister Rob Jetten was highly critical of the plan.

"The proposal is flawed," he said. "There is a lot of risk for damaging the energy security of supply, and also for stability of the financial markets."

German state secretary for climate, Sven Giegold, added, "We still have a lot of work to do."

The Estonian minister was the only one to say the plan was OK, pretty much as a temporary measure and only to address extreme price increases rather than a permanent solution.

The EU has approved a series of measures to mitigate the crisis in recent months, ranging from consumption savings to windfall taxes to claw back profits from energy producers. But the issue of whether and how to cap gas prices has split the bloc.

Ukraine's energy minister was also due to dial in, according to an EU diplomat, to discuss support for his country where the Russian war destroyed civilian infrastructure and incapacitated power and heating systems as winter cold sets in.

 

 

Is US behind Nord Stream gas pipeline blasts?

Since the outbreak of the Ukraine war and many years before the conflict even erupted, the signs were clear. The United States was and continues to wage economic war against Russia and all other countries, such as China and Iran that pursue independent foreign and economic policies. 

On Russia, Congress loathed the idea of Moscow sending 40% of Europe's gas supplies mostly through the Nord Stream 1 pipeline. Over the years, the US imposed so much diplomatic pressure on Europe to abandon the implementation of another pipeline: Nord Stream 2. 

It was supposed to be a major energy project in Europe, perhaps the biggest but also of major concern in Washington, where officials tried their best at scaremongering their counterparts in Europe.

Nord Stream 2 is designed by Russian energy giant Gazprom and the aim of the new pipeline was to double the amount of gas flowing from Russia straight to Germany.

The concern in Washington was the US sitting on an excess amount of gas supply from the shale gas boom but unlike Russia, there were little buyers.

The US has been eager to export the surplus to Europe on tankers in the form of liquefied natural gas (LNG) and essentially replace Russian supplies. 

What stood in the way of the LNG companies was Nord Stream 2, which all but ended the European Union's interest in building the more expensive LNG gas terminals that are needed to import American gas. The logistics of the whole operation did not make sense when there was a much cheaper option from Russia. 

As the momentum for Nord Stream 2 was gaining speed, former US President Donald Trump, in his last year in office, signed into law sanctions from the US Congress against companies involved in the construction of the new gas pipeline between Russia and Germany. 

However, many said at that time the sanctions came too late and would do little to end the project’s completion. Too much money had already been spent on Nord Stream 2, something to the tune of US$11 billion.

The layout of the new pipeline followed the route of the existing Nord Stream 1 pipeline under the Baltic Sea. While the Russian gas would serve most of Europe's energy needs the main countries involved, Russia and Germany, accused the US of using energy security concerns as a smokescreen for its own economic interests. 

Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel even condemned the American sanctions, with then Foreign Minister Heiko Maas saying they amounted to "interference in autonomous decisions taken in Europe. European energy policy is being decided in Europe, not in the US” he said. An EU spokesperson said the 27-nation bloc “opposes the imposition of sanctions against EU companies conducting legitimate business”.

To the huge frustration of the American Congress, Moscow and Brussels brushed aside the sanctions and it was obvious that the pipeline was almost complete. Denmark gave the final approval needed for the project. The company constructing Nord Stream 2 said it was putting the final touches with over 2,000 kilometers already laid at the bottom of the Baltic Sea. The pipeline was expected to start pumping gas earlier this year.

NATO's eastward military buildup toward Russian borders was met with the following threat by US President Joe Biden: "If Russia invades (Ukraine), then there will be longer Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it.” Before adding "I promise you we will be able to do it."

Moscow says the NATO military buildup on Russian borders, the abandonment of the Minsk agreement and Washington’s refusal to answer Russian security guarantees forced it to conduct what the Kremlin describes as a “special military operation” in Ukraine.

Three unexplained gas leaks, preceded by two explosions, occurred on the Baltic Sea’s Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines last Monday. Did the US force Russia into military action to exchange Russian gas to the EU with US gas in the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic that battered the American economy?

In the aftermath of the Ukraine conflict, the US offered a quick commitment to deliver its own LNG to the EU telling Brussels this is a big step towards making Europe less dependent on Russian gas.

EU Commission Head Ursula von der Leyen said, "We aim to reduce this dependency on Russian fossil fuels and get rid of it. This can only be achieved through... additional gas supplies, including LNG deliveries."

"The US commitment to provide the European Union with additional at least 15 billion cubic meters of LNG this year is a big step in this direction because this will replace the LNG supply we currently receive from Russia."

The United States has committed to providing the EU with an additional 15 billion cubic meters (bcm) of LNG this year, with both sides aiming to ramp up deliveries to 50 bcm per year over time.

"Looking ahead, the United States and Europe will ensure stable demand and supply for additional at least 50 billion cubic meters of US-LNG until 2030," Von der Leyen said, adding this would replace one-third of Russian gas supplies to the EU today.

"We need to secure our supplies not just for next winter but also for the years ahead", she added. "Our partnership aims to sustain us through this war."

The timing of the leaks and explosions has raised many eyebrows. It occurs just as Europe is getting restless with skyrocketing energy bills that are making voters topple one government after the other. While Nord Stream 1 was filled with gas when the explosions occurred, it was not pumping to Europe as a result of Western sanctions that had led to technical issues.

However, such is the severity of the European energy crisis. The sanctions could have been lifted on the pipeline, the maintenance issues resolved and the energy flows resumed. Not just Nord Stream 1 but gas could have been delivered through Nord Stream 2 as well to get to Europe by the winter.

Russia has said that the ruptures appear to be the result of state-sponsored "terrorism".

Russian President Vladimir Putin has accused the West of organizing the blasts that led to numerous gas leaks.

“Sanctions are not enough for the West. They have switched to sabotage. Unbelievable, but it is a fact!” Putin said during a televised speech.

“By organizing explosions on the Nord Stream international gas pipelines that run along the bottom of the Baltic Sea, they actually started destroying European energy infrastructure,” Putin said. “It is clear to everyone who benefits from this,” he added.

The Kremlin says the incidents on two major undersea gas pipelines from Russia to Germany look like acts of state-sponsored "terrorism".

"This looks like an act of terrorism, possibly on a state level," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters.

"It is very difficult to imagine that such an act of a terrorism could have happened without the involvement of a state of some kind, this is a very dangerous situation which requires an urgent investigation," Peskov said.

There have been many protests against energy price hikes across Europe which has put pressure on governments to return Russian energy. The German chancellor visited Persian Arab Gulf countries to try to secure energy supplies.

The Russian Foreign Ministry says US President Joe Biden is “obliged” to answer if Washington is behind the gas leaks. “On February 7, 2022, Joe Biden said that Nord Stream would be finished if Russia invaded Ukraine,” foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said on social media, posting a video of Biden saying “we will bring an end” to Nord Stream 2 if Russian tanks cross Ukraine’s border.

“Biden is obliged to answer the question of whether the US carried out its threat,” Zakharova added.

“A statement of intent was backed by a promise. We must be responsible for our words... Europe must know the truth,” Zakharova added.

The ministry says the ruptures to the pipelines occurred in territory that is "fully under the control" of US intelligence agencies.