This Friday, after two years of silence, Olaf Scholz resumed contact with Vladimir Putin to ask him to show his willingness to negotiate “a just and lasting peace” in Ukraine. Scholz at the same time asked the Russian president to put an end to the war and reiterated that Germany will support the invaded country “as much as is necessary” in the face of Russian aggression.
This was the first conversation between the German Chancellor and the Russian President since the end of 2022. The two spoke for about an hour.
The moment is significant, a few days after the election of Donald Trump to the White House and at the threshold of the electoral campaign for the early German elections. Western capitals are observing with concern the “globalization” of the conflict with the participation of North Korean troops alongside Russian forces.
After the conversation Scholz said: “I asked [a Putin] end Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine and withdraw its troops. “Russia must show its willingness to negotiate with Ukraine, with the aim of achieving a just and lasting peace.”
Much has changed since then. The war continues and doubts have calmed in EU capitals and Washington. Trump’s election victory could mean withdrawing or reducing US aid to Ukraine. It is not clear whether the Europeans can or want to take on the protection of the attacked country without the United States.
Scholz’s Germany is the second country, after the United States, to allocate the most aid to Ukraine in absolute terms. But the chancellor faces tough legislative elections on February 23 in a country where supporters of reviving ties with Russia are gaining strength at the polls and where war could be an election issue.
“Ukraine can count on our country and our solidarity,” Scholz said in a speech to the Bundestag, the federal parliament, on Wednesday. But he added: “I don’t want to hide that, in my opinion, it is important in the coming times to do everything possible so that there is no escalation in this war and so that we do not become a bellicose party.”
Scholz seeks a difficult balance. He is aware of the pacifism and affinity with Russia of a part of German society and of his own party, the Social Democrats. At the same time, it was he who decreed, after the Russian invasion of 2022, a change of era in German politics to address the Russian threat to Europe and his country with increased military spending and an end to energy dependence on Moscow.
The chancellor does not want to appear as a warmonger willing to do anything to defeat Russia, but he is not a pacifist or equidistant between the West and Russia, but an Atlanticist and pro-European in the tradition of modern Germany. He therefore calls, on the one hand, to ease the rigid debt limit to increase aid to Ukraine: this was one of the triggers for the breakdown of the governing coalition last week. And, on the other hand, it opposes NATO officially inviting Ukraine to join and rejects sending German cruise missiles and the use of German weapons to attack Russian territory.
“The country in Europe that does the most to not leave Ukraine alone and to ensure that it receives support,” Scholz said, referring to Germany, “is also a country that must ensure that this escalation does not happen.”
During the phone call with Putin, Scholz warned him that sending North Korean soldiers to Russia implies “a serious escalation and widening of the conflict”, according to German government sources. The chancellor insisted that Germany’s support for Ukraine is long-term and that the Russian president is wrong if he believes ”time is on his side,” according to these sources.
Scholz reported the phone call before and after to his Western partners and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. The chancellor agreed with Putin that they will remain in contact.
What factors are influencing Germany’s changing stance towards Russia in the context of the Ukraine conflict?
Title: Navigating a Complex Landscape: An Interview with Dr. Elena Kovalev, Political Analyst
Time.news Editor (TNE): Thank you for joining us today, Dr. Kovalev. We’ve just seen a significant development with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz resuming contact with Russian President Vladimir Putin after two years. What do you think prompted this conversation at this particular moment?
Dr. Elena Kovalev (EK): Thank you for having me. Scholz’s decision to reach out to Putin appears to be driven by multiple factors. One key element is the increasing anxiety in Western capitals about the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and the recent geopolitical shifts, particularly in light of Donald Trump’s election. As concerns about a potential reduction in U.S. aid to Ukraine grow, Scholz likely felt the need to re-engage with Russia to push for peace negotiations.
TNE: Indeed, the geopolitical landscape has shifted dramatically. Scholz emphasized the need for “a just and lasting peace.” What do you see as the main obstacles to achieving that?
EK: The primary obstacle remains the fundamental disparity in objectives between Ukraine and Russia. While Ukraine, supported by Germany and other Western nations, is seeking to restore its sovereignty and territorial integrity, Russia’s demands seem more about exerting influence and control over the region. Additionally, the inclusion of North Korean troops alongside Russian forces complicates the conflict further, indicating a broader alignment between Moscow and Pyongyang that threatens regional stability.
TNE: How does Scholz’s internal political landscape affect Germany’s stance on Ukraine? With impending elections and a growing pro-Russian sentiment, what do you foresee?
EK: Scholz faces a delicate balancing act. On one hand, his government has committed substantial aid to Ukraine; on the other hand, there is a significant segment of the German populace—particularly among his own party, the Social Democrats—that favors renewed relations with Russia. If public sentiment shifts further toward pacifism or isolationism, this could limit Scholz’s ability to sustain Germany’s current level of support for Ukraine, especially if he is pressured ahead of the February elections.
TNE: Your observation about public sentiment is intriguing. Scholz mentioned in the Bundestag about avoiding escalation and not wanting Germany to become a “bellicose party.” How can he achieve this while still supporting Ukraine?
EK: Scholz may need to emphasize a diplomatic approach while continuing to provide defense and humanitarian support to Ukraine. By advocating for negotiations with a clear stance on Germany’s values—supporting democracy and territorial integrity—he can appeal to a broader base. It’s essential for him to frame this support as part of a collective European security strategy, which might resonate better with the electorate and reduce fears of escalation.
TNE: The dynamics with the U.S. and other allies also contribute to this scenario. If Trump were to decrease American involvement, what would be Germany’s potential response?
EK: If the U.S. were to reduce its support, Germany would likely be pressed to step up in leading European efforts. This could entail rallying fellow EU members to strengthen collective sanctions against Russia while also exploring alternative military and humanitarian support avenues for Ukraine. However, it’s crucial for Germany to maintain strong communication and unity with its allies to avoid any perception of unilateral actions that could further complicate the situation.
TNE: As we look forward, what’s your perspective on the future of the conflict and Europe’s role in it?
EK: The conflict remains deeply interconnected with broader geopolitical tensions. While peace is a desirable outcome, achieving it will require robust negotiations and a willingness from both parties to make concessions, which does not seem imminent. Europe, particularly Germany, must play a pivotal role, not just in supporting Ukraine but in fostering dialogue and unity among allies. Ultimately, the ability to maintain a cohesive front will be critical in navigating these tumultuous waters.
TNE: Thank you, Dr. Kovalev, for your insightful analysis. The path ahead is undoubtedly complex, but understanding these dynamics is crucial for all of us.
EK: Thank you for the opportunity to discuss these vital issues. It’s indeed an intricate landscape, and I appreciate the chance to share my views.