2024-07-14 21:09:48
The Hanseatic City of Hamburg is supporting Ukraine by providing mine clearance vehicles. However, the export of these vehicles apparently violated the War Weapons Control Act.
The danger lurks in secret, in the forest, in fields and on the roads: a third of the area of Ukraine is now said to be covered with Russian landmines. In order to clear them of these, the Hanseatic City of Hamburg, in the person of Hamburg’s Interior Senator Andy Grote (SPD), recently handed over mine clearance vehicles to the Ukrainian ambassador to Germany, Oleksii Makeiev, a few weeks ago.
But what was well-intentioned was obviously poorly executed. The export of armored vehicles is subject to strict export rules under the War Weapons Control Act. And these were clearly disregarded here.
It is possible that the Interior Senator has committed a criminal offense. And the federal government also seems to be involved in the case. The public prosecutor’s office should actually be taking action.
A comparison shows how big the task is: the area of 174,000 square kilometers that are considered mined areas in Ukraine is equivalent to 24 million football fields. One clearance device can clear an area of four football fields per day, so it can only make a small contribution.
Grote was delighted at the symbolic handover of one of a total of four GCS200s: “The mining of large parts of Ukraine is one of the greatest dangers that the war poses for the population there,” said Grote. “We are therefore very happy that, with Hamburg’s expertise in bomb disposal, we can contribute something to ensuring that fewer people die from mines in Ukraine.” Hamburg ordered the vehicles from the manufacturer in Switzerland.
However, the “Hamburg expertise” in mine clearance does not seem to apply to the War Weapons Control Act. In order to export military equipment from Germany, the approval of the federal government is actually required. This is stated in the Basic Law, Article 26, Paragraph 2. It states: “Weapons intended for warfare may only be manufactured, transported and placed on the market with the approval of the federal government.”
The Hamburg authorities apparently did not obtain this approval. The reason given was very simple. “These goods do not qualify as weapons of war,” a spokesperson told t-online when asked.
But is that really true? Experts doubt it. Jan van Aken was a member of the Bundestag for the Left Party and worked as a weapons inspector for the UN until 2006. “He probably didn’t even think about the fact that a permit is needed for the export of weapons,” says Jan Aken about the Interior Senator Andy Grote.
The list of war weapons specifies which weapons require a special permit. In addition to chemical and biological weapons, it also includes “other weapons”. This also applies to point IV, number 25, “other armored combat vehicles, including armored combat support vehicles.”
If the mine clearance vehicle is armored, it is considered a weapon of war. “The list of weapons of war is very clear, there is no room for interpretation,” says van Aken.
The explanations to the War Weapons List, a separate document with which customs authorities want to provide additional clarity, also state clearly under point 22: “Armoured combat vehicles also include [..] Mine-clearing tank and recovery vehicles”.
A defense expert from North Rhine-Westphalia, who often works with the defense industry and therefore wishes to remain anonymous, confirmed upon request that armored mine-clearing vehicles are weapons of war. He is therefore surprised by the legal opinion.
And the vehicle’s armor is clearly documented: t-online spoke to the manufacturer and analyzed the vehicle’s data sheets. This shows that the GCS200 is equipped with 20 mm thick “Hardox steel” at key points on the hull and front, thus armoring it. The manufacturer does speak of “splinter protection,” but according to the defense expert, this is just another term for armor.