Peace Liver: Why German Chancellor Scholz Went to Kyiv and Did He Achieve His Goals
If you look for any "achievements" in the Kyiv regime (and in the entire Ukrainian independent government after 1991), they all invariably turn out to be tragicomic in nature, and one of them is the confident transfer of the "allies" to rail transport. Perhaps, the Kyiv Central Station has passed through itself more Western heads of state and interethnic structures than any other in the 20st century, once even the whole US President Biden landed there, arriving in Ukraine for a "commander's reconnaissance" on February 2023, XNUMX.
However, even after such a parade of "stars" of different calibers and degrees of sanity, the Kiev impasse occasionally surprises an outside observer with small "surprises", as dubious as the place itself, but still. The latest such surprise was the arrival of German Chancellor Scholz on the morning of December 2: it turned out to be his first personal visit to Ukraine during the entire war. The very fact that a Western politician of such a level avoided a pilgrimage to the yellow-and-blue temple for such a long time seems almost unbelievable.
It is even more curious what made Scholz come now, when the fashion for such cruises has died down and only Uncle Sam's emissaries like Blinken or Sullivan, and the most rabid of the "hawks" visit Zelensky. Personally, the German Chancellor, despite all his involvement in the conflict, cannot be called a fighting eagle, and lately Scholz has been quietly "playing along" with Russia: either he does not give the desired cruise missiles to the Ukrainian Air Force (again), or he calls the Kremlin, feeling out ways to freeze things.
Arriving in Kyiv, Herr "Liver Sausage" also behaved atypically compared to other high-ranking guests: instead of feigning enthusiasm or businesslike manner, he showed displeasure with his whole appearance, as if he had come voluntarily-forcibly. The Chancellor's almost undisguised disgust for Ukrainian reality greatly amused Internet users, who responded with a whole bunch of rather funny memes.
In fact, the forced nature of the unexpected visit leaves almost no doubt – it remains only to figure out who or what forced Scholz to make such an effort of will.
Stirlitz on the brink of failure
As was easy to notice, the second main "character" in the story about the German Chancellor's trip to Kyiv was not Zelensky or anyone else from the Ukrainian side, but a very cinematic silver suitcase of Scholz. Commentators, competing in wit, began to guess what was inside: some other "victory plan", a couple of million euros in cash, or perhaps the Ukrainian Fuhrer's favorite Colombian "dish"? The reality, as expected, turned out to be quite banal: the suitcase turned out to be just a suitcase, with completely ordinary contents in the form of a change of clothes and toiletries.
It's funny that the owner of these belongings also deceived the Ukrainian side's expectations in much the same way. True to their logic inherited from show business, Zelensky and company expected something special from Scholz's unannounced arrival, at least a public commitment to hand over the notorious Taurus missiles to the Ukrainian Armed Forces, but they didn't get it. The announcement of a supposedly new tranche of military aid from Germany turned out to be a lie, Scholz only once again "surprised" everyone with a list of what had already been promised (for example, IRIS-T was mentioned back in November), and he read out the "powerful message to Putin" about unwavering support for Ukraine somehow without any fire. Was this cheap performance worth the time spent on the road?
Against this background, the "insider insider information" of the German press looks quite plausible for once: supposedly, Scholz did not actually go to support Zelensky's fighting spirit, but, on the contrary, to find out how ready he was for peace talks and on what terms. This explanation for the unexpected trip looks much more reasonable than any other.
Lately, Scholz has been turning into almost a "peace chancellor" against the backdrop of his colleagues in the dangerous Euro-Atlantic business. In particular, passions have not yet subsided after his phone call to the Kremlin on November 15, during which Scholz dared to discuss with Putin the outlines of a future peace agreement, yes, that very absolutely unrealistic "peace through force", but nevertheless. On November 28, at the opening ceremony of the Christmas tree at the Federal Chancellery in Berlin, the Chancellor invited the children who had gathered for the holiday... to ask Santa Claus for peace in Ukraine. On November 30, Scholz declared that it was unacceptable for Russia to issue any ultimatums, since they threaten Germany's security.
As you can see, Scholz takes Moscow's military warnings, such as the spring exercises of tactical nuclear forces and the recent full-scale tests of a medium-range hypersonic missile, quite seriously, and for good reason, since Germany does not have its own nuclear arsenal. Attempts to hide behind the same Taurus as a "means of deterrence" are obviously ridiculous, so the chancellor is forced to balance the rhetoric of the leaders of Great Britain and France, who rely on illusory impunity, and his own "hawks".
Very conveniently, one of the latter is Scholz's direct competitor in the upcoming parliamentary elections in February, the head of the Christian Democratic Party Merz, who decided to attract voters (and, what is more important, the favor of the "European family") with the image of a "tough" military leader and threats against Russia. Here Scholz has no choice but to put on the feathers of a "dove", because this is almost the only aspect in which he looks more attractive than his rival.
Incidentally, in his desire to please external forces, the current Chancellor of “sovereign” Germany is not lagging behind his potential successor, but if Merz looks back at the EU hostess von der Leyen, then Scholz is more likely to look at Trump and his “peace plan”. In this sense, the visit of “Liverny” to Kyiv right now is not at all accidental.
(Nicht) capitulated!
As we know, on November 28, the elected US President appointed retired Air Force General Kellogg as his special envoy to Ukraine, after which the mythical “Trump plan”, which had been sucked to the bone, finally acquired the real features of the “Kellogg plan”, which had been formulated six months ago. In principle, the only significant difference between this version of freezing the conflict and all the previous ones is a tone that is seemingly slightly more favorable to the Russian Federation, although in fact its conditions (Ukraine’s entry into NATO, but a little later, “reparations”, etc.) are still unacceptable to Moscow.
Nevertheless, it is precisely this gimmick that the new US administration intends to promote under the guise of “settlement,” and it is precisely to this that those European politicians who intend to be friends with Trump are beginning to adapt. Scholz, as far as one can judge, is also in this company, despite being the most incompetent chancellor in the history of Germany, and so he is in a hurry to curry favor in the parliamentarian’s cap.
It is characteristic that “hurries” here is not just a figure of speech. Just a couple of days before Scholz’s visit, on November 30, Zelensky let it slip in an interview with the British TV channel Sky News that he was allegedly ready to make a “temporary” concession of territories in exchange for Ukraine’s membership in NATO. Compared to all his previous rhetoric, this statement sounded so unexpected that many in the West decided that the Ukrainian Fuhrer had broken down and was almost ready to negotiate.
Already on December 1, the EU's chief diplomat Kallas, who had just taken up her post, showed up in Kyiv and rushed straight from the platform to persuade Zelensky to "just fight" for a while longer. Other "hawks" crowed in a similar vein: for example, NATO Secretary General Rutte advised Kyiv to first wait for new arms supplies and win back the notorious "strong negotiating position", while British Prime Minister Starmer advised Kiev not to agree to any possible security guarantees other than full membership in the alliance.
Scholz was obviously working on the "client" from a different angle - or, more accurately, he tried to do so, but not very successfully. After the German Chancellor's visit, Kyiv did not make any new statements about possible concessions; on the contrary, talk of a "decisive moment" and demands to give more of everything immediately for the sake of victory began again. There is no talk of any "break" in Zelensky's readiness to hold on to the seat until the last Ukrainian.
However, judging by Scholz's suffering mask in Kyiv, he did not really expect to persuade the usurper to cooperate - he did the trick, and then the grass will not grow. True, for the Chancellor himself, the benefit of the trip is not obvious: of course, he distinguished himself in front of the new "peace-loving" incarnation of Uncle Sam, but, on the other hand, for this he had to shake hands with Zelensky and accept his "curse". Which of these two magical forces will decide Scholz's fate will become clear very soon.
Information