Bodies were removed from the rubble on the 40th day" - death and destruction that Russian army leaves behind
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Defense News. Finland and Sweden may take unhurried route to NATO membership
Helsinki. Finland and Sweden have chosen to pursue separate tracks and speeds to advance their interests in joining NATO.
Finland had indicated it would prefer a solution that would see the two Nordic unaligned states “jump together” into NATO.
However, Sweden has decided to examine a range of security-related options, including deepening Nordic defense cooperation and urging the European Union to develop enhanced defense policies to offer greater military protection to EU member states that border the highly sensitive Baltic Sea and High North regions.
Unlike Sweden, the Finnish government has set the wheels in motion to fast-track its application to join NATO against the backdrop of heightened security tensions in the region elevated by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Prime Minister Sanna Marin told opposition party leaders, the majority of whom back the government on this issue, that she expects a decision on NATO membership soon.
“Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has caused Finland to review our security strategy,” Marin said at a joint press conference in Stockholm on April 13 hosted by Swedish Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson. “I won’t offer any kind of timetable as to when we will make our decision, but I think it will happen quite fast. Within weeks, not within months. The security landscape has completely changed.”
Noting enhanced defense cooperation with Finland, Andersson said Sweden and Finland can be expected to decide whether to apply for NATO membership independently and on different timetables.
The Swedish government is expected to deliver its National Security Report to the Riksdag, the country’s legislature, before May 31.
“What we need to do is to carefully think through what is in the best long-term interests of Sweden, and what we need to do to guarantee our national security, our sovereignty and secure peace in this new heightened tension and situation,” said Andersson.
Finland is expected to reach a decision on joining NATO before the Alliance’s two-day summit meeting slated to commence in Madrid on June 29.
The existing partner status of Sweden and Finland, within their cooperation framework with the alliance, means that neither country is covered under NATO’s Article 5, which considers a hostile attack against one member state to be an attack against all.
The Sarin government presented its updated Defense and Security Risk report to the Eduskuna, Finland’s legislature, on April 13. The report, which set out the pros and cons of joining NATO, serves as the opening salvo in a new national debate to join NATO.
The report outlined the “fundamental changes” Finland would be required to make to its foreign and security policies in order to join the military alliance. It identified the main benefits of joining NATO to include security guarantees embedded in the mutual-defense pledge as well as increased security cooperation through the alliance.
The risks and disadvantages listed by the report included the potential for a hugely negative reaction by Russia if Finland decides to join NATO.
“If Finland and Sweden become Nato members, the threshold for using military force in the Baltic Sea region would rise, which would enhance the stability of the region in the long term,” the report stated.
Finland’s trepidation over a hostile response from the Kremlin was confirmed on April 14 when Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chair of Russia’s security council, signaled that Russia would abandon its nuclear-free-zone policy for the Baltic Sea.
“Russia would need to bolster its defenses in the Baltic Sea region. This would include the deployment of nuclear weapons, if Finland and Sweden were to join NATO. In this situation, there could be no more talk of any nuclear–free status for the Baltics - the balance must be restored,” said Medvedev.
In a poll run by the Finnish Business Policy and Forum (FBPF), released on April 12, some 84% of Finns considered Russia to pose a “significant military threat” to Finland and a constant threat to Europe and Baltic Sea and the High North regions.
A March poll conducted by the FBPF found that a record 60% of Finns favored joining NATO, compared to 26% in October 2021.
Finland and Sweden joined NATO’s Partnership for Peace (PfP) program in 1994 and the Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council in 1997. The militarily unaligned Nordic states are designated “most active partners” by NATO.
Sweden has contributed to the NATO-led Resolute Support Mission in Afghanistan, the Kosovo Force (KFOR) in Kosovo, and NATO Mission Iraq. For its part, Finland has contributed to NATO-led operations and missions in the Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq.
Sweden and Finland are among six countries, known as Enhanced Opportunity Partners under the Partnership Interoperability Initiative, that contribute to NATO operations and other alliance projects.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Wall Street Journal.
Anti-Russia Alliance Is Missing a Big Bloc: The Developing World
Nations are resisting economic sanctions and voicing criticism over the Ukraine invasion, fearful of political and economic repercussions from Moscow or Beijing. “Our position is not that this is not our problem.”
Western leaders seeking to build a global coalition to isolate Russia over its?war on Ukraine? are facing pushback from the world’s largest developing nations, including the democracies of India, Brazil and South Africa.
The resistance, much of it from economic self-interest, limits the pressure on President?Vladimir Putin ?and spotlights factions in the global community that recall the Cold War, when many countries tried to steer clear of the rivalry between the U.S. and Soviet Union.
The U.S. and its allies in Europe? and elsewhere have imposed economic sanctions against Russia and provided billions of dollars in?military aid to Ukraine since? the Feb. 24 invasion. The united front was praised for rejuvenating a flagging Western alliance.
Yet even after the massacre of civilians in Bucha, Ukraine, 24 countries of the 141 United Nations member states voted last week against removing Russia from the United Nations Human Rights Council; 58 member states abstained, including India, Brazil, Mexico, Indonesia and South Africa.
While U.S. and European leaders have accused Mr. Putin of war crimes in Ukraine, leaders in the developing world, from Mexico’s Andrés Manuel López Obrador to India’s Narendra Modi, have refused to criticize the Russian leader.
The bulk of the economic sanctions on Russia are being shouldered by members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and other close U.S. allies such as Australia, Japan and South Korea.
“One of the consequences of this is the Biden administration is going to come back to a recognition that our real buddies, our real fellow travelers, are in Europe and northern Asia,” said John Feeley, a former U.S. ambassador and diplomat. “It will be to the detriment of perhaps Africa and Latin America where this was an opportunity for those regions and India, especially, to say, ‘Look we may have our differences…but we stand for some very clear democratic, sovereignty-based, international rules-based principles.’ ”
The split opens avenues for Russia to circumvent Western sanctions and allows Moscow to say it retains the support of nations around the world. Saudi Arabia, which has a historic security partnership with the U.S., has refrained from condemning Russia’s invasion and rebuffed Washington’s call to pump more oil to both tame surging prices.?
A day before President Biden landed in Europe last month to shore up international support for Ukraine, ambassadors from what are known as the BRICS economies—Brazil, India, China and South Africa—smiled for photos with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and then met for talks on enhancing mutual cooperation. In the hourlong meeting, covered by Russian state TV, Mr. Lavrov told the ambassadors that Moscow was a victim of an “unprecedented economic war.” None criticized the Russian invasion or Mr. Putin.
“Our position is not that this is not our problem. Our position is that we are for peace,” said India Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar on the day his country abstained from the U.N. vote against Russia. “Indian foreign policy decisions are made in Indian national interest, and we are guided by our thinking, our views, our interests.”
India, a longtime Russia ally, doesn’t want to alienate Moscow and drive it closer to Beijing, a regional rival.
New Delhi hosted top U.S. and U.K. officials for talks on Ukraine this month and meantime held separate meetings with Mr. Lavrov on a proposal to pay for Russian oil in rubles instead of dollars, a way for Moscow to evade sanctions. India in recent days bought millions of barrels of Russian crude at a hefty discount, Indian officials said, and could buy more.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken, left, and Indian External Affairs Minister Dr. S. Jaishankar during a discussion this month at Howard University in Washington.PHOTO:?STEFANI REYNOLDS/PRESS POOL
“Now is the time to stand on the right side of history,” said U.S. Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo, “not funding and fueling and aiding President Putin’s war.”
World order
Chinese leaders have positioned themselves as speaking for developing nations about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. After meeting with African and Asian foreign ministers, China’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, spoke of a disquiet among developing nations at being pressured to take moral positions on complex international questions.
China sees Russia as an ally in countering the U.S. and its Western allies. The two neighbors seek to dismantle the U.S.-led world order and allow Beijing and Moscow to hold sway over their respective regions.
The past two decades have seen a shift in how the developing world views the U.S., Russia and China. Moscow has spent billions on expanding trade, diplomatic ties and military ties, from selling weapons to Venezuela and India to delivering wheat exports to much of Africa. Beijing has been flexing its economic muscle with the building of dams, roads, bridges, pipelines and railways in dozens of countries world-wide through its Belt-and-Road initiative.
The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, and the subsequent images of Iraqi prisoners tortured at Abu Ghraib prison, fed perceptions in some countries that the U.S. was guilty of the same violations of sovereignty it claimed to oppose. “This is part of the legacy of the 2000s and the war on terror,” said Odd Arne Westad, a professor of history at Yale University.
Officials in emerging economies trying to recover from the Covid-19 pandemic fear Western sanctions will make things worse. In Sudan, which imports around 80% of its wheat from Russia and Ukraine, the price of bread has nearly doubled over import disruptions.?Reliance ?on Russian and Ukrainian crops stretches from Turkey to North Africa. Agricultural producers depend on Russian fertilizers.
Egypt, a military ally of the U.S., condemned Russia’s invasion at the U.N., and then criticized the Western sanctions. Analysts said the mixed response reflected worries that Washington could ease its decadeslong security ties in the Middle East and force greater reliance on Moscow as an arms supplier.
For some nations, refusal to criticize Russia reflects a desire to please China. Demand for such goods as Brazilian iron-ore and Argentine soybeans boosted China past the U.S. as the top trading partner in most South American countries. Beijing’s bilateral trade with Africa rose 35% last year to a record $254 billion, far higher than the continent’s trade with the U.S.
New Delhi, meantime, seeks help from Moscow to defend its nearly 2,200-mile border with China, where Indian and Chinese troops have skirmished in the past. Russia provides half of India’s weapon imports, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, as well as a majority of the component parts to repair existing equipment.
Indian officials in December signed a deal to buy Russian S-400 surface-to-air missile systems. The two countries also signed a contract for a joint venture to manufacture more than 600,000 Russian-designed AK-203 assault rifles in India.
?Middle lane
Some developing countries view the war in Ukraine as Europe’s problem. Others don’t want to be used as proxies in a fight between great powers. During the Cold War, as many as 120 countries formed a nonaligned movement to navigate the U.S.-Soviet rivalry.
“There is a feeling of anxiety that this situation may become a permanent one, where you would have permanent divisions between, on the one side, the West, the U.S. and its allies, and on the other side Russia and China,” said Rubens Ricupero, a former Brazilian ambassador to the U.S. and Italy.
With a few exceptions, governments in Latin America voted in favor of the U.N. resolution condemning the invasion but refused to join in sanctions.
The nonaligned approach is rooted in the sentiment that it wouldn’t be beneficial to pick sides if the war were to spill over into the battle over global influence being waged by the U.S. and China, said Brian Winter, editor of Americas Quarterly, a nonpartisan journal about Latin America.
“If we’re entering a new era of great power conflict, most Latin American governments would prefer to sit this one out,” Mr. Winter said. “These governments remember that the Cold War had terrible consequences for them, that the region was used as a chess board.”
In Africa, nearly half the governments either abstained or didn’t cast a vote last month to condemn Russia for the invasion of Ukraine. Many countries on the continent are ruled by parties that had been supported by Moscow during national struggles for independence from colonial or white-minority rule. Party leaders in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Angola and Mozambique remember how Soviet weapons, cash and advisers helped win freedom in the 1960s through 1980s.?
Russia dispatched senior diplomats to lobby for support from defense and foreign ministries in Uganda, South Sudan and Ethiopia. The delegations pledged investment and infrastructure aid in return for backing—or at least not voting to condemn—Russia at the U.N.
Uganda’s longtime leader and a key U.S. security partner Yoweri Museveni said Russia should be viewed as the center of gravity in Eastern Europe. His son and heir apparent, Lt. Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba, went further.
“The majority of mankind (that are nonwhite) support Russia’s stand in Ukraine,” he wrote on?Twitter .?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Middle East Eye.
Russia-Ukraine war: Conflict boosts hopes for East Mediterranean energy, experts say
Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid said Russia's invasion will change the structure of the European and Middle Eastern energy markets.
The Tungsten Explorer drilling ship off the coast of the Cypriot town of Oroklini in the gulf of Larnaca, on 21 July 2020 (AFP)
Russia's invasion of Ukraine has given a new boost to long-running efforts of Eastern Mediterranean states to tap into regional gas reserves amid concerns over energy security in Europe, experts have said.
On Tuesday, Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid travelled to Athens to meet with his Greek and Cypriot counterparts, Nikos Dendias and Ioannis Kasoulides.
Russia's invasion of Ukraine will "change the structure of the European and Middle Eastern energy market," Lapid told?his Greek counterpart, adding that it offers "opportunities which we must examine together".
In a statement issued later alongside Greece's Dendias and Cyprus's Kasoulides, Lapid addressed the opportunities afforded by western efforts to reduce their?dependency on Russian gas.
"There are risks here, but there are also?opportunities," he said.
Are Russia and Gulf states trading support for wars in Ukraine and Yemen?
Antonia Dimou, director of the Middle East and Persian Gulf unit at the Athens-based Institute for Security and Defence Analyses, told MEE that "energy is the dominant issue that will now impact alignments within the Eastern Mediterranean region, given the war in Ukraine".
Over the past decade, Greece, Israel and Cyprus have partnered on economic and security issues, with leaders regularly engaging in high-level trilateral summits.
The countries' militaries frequently conduct joint exercises together and Israel has inked major defence deals with Athens. Israeli visitors have also become an important market for Cypriot and Greek tourism-dependent economies.
In 2016, the three countries signed a $6bn plan to ship Israeli and Egyptian gas to mainland Europe via a 1,180-mile pipeline running through Greece and Cyprus. But the project languished over concerns about its economic feasibility and festering maritime tensions with Turkey.
Earlier this year, in pulling its support for the EastMed pipeline, the Biden administration cited environmental and economic concerns, along with what it considered to be the project’s contribution to heightened tensions in the region.
Panayotis Tsakonas, head of the security programme at the?Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy ?(ELIAMEP),?told MEE that the conflict in Ukraine had rekindled interest in the project.
"There is a kind of reconsideration on how exactly to deal with the East Med pipeline, with the Europeans and Americans looking for alternatives to Russian gas," he said.
New opportunities
Europe depends on Russia for roughly 40 percent of its natural gas needs. Within one year the EU aims to cut its dependence on Russian gas by two-thirds. That has left the bloc scrambling for supply in an already tight market.
Israeli Energy Minister Karin Elharar said the country had received a request from the EU to supply it with natural gas. According to the Israeli Ministry of Energy, the country could provide Europe with 10 percent of the gas it currently buys from Russia.
Israel's president arrives in Cyprus to ease concerns amid rapprochement with Turkey
Last month, the CEO of Chevron, the company which operates Israel’s Tamar and Leviathan gas fields in the Mediterranean, said that an Eastern Mediterranean gas pipeline could offer the EU an alternative to Russian supplies.
Dimou said that in the short term the countries were looking at "practical steps" that would allow Israeli gas to be shipped to Europe.
Israel already pipes its gas to Egypt for liquefaction at the country's LNG facilities in Idku and Damietta, and Egypt's cash strapped government is eager to increase the export of LNG through plants that have spare capacity.???
"It would be both politically and technically easier for Israel to pipe its gas to Egypt's liquefied LNG plants for conversion and then export to Europe," she said.
Greece has also expanded its own infrastructure. Besides its LNG terminal on Revithousa island off the coast of Attica, it is building a new floating terminal in the northern city of Alexandroupoli.
'Quiet and easy'
?The renewed?focus on energy security comes as Eastern Mediterranean rivals have also been coming together after years of heightened tensions in the region. Last month Israeli President Isaac Herzog visited President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Ankara, with much fanfare.
The trip raised concerns in Athens and Nicosia about their carefully constructed alliance with Israel. The three countries, along with Egypt, have moved closer together because of their shared concern over Turkey’s muscular foreign policy in the region.
Before visiting Ankara, Herzog travelled to both Athens and Nicosia to reassure leaders there about the alliance.
"Politics is symbolism and the fact that Herzog visited Greece and Cyprus before Turkey shows the importance of our ties," Constantinos Filis, executive director at the Institute of International Relations at Athens Panteion University, told MEE.?
"The Israelis will not change their policies with Greece and Cyprus because of rapprochement with Turkey," he added.?
In a surprise move, Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis held rare talks with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Istanbul just a few days after Herzog's visit. The two countries have been locked in long running feuds over maritime borders, migration, and the sovereignty of the Aegean islands.
On Sunday, Turkey's Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu heralded the thaw in relations, stating, "We can say that the channels of dialogue with Greece are more open today than ever before."
Greek and Israeli defence ministers meet after US ends support for EastMed pipeline
Analysts say the rapprochement is another indication of how the conflict in Ukraine has rippled across the Eastern Mediterranean. "The cry from the international community right now is for cooperation," Tsakonas told MEE.
He said the US and Europe had no interest in seeing tensions in the region go back to the fever pitch of 2020 when Greek and Turkish warships were colliding. "They want to keep things quiet and easy," he added.
Turkey has also set its sights on a potential energy deal with Israel. A Turkish-Israeli pipeline estimated to cost $1.5bn has long been floated as a more viable alternative to the EastMed line.
However, analysts have expressed scepticism about the feasibility of that plan, as it would likely have to cross through the contested waters of Cyprus, which is divided between the official?Republic of Cyprus in the south and a breakaway Turkish north,?recognized?only by Ankara.?
"Without a political settlement on the island, such a project would be extremely difficult," Filis told MEE.
Still, some analysts say that with war now raging in Europe?the time could be ripe for compromises?after years of tensions?have prevented countries in the region from tapping into their natural resources.?
"We have four players, [Greece, Cyprus, Israel, Turkey] who all want to eat this delicious pie. But if one of them is left out, then no one gets to eat it," Hay Eytan Cohen Yanarocak, an expert on Turkey-Israeli relations with the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security, told MEE.
The trick, Cohen said, is to find a "common denominator that shares the pie."
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan
The 8th Foreign Ministers’ Meeting of the “Central Asia plus Japan”?
………………………………………………………………….
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan
Japan-Turkmenistan Summit Telephone Talk
On April 13, commencing at 3:50 p.m. for approximately 20 minutes, Mr. KISHIDA Fumio, Prime Minister of Japan, held a telephone talk with H.E. Mr. Serdar BERDIMUHAMEDOV, President of Turkmenistan. The overview of the talk is as follows.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Distributional Impacts of COVID-19 in the Middle East and North Africa Region
COVID-19 is one of multiple crises to have hit the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region in the decade following the Arab Spring. War, oil price declines, economic slowdowns and now a pandemic are tearing at the social fabric of a region characterized by high rates of unemployment, high levels of informality and low annual economic growth. The economic costs of the pandemic are estimated at about $227 billion, and fiscal support packages across MENA are averaging 2.7 percent of GDP, putting pressure on already weak fiscal balances and making a quick recovery challenging. Pre-pandemic MENA was the only region in the world experiencing increases in poverty and declines in life satisfaction.
This Report investigates how COVID-19 changed the welfare of individuals and households in the region. It does so by relying on phone surveys implemented across the region and complements these with micro-simulation exercises to assess the impact of COVID-19 on jobs, income, poverty and inequality.
The two approaches perform a complementary task by corroborating each other’s results, thereby making the findings more robust and richer.
This Report’s results show that in the short run, poverty rates in MENA will increase significantly, and that inequality will widen. A group of “new poor” is likely to emerge that may have difficulty to recover from the economic consequences of the pandemic.
The Report adds value by analyzing newly gathered primary data, along with projections based on newly modelled micro-macro simulations and by identifying key issues that policy makers should focus on to enable a quick, inclusive and sustained economic recovery.
Citation
“Hoogeveen, Johannes G.; Lopez-Acevedo, Gladys. 2021.?Distributional Impacts of COVID-19 in the Middle East and North Africa Region.?MENA Development Report;.?Washington, DC: World Bank. ? World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/36618 License: CC BY 3.0 IGO.”
Download:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Last but not least.
? Achgut - Wochen-Newsletter - 15. April?2022
Frank-Walter Steinmeier wird von Wolodymyr Selenskyi ausdrücklich nicht eingeladen und das politische Berlin sieht das als Affront.
Liebe Leserin, lieber Leser!
Frank-Walter Steinmeier wird von Wolodymyr Selenskyi ausdrücklich nicht eingeladen und das politische Berlin sieht das als Affront. Die Würde des h?chsten Amtes im Lande muss geschützt werden. Zun?chst vor den ukrainischen Einladungsmuffeln, die das Ganze recht pragmatisch sehen: In Zeiten wie diesen l?dt man lieber die zuverl?ssigen Freunde ein, statt die halbherzig sp?teinsichtigen, die in der Vergangenheit nicht durch Engagement für die Sache der Ukraine aufgefallen sind und auch heute nicht.
Das hohe Amt muss aber nicht vor taktlosen Staatsm?nnern im Selbstverteidigungsmodus beschützt werden, die ihren Anstand notgedrungen hinter Sands?cken deponiert haben, sondern ben?tigt den Schutz vor dem Amtsinhaber selbst, der ein gut ausgestattetes Portfolio an Fragwürdigkeiten und Fehlgriffen vorzuweisen hat, die weit schwerer wiegen als die Unlust des ukrainischen Pr?sidenten, einen ehemaligen Putin-Versteher im Au?enamt zur Besichtigung von Schützengr?ben und Ruinen einzuladen.
Zumal der Bundespr?sident die Stippvisite als Pflichttermin sieht und ohnehin nichts anderes zu tun pflegt, als steife Textbausteine aus dem Diplomatenstadl abzuliefern. An vorderster Front der deutschen Solidarit?ts-Delegationen und Sch?nwetter-Moralisten kann der Bundespr?sident auch von seinem Schloss aus Ratschl?ge an die Ukraine erteilen, die dort jedoch keiner braucht. Denn über Frieden und europ?ische Solidarit?t reden l?sst es sich leicht, wenn man nicht von TOS-1-Raketenwerfern aus den Vorst?dten in Spandau, Friedrichsfelde oder Bernau bedroht wird.
Diplomatisches Feingefühl m?gen die Ukrainer zwar nicht besitzen, aber der Bundespr?sident selbst l?sst hinter der Fassade des Politprofis auch Zweifel an der Sorge um die Würde des Amtes aufkommen. In Erinnerung bleiben seine ?Ausrutscher“, denen stets der Hautgout linkslastigen Ressentiments anhaftet, das auf das unwillige Bürgertum zielt. ?Walter, der Spalter“, ist wirklich kein sch?ner Anwurf für einen Mann im h?chsten Amt, aber als Jobbeschreibung passt es trotzdem. Eigentlich müsste er sich qua Amt allen Deutschen zuwenden und Partei ergreifen für den gesellschaftlichen Frieden. Indem er das Gemeinsame f?rdert, nicht das Trennende, soll das deutsche Staatsoberhaupt Hysterie, Ausgrenzung und staatliche Anma?ung verhindern. Dafür steht Frank-Walter Steinmeier definitiv nicht.
Mit ihm ist das Amt des Bundespr?sidenten seiner ursprünglichen Weihe endgültig enthoben worden. Es ist in der Wirklichkeit von Parteilichkeit angekommen. Steinmeier ist der prototypische Repr?sentant einer Neigung zu immer mehr Dekonstruktion repr?sentativer Funktionen und staatlicher Symbole. Da passt der gestrenge überheblichkeitsmodus, der ihm wie der Schatten seiner Partei folgt, nur zu gut.
Irren ist menschlich, aber bewusst ideologische Irrtümer zu f?rdern, ist nicht pr?sidial: Frank-Walter Steinmeier gelang es, den demokratie-, frauen- und israelfeindlichen Ajatollahs im Iran zum Revolutionsgeburtstag im Namen aller Bundesbürger zu gratulieren. Rückschlüsse auf seine Amtsauffassung lassen auch seine Begeisterung für Nord-Stream-2 zu, mit der er unsere europ?ischen Nachbarn düpierte und eine ?deutsch-zentrische“ Interessenspolitik vertrat, die uns heute versorgungstechnisch auf die Fü?e f?llt.
Zum Teil schien es, als habe er seinen inneren Kompass verloren, als er beispielsweise eine vom Verfassungsschutz beobachtete linksextremistische Band empfahl, die in Chemnitz auf einem Konzert ?gegen Rechts“ auftrat. Das zeitgeistig getrübte Politikverst?ndnis des Bundespr?sidenten veranlasste ihn gar vor Kurzem, eine RAF-Terroristin in einer Reihe ?gro?er Frauen der Weltgeschichte“ zu nennen. So geht Geschichtsklitterung, die peu à peu die Grenzen des Sagbaren zugunsten (extrem)linker Standpunkte verschieben soll und den gesamtgesellschaftlichen, liberalen Wertekanon ignoriert.
Für viele seiner Missgriffe hat sich der Bundespr?sident zwar im Nachhinein entschuldigt, für seine missglückte, parteiische Amtsführung wird er das aber wahrscheinlich nicht tun. Sie ist ihm egal. Denn er ist, wie die meisten ?gro?en Geister“ des Berliner Klüngels, ein geübter Darsteller gespielter Demut, die in den abgeschotteten Sph?ren der Hauptstadtpolitik eine entmenschlichte Steifheit und absurde Realit?tsfremdheit angenommen hat.
Das kam in den zwei harten Corona-Jahren besonders deutlich zum Vorschein. Gern setzte er dabei – wie bei seinen Geburtstagsgrü?en nach Teheran – eine Mehrheit voraus, die er für sein knallrot gef?rbtes Weltbild zu vereinnahmen sucht. Die vermeintliche Minderheit ist für den Bundespr?sidenten dann auch schnell eine Gefahr für das Land: ?Diejenigen, die sich nicht impfen lassen, setzen ihre eigene Gesundheit aufs Spiel, und sie gef?hrden uns alle. [...] Es geht um Ihre Gesundheit, und es geht um die Zukunft Ihres Landes!“ Das ist haarscharf an den ?Feinden der Volksgesundheit“ vorbeiformuliert und bedient in seiner Diktion das pure Ressentiment.
Ich kann den Pr?sidenten der Ukraine verstehen, der Wichtigeres zu tun hat, als sich im Angesicht der Verwüstung des eigenen Landes noch Friedensfantasien und Hinhalte-Diplomatie aus dem Bellevue'schen Wunschkosmos anh?ren zu müssen. Er erwartet Handfestes. Lieber n?hme er Waffen zur Verteidigung seines Landes in Empfang, als die kaltherzigen Worte aus dem geistigen Zirkeltraining der Kaderpolitik, die das Wort ?Realit?t“ für ein ontologisches Ph?nomen h?lt, das im weiten Umfeld der Hauptstadt wie eine Seuche grassiert.
Ganz in der N?he des Reichstages, an der Stra?e des 17. Juni, steht ein Ehrenmal mit zwei Panzern und Haubitzen der ?glorreichen“ sowjetischen Armee, die uns – wie die Alliierten – von Nazideutschland befreit hat.
Dies ist einer der gültigen Erz?hlstr?nge der deutschen Geschichte nach 1945, die sich in den Ehrenmalen manifestiert hat.
Es gibt aber noch andere, private Erz?hlstr?nge, die nicht in den Schulbüchern stehen und in den verborgenen Biografien von Frauen und Kindern im russisch besetzten Teil Deutschlands tiefe Spuren hinterlassen haben.
Meine Gro?mutter, meine Tanten und meine Mutter haben solches durchleben müssen.
Und ich denke an ihre Schicksale, wenn ich heute die Bilder und Berichte aus der Ukraine sehe. Da reimt sich so manches in der Geschichte.
Das ist die ontologische, die existenz-philosophische Ebene, auf der Deutschland und die Ukraine verbunden sind.
Deshalb kann ich nachvollziehen, warum Wolodymyr Selenskyj keinen Smalltalk mit Frank-Walter Steinmeier halten m?chte. Warum der deutsche Bundespr?sident in der Ukraine nicht vonn?ten ist, wird mir wieder ganz besonders am heutigen Tag der Selbstaufopferung für das Menschsein, dem Karfreitag, bewusst.
Ich wünsche Ihnen sch?ne Osterfeiertage,?Ihr?
Fabian Nicolay
Herausgeber ?