Before the Chancellor’s visit to the USA, the federal government tried to be more offensive in the Ukraine crisis. She has the greatest leverage in deciding who she will do gas business with in the future.
At the beginning of his trip to Washington, Olaf Scholz was exposed to criticism that was not proportionate. Apparently someone like Henry IV had to set out in front of the castle gate to beg for admission for three days. But Washington is not Canossa, and the attitude of the federal government is downright offensive, measured against the upheavals of the investiture dispute. Yes, the Federal Chancellor and the government made communication mistakes. Now he is bringing a troop reinforcement for the Baltic States as a gift. And Scholz repeatedly made it clear that violating Ukraine’s sovereignty will have serious consequences. All European countries have drawn up a catalog of sanctions with the USA, which will hit Russia hard if the worst comes to the worst. It would be unwise to make the extent of the sanctions public now – neither the US is doing that, nor should Germany disclose its Nord Stream plans now. The pressure grows in the blur.
What Robert Habeck says – and thus implies
It is therefore much more important to listen to the marginal notes, such as those made by Economics Minister Robert Habeck. He holds out the prospect of state intervention in the energy market and diversification of the gas supply market as early as next winter. These are decisions that the previous federal government could have made, because the one-sided dependency on Russia was never a secret. It extends to the so-called strategic gas reserves – tank farms operated by Gazprom of all people. It is clear who is managing a strategic reserve.
Habeck is right: the supplier monopoly makes Germany vulnerable – whether the gas flows through one or three pipes. If it only flowed through Nord Stream, the Russian leverage would be even greater. So this government can do itself the greatest favor if it frees itself from its dependencies.