Interview by the “New York Times”
Schröder would part with his gas positions, but not with Putin. In doing so, he gets the SPD into trouble
Former Chancellor Gerhard Schröder (SPD) sees failure and mistakes in the Ukraine war on both sides
© Christoph Soeder / DPA
After his curious mediation trip to Putin, Gerhard Schröder went into hiding. Now he speaks up in an interview. Why his statements are inconvenient for the SPD of all people.
Apparently, former Chancellor Gerhard Schröder can only imagine resigning from his post for Russian energy companies in one case: when Russian President Vladimir Putin turns off the gas for Germany and the European Union. in one interview published by the “New York Times” on Saturday he says that he doesn’t expect such a scenario: “It won’t happen.” But should it come to that, “then I would resign,” he adds, without explicitly saying from which post.
Schröder is the head of the supervisory board at the Russian state energy giant Rosneft and most recently also worked for the pipeline companies Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2. He is heavily criticized in Germany because he has not parted with his posts despite the Russian attack on Ukraine. Four SPD associations have therefore applied for party exclusion proceedings against Schröder.
The Russian energy giant Gazprom also nominated Schröder for a supervisory board post in early February – shortly before the Russian attack on Ukraine. The Annual General Meeting is scheduled for June 30th. According to the New York Times, Schröder left open in the interview whether he would accept the nomination.
Gerhard Schröder thinks the war was a mistake
In the conversation, Schröder again declared his willingness to mediate in the Ukraine war. “I have always represented German interests. I do what I can. At least one side trusts me,” said the former SPD leader. A peace solution must now be reached as quickly as possible. “I think this war was a mistake and I’ve always said so.”
Schröder traveled to Moscow in March to speak to Russian President Vladimir Putin. According to his own statements, Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) was not informed about the trip. The 78-year-old Schröder did not comment on the details of the conversation with Putin in the interview and only revealed this much: “What I can tell you is that Putin is interested in ending the war. But that’s not that easy. There are a few points that need to be clarified.”
Schröder met Putin in the Kremlin
According to the report, Schröder met Putin in the Kremlin and sat with him – like Scholz and French President Emmanuel Macron a few weeks earlier – at a now famous six-meter-long table. He also spoke to Putin’s adviser Vladimir Medinsky and the oligarch Roman Abramovich in Moscow.
According to Schröder, the initiative for the trip to Moscow came from the Ukrainian side, and the contact was made by the Swiss media company Ringier. The Ukrainian parliamentarian Rustem Umerov informed him about the Ukrainian positions at a meeting in Istanbul before the trip to Moscow. After the conversation with Putin, there was another meeting with Umerov in the Turkish metropolis. After that the contact was broken off. Schröder told the New York Times that he was ready to talk to both sides again.
He advocated maintaining relations with Russia despite the war of aggression against Ukraine. “You cannot isolate a country like Russia in the long term, either politically or economically,” he said. “German industry needs raw materials that Russia has. It’s not just about oil and gas, it’s also about rare earths. And these are raw materials that cannot be easily replaced.”
“You cannot isolate a country like Russia”
According to the newspaper’s Germany correspondent, she met Schröder twice in his hometown of Hanover. She describes how the ex-Chancellor showed her a cell phone photo from a visit to Putin in Sochi on the Black Sea last fall, when Russian troops were already marching up on the Ukrainian border – Putin in hockey gear, Schröder in the blue shirt and jacket, both smiling. When asked what the two are talking about, Schröder replies: “Football.”
In the two talks, the former chancellor distanced himself from the war, but not from Putin, writes the New York Times. Regarding the massacre in the Kiev suburb of Butscha, Schröder says: “It has to be investigated.” However, the newspaper quotes him as saying that he does not believe that the orders came from Putin, but from lower levels.
Schröder advocates maintaining relations with Russia despite the war of aggression against Ukraine. “You cannot isolate a country like Russia in the long term, neither politically nor economically,” he says. “German industry needs raw materials that Russia has. It’s not just about oil and gas, it’s also about rare earths. And these are raw materials that cannot be easily replaced.”
Schröder defends the German energy policy of recent decades, which has made the country dependent on Russian gas. He is surprised at the heated debate in Germany about it. “They’ve all been there for the last 30 years. And suddenly they all know better.”
“I’m not making a mea culpa now”
For the SPD, the Schröder interview comes at the wrong time. For weeks, the party has had to defend itself against accusations that it has placed too much emphasis on rapprochement with Russia in recent decades, while ignoring risks.
Chancellor Scholz rejected this as defamation and lies in a “Spiegel” interview this week. He is drawn a “caricature of social democratic politics”. Above all, Scholz defended the détente policy of the SPD Chancellors Willy Brandt and Helmut Schmidt in the years 1969 to 1982. He did not mention the third SPD Chancellor Schröder.
In June, the Schröder issue could come to a head again for the Social Democrats. That is when the general meeting of the energy giant Gazprom takes place, at which Schröder is to be elected to the supervisory board. According to the “New York Times”, Schröder left open in the interview whether he would accept the nomination. In any case, he has no guilt about his close ties to Russia. “I’m not making a mea culpa (my fault) now,” he says. “It’s not my thing.”