Germany's Scholz implies British troops operating long-range missiles INSIDE Ukraine, is slammed by counterparts for intel-leak

RT
Thu, 29 Feb 2024 13:33 UTC

© Christoph Schmidt/Getty Images

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz

The chancellor said giving Kiev long-range missiles would require assistance from German troops, citing London's example

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has come under fire from the UK after he suggested that there were British troops operating in the Ukraine conflict. Explaining why Berlin would not supply Kiev with long-range Taurus missiles, Scholz said it would require German military personnel on the ground providing assistance.

He went on to say that Taurus "is a very long-range weapon, and what was done on the part of the British and French in terms of target-control and target-control assistance can't be done in Germany."

Commenting on Scholz's remark, Tobias Ellwood, the former chair of the British Commons defense committee, said it was "a flagrant abuse of intelligence deliberately designed to distract from Germany's reluctance to arm Ukraine with its own long-range missile system," as quoted by The Telegraph. The British lawmaker was also sure that the statement would be "used by Russia to rachet up the escalator ladder."

"German soldiers can at no point and in no place be linked with the targets that this system reaches," Scholz insisted, even if operating from German soil, according to the DPA news agency.

The German chancellor stated that it would be "not very responsible" for his country to risk becoming a "party to the war."

Meanwhile, on Tuesday, the Financial Times quoted an anonymous senior European defense official as saying that "everyone knows there are Western special forces in Ukraine - they've just not acknowledged it officially."

Addressing the press following a summit of Kiev's backers in Paris on Monday, French President Emmanuel Macron noted that "in terms of dynamics, we cannot exclude anything," referring to a potential ground deployment of Western militaries.

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg however hastened to clarify that there were "no plans for NATO combat troops on the ground in Ukraine." This was followed by similar assurances by the leaders of Germany, Poland, the Czech Republic, Sweden and Finland.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov warned that such a development would mean that "we have to talk not about the probability, but rather the inevitability" of an all-out military confrontation between NATO and Russia.

Comment: The Daily Mail further clarifies the comments:

On Tuesday, it was revealed that the UK had also stationed a 'small number' of troops in Ukraine in a support capacity, specifying only that some were involved in medical training.

Though it is known that the UK provides Ukraine with intelligence on Russian targets, it is not currently known to what extend support is given to Ukrainian troops in direct military action.

And The Telegraph:

Justin Crump, chief executive of Sibylline, an intelligence consultancy, said: "British support to Ukraine is hardly news to Moscow given repeated leaks, but this has previously been veiled in ambiguity - itself drawing on a trick from Russia's own playbook.

"[Mr] Scholz though has more clearly pierced this veil. His assertion is a gift to Russian propagandists, already forming a key part of Russia's effort to undermine Nato cohesion and support for Kyiv during this critical period ahead of US and UK elections."

Meanwhile the overall press coverage seems to be dancing around the issue, such as with the following from The Standard:

His comments led to reports that British soldiers are in Ukraine helping with weapons system, or at least helping to fire them remotely.

Whilst one could put this down to infighting and/or incompetence - and it does come amidst the German Navy's recent embarrassment - what with the admission from the US about CIA bases stationed in Ukraine since 2014; with Macron's calls to send in France's troops to Ukraine; and the seeming need for the West to escalate matters, one can't help but wonder whether it's, at least in part, laying the ground for a provocation.

Although perhaps that's giving the desperate, bungling, albeit sinister, establishment puppets too much credit.

Either way, the outcome seems as though it will be the same: note that Russia's response is that, indeed, a direct (official) confrontation does seem to be brewing:

• Korybko: Russia's Avdeevka win will reverberate across Europe and accelerate geostrategic shifts
• The new multipolar world system and the end of an era
• 'Hiding something': Journalists from BBC, CNN, write open letter calling for access into Gaza, question motive for obstruction