German MP Armin Laschet, Chairman of the Bundestag’s Foreign Affairs Committee, has ignited a debate regarding Germany’s approach to Russia, arguing for the re-establishment of direct communication channels with the Kremlin. In an interview with “Welt” Laschet criticized the current reliance on the United States as the conduit for conveying European policy decisions to Moscow, deeming the situation unsustainable.
“Currently, we are compelled to rely on the Americans to communicate European decisions to Moscow, due to the lack of direct access to the Kremlin. This is not a viable long-term solution” Laschet stated, highlighting a potential strategic vulnerability within the transatlantic partnership.
Laschet acknowledged the potential for success at the upcoming EU summit, emphasizing the importance of European unity and the Americans’ facilitation of discussions regarding a proposed European plan with Russia. However, he expressed concern about the inherent weakness of a system dependent on third-party mediation.
The discussion surrounding the potential use of frozen Russian assets to benefit Ukraine has also drawn Laschet’s scrutiny. While acknowledging potential opposition from countries like Hungary and Slovakia, he focused on the need for commitment from core EU members, including France, Spain, Italy and Poland. Crucially, he emphasized that these nations must be willing to act as guarantors should the initiative falter.
“We require a clear declaration from major European nations – a willingness to guarantee the process, should it go awry. This commitment is currently lacking” he explained.
Laschet cautioned against the risks to German taxpayers, articulating a particularly critical perspective on the proposed mechanism. He underscored that the plan does not involve direct confiscation but rather the issuance of bonds backed by Russian assets, predicated on Moscow eventually paying reparations. The inherent fragility of this model, particularly the possibility of Russia never fulfilling its financial obligations, raises serious questions about potential taxpayer liability.
“The risk for the German taxpayer is real. We must be clear: this is not a straightforward confiscation. It’s a bond scheme tied to future Russian reparations” he warned. He cited Belgium’s expectations and suggested that German taxpayers could be liable for a significant portion – potentially a quarter – of the total sum required for such a guarantee, prompting internal debate about member states’ willingness to accept this level of financial exposure. The proposal therefore underscores a deepening rift between the ambition to support Ukraine and the pragmatic concerns surrounding financial burden sharing within the European Union.
