Home World How Scholz triggers Germans’ mental escape from Putin’s war

How Scholz triggers Germans’ mental escape from Putin’s war

Chancellor Olaf Scholz visits the Bundeswehr Chancellor Olaf Scholz visits the army in ALÜ (training course

The “Psychogram of Germany” from the “concept m Institute” examined German attitudes toward the war in Ukraine based on in-depth psychological interviews. In his current analysis, social researcher Dirk Ziems explains why many Germans no longer necessarily support Ukraine unconditionally.

The terrorist attack in Moscow and the subsequent alarm about extremist attacks in France have further fueled the debate about the war in Ukraine. Once again the fear of an escalation that can no longer be calculated arises, and this strengthens many Germans in their certain war weariness, which was perhaps expressed most clearly by the leader of the SPD parliamentary group, Rolf Mützenich, when asked in the Bundestag: “Shouldn’t we talk about that? How to freeze the war in Ukraine and end it later?”

General war fatigue

Like the Chancellor’s stance on the Taurus issue, the maxim to “freeze the war” is also set in the context of a general war-weariness among Germans. People no longer accept news about daily attacks on civilians and ongoing war crimes. The documentary “20 Days of Mariupol” wins the Oscar, but almost no one wants to see documentaries of this type anymore.

When the war began, the Chancellor was still talking about a “turning point.” There is now a fear that Ukraine and Russia are engaged in a very long and exhausting trench war, a “Verdun with drones”, and that Ukraine can no longer win this war, which is why further resistance seems futile and more surrenders of weapons are necessary. it’s useless.

In the in-depth interviews conducted, this attitude is often not expressed directly, but is repeatedly admitted as quintessence when asked more closely. How could this change occur?

The Germans want to turn back time before 2022

Apparently, the Germans want to return to the times before 2022, when the conflict between Russia and Ukraine was “frozen” and the militarization of public life, as perceived now, did not yet play any role. Instead of participating in the pathos heralded turning point, many people are now dragged back into a private world that no longer even wants to hear news about the war.

A Chinese invasion of Taiwan, specifications for weapons systems, “regaining warfighting capability” – these issues played no role in public discourse before 2022. People are now dreaming again of those “good old days.”

More threatening than possible new Russian attacks in Eastern Europe are new weapons deliveries that could “corner Putin” and force him to resort to nuclear weapons. However, a peace agreement of any kind is seen as an opportunity to restore peace and tranquility in the years to come.

The carefully considered attitude of Chancellor Olaf Scholz reflects the mood of the majority in this regard. His policy is seen by most as a “measured” and balanced “counterattack.”

The calculation behind this appears to be to provide Ukraine with enough support and weapons so that it does not lose the war. But, on the other hand, not so much that Putin suffered a defeat and, consequently, cornered, he could intensify the war against NATO and Germany.

A minority favors continued aid to Ukraine against Putin

However, only a minority believes that the conflict with Putin should be “fought decisively.” For them, the prospect of a “frozen conflict” is an illusory and dangerous miscalculation. The course of the war so far is interpreted to mean that the West, encouraged by the hesitant attitude of Chancellor Scholz, supported Ukraine too late and with too few weapons to make successful advances. Ukraine was engaged in a trench war that it could only lose due to Russia’s material superiority.

As this now opens the prospect of Ukraine’s collapse, Putin has no interest in peace negotiations. Emerging conflicts in the formerly united Western alliance confirmed to Putin how thin support for Ukraine is.

“Appeasement” versus “warmongering”: It is unfortunate for political discourse in Germany that the two parties, the “calmly considering camp” and the “resolutely fighting” camp, are irreconcilably opposed to each other and that the other side is trapped in a conflict. Wrong mentality.

“A town in the central office”

Some fear a threat to world peace if Putin loses, others if he wins. Some see in Olaf Scholz’s actions the qualities of a “peace chancellor” protecting Germany from escalation, while others attest to a complete failure of leadership: instead of forcing the Germans to adopt a new defensive spirit after the announcement of the turning point, Scholz was Failed to initiate a change of mentality. In a historic moment, Scholz gave in to the population’s comfortable tendency to long for a time before the turning point.

One interviewee summed up this impression as follows: “Germans have a basically pacifist attitude. The idea that they would one day be forced to defend their country and its values ​​in war is fundamentally foreign to them. “People who work from home and don’t realize that there is a war outside that also affects them.”

NO COMMENTS

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Exit mobile version