Ukrainian envoy hails Merz for keeping extent of military aid secret
After taking office last week, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz agreed with Defence Minister Boris Pistorius to stop detailed publications of arms deliveries to Ukraine, including exact quantities.
Merz's predecessor Olaf Scholz pursued the same practice in the first months of the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine launched in February 2022, but his administration later succumbed to public pressure and began publishing a detailed list of the shipments online in June that year.
It was last updated on May 6, the day the new government took office in Berlin.
Merz, at the time the conservative opposition leader, sharply criticized the practice of keeping the details of arms shipments under wraps.
"We are being kept in suspense, there are excuses, there is no precise information about what Germany is actually supplying," he told broadcasters RTL and n-tv at the time, pledging he would "inform the public better" if he was elected chancellor.
"A good chess player thinks several moves ahead. What he doesn't do is predict these moves to his opponent," Ambassador Oleksii Makeiev told dpa, welcoming Merz's change of course.
Makeiev's predecessor Andriy Melnyk, on the other hand, criticized Merz for his u-turn, calling the approach a "very strange" practice that brought back "bad memories" of Scholz's centre-left administration which Melnyk claimed sought to mask restraint in arms deliveries by secrecy.
Melnyk argued that publishing the exact extent of the military aid would send a strong signal to Russia and have a preventative effect.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
22 minutes ago
- The Hill
Blumenthal calls for firing of RFK Jr. ally over violent rhetoric
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) is demanding Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr 'immediately' fire a key ally from his role as vaccine advisor on a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention panel due to 'escalating and violent' rhetoric in the wake of an attack on CDC headquarters. Blumenthal wrote a letter to Kennedy on Aug. 13 calling for him to fire Robert Malone from the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Blumenthal said Malone 'issued a meme-filled post' on his personal blog 'that included violent and threatening images that appeared to be directed at government officials.' Hours before a gunman attacked CDC headquarters, Malone uploaded a post to his personal blog that included an image of a revolver loaded with a single bullet and the words 'Five out of six scientists have proven that Russian roulette is harmless.' Less than 48 hours after the attack, another of Malone's blog posts included images of guns and meme with the words 'if you need a disarmed society to govern, you suck at governing.' On Aug. 8, a gunman opened fire on the CDC in Atlanta, killing a responding police officer. Officials said almost 500 shell casings were recovered, and about 200 struck six different facilities on the agency's campus. The alleged shooter was motivated by his distrust of the COVID-19 vaccine, according to law enforcement. Kennedy tapped Malone as one of eight hand-picked replacement members of the ACIP in June after firing the 17 sitting panelists. Malone is a former researcher who helped lay the groundwork for mRNA vaccine technology, but has since turned into a self-professed anti-vaxxer, COVID-19 skeptic and close advisor to Kennedy. ACIP is an influential panel that recommends which vaccines go on the childhood and adult schedules after reviewing safety data. If ACIP endorses a vaccine, insurers must cover it. 'Malone has displayed an unfathomable failure of judgment and heartlessness for the family of slain Officer Rose, and for the thousands of CDC staff on whom the work of ACIP depends,' Blumenthal wrote in the letter. 'Dr. Malone's escalating and violent rhetoric—including in the aftermath of this tragic incident—has no place on a panel responsible for determining immunization recommendations for children and adults throughout our country,' he continued, before calling on Kennedy to fire Malone immediately. Malone did not immediately respond to requests for comment. 'Sen. Blumenthal's demand is nothing more than virtue signaling,' an HHS spokesman told The Hill. 'Dr. Malone was selected for ACIP based on his long-standing scientific credentials and we are grateful to him for taking the call to serve. This is not a moment for the media or democratic lawmakers to exploit a tragedy for political gain.'
Time Magazine
24 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
The Real Danger of the Trump-Putin Summit
It's symbolic that Alaska has been chosen as the location for Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump's meeting on Friday to discuss Ukraine giving up occupied territory to Russia in the name of 'peace.' In 1867, the U.S. bought Alaska from Russia, then a colony of the Tsar, for a measly $7.2 million (around $150 million today). It's as if whoever selected the location is suggesting there's nothing particularly dramatic for lines on maps to be redrawn, that you can swap parts of countries as if they were mere real estate. But this ignores something vital—people. Russia's occupation of eastern parts of Ukraine isn't just a land-grab. Its aim is to wipe out independent Ukrainian identity; to re-define who the local people think and feel they are at the barrel of a gun. It's a vast project of enforced social engineering that takes us back to the Age of Empire, when colonizers imposed their will on conquered subjects. It's reminiscent of some of the darkest parts of the 20th century, when totalitarian dictatorships used terror to compel obedience on captured nations. If any 'deal' brokered in Alaska ignores the rights of Ukrainians in occupied lands then it will legitimize the return of some of the most evil chapters of our history. So whatever happens Friday, it's imperative to never normalize Russia's occupation. Some of the crimes Russia commits are blatant violations of international law. A U.N. report looked at accounts of civilian detainees in Russian-occupied Ukraine and found that 90% had been 'tortured or ill-treated.' Children have been executed. Believers outside the Kremlin-allied Moscow Patriarchate have been arrested, taken prisoner, tortured, and killed. Meanwhile, at least 19,546 children have been taken away from their guardians and families—spirited away to Russia where they are taught to forget Ukraine. This enforced deportation has led to Putin being indicted for war crimes. Read More: The Hidden War Over Ukraine's Lost Children Such crimes are easy to define under international law. We can open criminal proceedings against the perpetrators. But just as insidious are the more subtle forms of coercion that often get overlooked by courts. The way, for instance, Russia threatens to deny basic services like heating to Ukrainians who don't take up Russian passports. Or how millions of people across Ukraine—and not just in the occupied parts of the country—have been forced to flee their homes because the conditions Russia created made it too frightening to remain. Such displaced people currently have no recourse to justice. This needs to change. They should be allowed to claim reparations. Or consider the process of indoctrination. Over 1 million children are at school in occupied Ukraine. The Russian curriculum they are forced to follow wipes out the centuries-long struggle for Ukrainian independence. It barely mentions the mass famine of Ukrainians in the 1930s that killed 4 million, and which many historians consider a genocide. Parents who refuse to send their children to pro-Russian schools are threatened with losing their parental rights, witnesses have told The Reckoning Project, the war crimes NGO I helped found. Possession of Ukrainian textbooks can even lead to five year sentences. While Ukrainian identity is suppressed, a militarized form of Russian imperialism is rigorously promoted in occupied Ukraine. Children are expected to attend military youth groups reminiscent of the Hitler Jugend. Here students learn to shoot, sing patriotic Russian songs, and express 'unconditional love' to 'our holy Russian land' and 'readiness to join the holy fight.' Ukrainian officials and activists label this process 'brainwashing,' even 'cultural genocide.' But none of these are crimes under international law. Thus we risk the perpetrators getting away with the ultimate purpose of Russia's occupation—erasing Ukrainian identity. In order to ensure Russia doesn't get away with that, lawyers at The Reckoning Project have made a submission to the U.N. that details how Russia is in breach of the 'Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights' that guarantees parents the right to give children the education they choose. A U.N. submission is a small step in itself, but it helps create the basis for sanctioning officials and demanding damages from Russia. It should be seen as part of a web of justice that includes naming and shaming through media, online advocacy, pressure on private companies and public bodies, reparations, and other tools to ensure the whole system of Russian occupation is not normalized. All of this can also help show the world it can move on from the age of brutal imperial conquest and totalitarian thought control. Which brings us back to the Alaska Purchase. It is not just a symbol of how easily great powers can negotiate land swaps. It's a testimony to how colonial powers callously ignore the local population. When Russia occupied Alaska in the 19th century, it made serfs out of the local Indigenous tribes, forced them to hunt for furs, and raked in the profits. Missionaries pushed Native Americans to adopt Russian Orthodoxy. During the sale of Alaska, the rights of the majority Native Americans were ignored over Russian settlers. Following the U.S. takeover, racial segregation laws were erected and a system of devastating boarding schools created to split up Native American families. The analogy to occupied Ukraine is imperfect but in both cases children were barred from speaking their language or following their traditions. Russia makes no bones about its desire to bring back a new Age of Empire. Its propaganda revels in its desire to subjugate small European countries—and celebrates the idea America could soon join it to carve up the continent. It is encouraging that Trump has shown a greater willingness to criticize Putin and Russia in recent weeks. But the ultimate test will be the message Trump sends from Alaska. It will show which way the U.S. wants history to move.
Atlantic
24 minutes ago
- Atlantic
The Damage to Economic Data May Already Be Done
If you have been closely following the ongoing Bureau of Labor Statistics story—in which Donald Trump fired then-Commissioner Erika McEntarfer after being displeased by the bureau's July jobs report and selected the Heritage Foundation economist E. J. Antoni to succeed her—you will have heard an unusual consensus about the airtight political independence of the agency and the people who work there. Among BLS employees, including former Commissioner William Beach, whom Trump appointed in his first term, a fierce loyalty to the data is bone deep. Antoni does not appear to share that spirit of independence, nor does he seem to have a great deal of talent for economics or statistics, according to economists from across the political spectrum. Even so, his power to avoid future reports that embarrass Trump appears to be limited. In an interview recorded on August 4, before his nomination, Antoni proposed eliminating the monthly release of employment data, but the administration has already insisted that that won't happen. BLS data may not be completely tamper-proof, but they're pretty close. The sharpest economic minds in this country, both inside and outside the bureau, pay meticulous attention to the deepest layers of the data, many strata below the headline-unemployment rate and change-in-payroll employment. Deceiving them all would be very hard to do. Unfortunately, that might not matter. Antoni doesn't have to manipulate any data to undermine the reliability of the government's economic statistics. That damage might already have been done. I was a career press official at the Department of Labor who prepared a series of labor secretaries for their TV appearances early on the first Friday morning of every month. The release of the jobs report—'Jobs Day'—is a marquee event in this little corner of the federal government, when the press and the financial world's attention is fixed on the plaza of the Frances Perkins Building, in Washington. I lasted only one Jobs Day into the tenure of Trump's labor secretary, Lori Chavez-DeRemer, before taking DOGE's buyout deal. I decided to leave the government in large part out of fear of precisely the kind of demands for oaths of political loyalty that were being threatened then and are now being implicitly exacted on every career civil servant at the BLS. Brian Klaas: Will Trump get his Potemkin statistics? Most labor secretaries, understanding the power of jobs data to create or destroy value in the financial markets, have taken a sober and restrained approach to these press appearances. Then there's Chavez-DeRemer. One of her prime talking points has been that 'native-born workers have accounted for all job gains since Inauguration Day.' Every single one. Not a single Russian surgeon or Canadian blackjack dealer got a job after January 20 of this year. In fact, the BLS makes no such assertion. The claim is absurd on its face—the kind of political catnip that a Cabinet secretary in the Trump administration is expected to put forward without shame, as a kind of homage to the boss. The existence of an independent BLS commissioner is predicated on the idea that someone needs to talk about the labor market who is never tempted to say such things. It's a public service, primarily for investors. Might a member of the Cabinet say something iffy as a result of her political loyalties? That's not ideal, but here's someone else you can listen to who doesn't have that problem. Until now, this arrangement allowed the president's representative to attempt to convince the public of the effectiveness of his priorities while reinforcing the objective, nonpartisan genesis of the underlying data. If the BLS commissioner is now every bit the political animal that the labor secretary is, then what is the purpose of the BLS commissioner? I am not a statistician; perhaps Antoni can mandate methodological deviations that bias the numbers in Trump's preferred direction. But I don't think he needs to. Confidence in the bureau is already badly weakened. This is about more than just our trust as consumers of the jobs report, because we are also its producers. To create its reports, the BLS needs businesses and citizens to take the time to respond to surveys about changes to their payroll and about who is going to work or looking for a job in their household. Even before Trump won the election last November, the trend in survey responsiveness was declining, posing an existential threat to the robustness of the data. The appointment of a transparent partisan to the head of the BLS is unlikely to improve matters. Why should we take the time to report our economic circumstances to the government if we believe the government isn't interested in the truth? If fewer Americans think that contributing to the creation of these reports is a valuable use of their time, the civil servants at the BLS will struggle to produce reliable numbers, regardless of what policies Antoni puts into place. The damage to our understanding of the economy would be far more consequential than a month of bad jobs numbers.
