The poker players
Wilfully crossing red lines despite the obvious threat of war: German politicians urge the use of Western weapons against targets deep inside Russia; and Berlin sends warships through the Taiwan Strait.
BERLIN/MOSCOW/BEIJING (own report) – Several leading politicians in Berlin’s governing coalition are pushing for the release of longer-range Western weapon systems for Ukraine to attack targets deep inside Russia. “There is no alternative,” claims Anton Hofreiter, a senior member of the Green party in the ruling coalition. Voices from the SPD are also seeking to greenlight what is a very serious escalation. Moscow, for its part, has stated that, the deployment of, for instance, the Storm Shadow cruise missile would necessarily involve Western military personnel and that means NATO countries actively entering the war as direct participants. The potential consequences are terrifying. Yet Hofreiter presents the choices in the style of a poker player: we shouldn’t be deterred, he says, by Moscow’s “threats” have “been repeatedly proven empty” in the past. This is a dangerous delusion, as Russia’s decision to attack Ukraine on February 24, 2022 demonstrates. Meanwhile, Berlin is set to cross further red lines, this time China’s, by dispatching two German warships through the Taiwan Strait. Yet when it comes to European territorial waters, policy advisors in Berlin have begun to suggest that Berlin should take action against foreign warships sailing through the North Sea and Baltic Sea – at least if those vessels happen to be Russian.
Warships in territorial waters
The conflict with Beijing continues to escalate following the passage, last week, of the naval frigate ‘Baden-Württemberg’ and the accompanying supply ship 'Frankfurt am Main’ through the Taiwan Strait. China claims the waters up to twelve miles off its mainland coast as its own territorial waters. Beijing has also declared the waters from twelve to 200 miles off the coast to be China’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), a claim that accords with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This covers the entire Taiwan Strait, which measures some 96 nautical miles at its widest point.[1] The law clearly states that the right of innocent passage shall apply in the territorial waters. And, legally, foreign warships may pass through as long as they are not engaged in any military activities.[2] A number of states – especially those that were once fully or partially colonised, including China, interpret UNCLOS more narrowly by requiring prior notification of any passage of foreign warships through its territorial waters. Under the UNCLOS rules, military activities are generally permitted in an EEZ, although exceptions can be made if the sovereign rights of the coastal states are impacted. Formerly colonised states, and these include China and Vietnam, tend to insist on these exceptions and lay down stricter rules here.[3] They point to problems like remote espionage through electronic surveillance, which is frequently carried out by naval vessels sailing off foreign coasts.
Powers of intervention
German experts are, for their part, expressing concerns about foreign warships passing through Germany’s own Exclusive Economic Zone. This is a response to the fact that Russian ships repeatedly enter the EEZs of European countries, including Germany, primarily in the North Sea and Baltic Sea and sometimes in more southerly waters. According to a study by the Berlin-based German Institute for International and Security Affairs (Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik; SWP), the issue of “what powers of intervention coastal states have in their [EEZ]” is “controversial”.[4] The think-tank’s paper deals explicitly with straits in which littoral states claim an EEZ, the Taiwan Strait being a prime example. Within an EEZ that encompasses such a strait, states with a coastline are entitled, for example, to “adopt regulations to protect facilities, installations, cables and pipelines” and, to this end, “create safety zones”. “There is disagreement,” the SWP paper continues, as to whether coastal states are allowed to prevent foreign ships from “carrying out survey work or collecting information for other purposes”, which in effect means spying. The law certainly offers “scope for an argument that would justify interventions against spy ships”. The SWP admits that this position approximates to the legal interpretation advanced by China and a number of other states. India, for example, takes a similar view.
Ignoring the problem
The SWP think-tank’s conclusion that there is some latitude for justifying an intervention against foreign naval vessels would also apply in the case of the frigate ‘Baden-Württemberg’ entering the Taiwan Strait. The spectrum of operational tasks performed by the high-tech F125-class frigate includes not least “maritime surveillance”, states the Bundeswehr itself.[5] The ‘Baden-Württemberg’, which is precisely this class of vessel, has only just recently taken part in a US-led maritime surveillance operation to enforce UN sanctions against North Korea. And it is widely understood that the mission involves maritime spying on foreign countries to gather intelligence on developments in their coastal regions. It may be true that the frigate would not necessarily activate its surveillance technology during the passage through the Taiwan Strait. But in principle this would, of course, be possible. China, which is not at all happy with this situation, is bound to closely monitor the German warship’s movements. In Berlin, there is a conscious effort to ignore or downplay the issue. “International waters are international waters; it is the shortest route and, in view of the weather situation, the safest route,” proclaimed Defence Minister Boris Pistorius on Friday, “so we’re sailing through.”[6]
“Participating means participating”
Leading Berlin politicians have adopted a similar attitude of Brinkmanship towards Russia. Moscow has announced that the use of long-range Western-made weapons launched from Ukraine against targets deep in Russian territory would be seen as an act of war. Weapons such as the Franco-British ‘Storm Shadow’ cruise missiles can only be deployed effectively by using data from NATO forces and relying on the technical know-how of Western military personnel. This is already well known. It was underscored by the recording of a conversation between German air force officers, leaked at the beginning of March.[7] The officers discussed options for deploying Taurus cruise missiles from Ukraine that would conceal the inevitable involvement of Bundeswehr experts. The officers suggested that the required data sets could, if necessary, be transported “by car” first to Poland, i.e. to the border with Ukraine. They said British military personnel might possibly provide the Ukrainians with their indispensable assistance in missile targeting instead of German soldiers. The officers agreed during their call that, despite the government’s reservations, the Luftwaffe would not be able to avoid playing an active role, at least as far as data provision was concerned: “Participating means participating,” admitted one officer, knowing full well that even the active transmission of the data, let alone any active targeting by German military personnel, constitutes a “ground for war”.[8]
“No alternative”
Those reservations are rapidly crumbling. Politicians in Berlin’s governing coalition are now calling for Ukraine to be allowed to fire weapons such as the ‘Storm Shadow’ at targets far inside Russian territory. It is now a matter of enabling Kiev, “together with the other European states, the UK and the US, to destroy military targets on Russian territory,” explains Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann from the FDP, who is chair of the Subcommittee on Security and Defence of the European Parliament.[9] As Strack-Zimmermann adds, “This means that Germany must finally deliver the Taurus.” Anton Hofreiter from the Greens, who chairs the Bundestag Committee on European Union Affairs, agrees and calls for Ukraine to be “enabled to combat Russian launch sites on Russian territory with longer-range weapons.” “There is,” he proclaims, “no alternative.” Andreas Schwarz, member of the Bundestag for the SPD, is also in favour of releasing long-range weapon systems. This step “has been secured and is to be welcomed in principle,” argues Schwarz.[10]
Delusion
When confronted with the catastrophic prospect of a nuclear war that flows from Moscow’s stated view that the deployment of long-range Western weapons must be seen as Western countries directly entering the war with Russia, the German hawks respond like poker players. The Green politician Hofreiter guesses that Moscow will back down. “Russia’s threats have repeatedly proven empty.”[11] This is simply not true. Moscow had a red line when it came to Ukraine moving to join NATO. When that red line was crossed, Russia launched a war against Ukraine on 24 February 2022. This time, however, the stakes are even higher: the poker players may trigger a third world war.
[1] Lynn Kuok: Narrowing the differences between China and the US over the Taiwan strait. iiss.org 13.07.2022.
[2], [3] Michael Paul: Die USA, China und die Freiheit der See. SWP-Aktuell 14. Berlin, March 2016.
[4] Christian Schaller: Spionage und Sabotage vor Europas Küsten – Kritische Infrastruktur im Fadenkreuz. SWP-Studie 2024/S8. Berlin, 28.02.2024.
[5] Die Baden-Württemberg-Klasse: Marathonläufer für den Einsatz. bundeswehr.de.
[6] Deutsche Marine durchquert umstrittene Taiwanstraße. tagesschau.de 13.09.2024.
[7] Reinhard Lauterbach: Ist ein Pilot an Bord? junge Welt 14.09.2024.
[8] See also: Grounds for war.
[9], [10], [11] Die Taurus-Debatte ist zurück. spiegel.de 13.09.2024.
