Here in Berlin, as the aftershocks of Russia s invasion
of Ukraine continue, Germany discards the policies
of decades, to lead the European response.
As Germany steps forward to play a key role in Europe's
defence and foreign policy, Nato's secretary-general tells us
it's a turning point.
The German decision is historic, partly because it affects the shift,
the pivotal moment, we face in Europe.
On the battlefields, meanwhile, Ukraine accuses Russia
of bombing a theatre housing hundreds of refugees.
We've the latest on that and possible peace moves with Russia.
As we await news on the death toll in this latest attack, are we any
closer to a negotiated peace?
A homecoming for Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe after nearly
seven years in detention.
She and fellow detainee Anoosheh Ashoori are due to land
in the UK in the next two hours.
We'll speak to the Zaghari-Ratcliffe family lawyer.
Good evening from the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin, the scene to some
Good evening from the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin, the scene of some
of the most tumultuous moments in European history and the place
now where in the wake of Vladimir Putin's invasion
of Ukraine, Germany's government has set the country on a new path.
For those who have longed to see it match economic greatness
with leadership in international security, set the shame
of its warlike past into a historical context,
and to abandon its accommodations with President Putin,
that time is now upon us.
In a moment we'll speak to a range of politicians and players to make
sense of this sweeping change.
First, a look at Germany's historic shift.
There was a time when talk of German rearmament would have caused shock
waves across Europe.
But now at this old east German training area,
they're preparing new soldiers for the mountain troops - part of an
army that's about to be revitalised.
With war stalking the continent, the Bundeswehr has a big funding
increase in its sights -
a boost of 100 billion euros, part of a new foreign policy
set out by the government in response to the invasion of Ukraine.
The government here is talking about a complete transformation of
Germany's defence and foreign policy.
It's a bold announcement, but it will take time to come
to fruition.
Many in Europe would say the changes announced by Chancellor
Scholz are long overdue.
This man was military advisor to Angela
Merkel, as Germany failed to meet increased defence
Merkel, as Germany failed to meet increased defence spending pledges
set by Nato after Vladimir Putin seized Crimea in 2014.
We gave more money in the defence budget in 2014, but
we did not change our policy towards Russia.
Angela Merkel tried to include the Russians again in the
European system and she tried to talk.
But I think in the end we missed seven years and we should
have started to change completely our policy seven
years ago and not today.
In Berlin, where the mass graves of Soviet soldiers who fell
in 1945 remind everyone of the cataclysm of
the Second World War, the German preference for
diplomacy and commerce, rather than deterrence
and confrontation, seemed logical for decades.
The Soviet Union lost 27 million people.
And Germans are very conscious of the
fact that the very worst damage was done in the Soviet
Union and in the east.
So, you know, the desire not to...
..the desire to reconcile with the Soviet Union was one of the
strongest desires in German foreign policy and in many ways quite equal
to the desire to reconcile with the Jewish people.
And as if to remind Germany's politicians, the Reichstag
still bears the graffiti left by the Soviet soldiers who took it.
And well before Parliament shifted here,
the Social Democrat Willy Brandt pioneered a rapprochement with the
Kremlin and a later leader, Gerhardt Schroeder, stressed economic
interdependence was a good thing, leading to a heavy reliance on
Russian gas and oil.
Something today's politicians now seek to end.
I don't think that we will have a complete boycott of getting oil
for the next few months, or even years.
Because we are very much dependent.
I think there is still some deliberations
on how can we manage not to pay too much
into the war chest of Putin by buying his
oil and gas, of course.
And at the same time developing a strategy not to
damage our own economy and our own physical well being.
So, now, the energy investments have to be unpicked and
the coercive side of German policy, the military, beefed up.
But the Bundeswehr has suffered from decades
of underfunding.
Its readiness and ability to sustain a fight are low.
Fixing those issues could soon blast through that promised
100 billion.
The Bundeswehr is in a bad situation, we have less tanks than
Switzerland and less ships that our small
neighbour, the Netherlands.
The air force is a little bit better,
but our navy for instance, we have the smallest
navy of our history.
From that point of view, these hundred billion...
..is not a very high amount of money, when we need
that to strengthen our military capabilities.
But for those serving and training now, there is at least
the promise that their troops will be made ready for conflict.
The targets of growing military potential and a more hard-headed
approach to Russia have now been fixed, then.
But if Vladimir Putin passed from the scene in the coming
months, would Germany's new-found vigour falter and more traditional
attitudes to defence spending and indeed Russia
reassert themselves?
I'm joined by Nils Schmid, foreign policy spokesperson
for the governing Social Democrats, Conservative politician
Roderich Kiesewetter, who sits on the Bundestag foreign
affairs committee and served in the German army.
And a deputy director of the German Marshall Fund
to the United States, Sudha David-Wilp.
Welcome to you all on this special Newsnight programme. Let's start off
with this issue, Nils Schmid, if Putin did fall, do you think many of
the changes that have been announced by the Chancellor would start to
trend back again, whether that is on energy or military spending or in
foreign policy? No, I don't think so. We have to acknowledge that
Russia has become a very aggressive country, it has invaded a
neighbouring country, and so, we had better prepare ourselves and
strengthen Nato and strengthen our military. You never know who will
come after Putin, so we had better understand that we are in along a
with Russia, independently of Putin. Why did it take Germany as long as
it did to realise what you've just said? Because Poland or the Baltic
republics would say that was obvious after 2014, maybe even after Georgia
in 2008? Well, with the benefit of hindsight, you always know better,
but after all, we should not feel ashamed about trying to solve
conflicts via diplomacy, and that's what the Chancellor did until the
very last moment, but now, we have to adapt, and I think that the last
30 years were more dominated by the idea of dialogue and detente, and
now it's time to come back to the idea of deterrence, and to put more
emphasis on this.
emphasis on this. Do you agree that the old politics is over now? Yes, I
think there is now an acknowledgement that the last 30
years have a been a bit of a respite from history and I don't think there
will be any turning back now. As the Chancellor said in Parliament in his
historic speech, we need to invest in this area in order to secure our
freedom and democracy, it's not just about Russia, but I think Germany
realises, to be a responsible stakeholder, it has to have a strong
military. Roderich Kiesewetter, we hear about the increase in military
spending, Germany was on about 1.36 of its economy, going up to over 2%,
it is a big economy, so those are big sums of money, does it mean the
German Armed Forces will grow commensurately in size? I believe
this would be the wrong approach, what we need is really a shift in
the strategic culture, we need a national security strategy as the
coalition treaty is promising, and then we need to prioritise according
to our interests, and then we need to re-shift the armed forces to the
defence of the alliance and for national defence. We are not able to
do this because for the last 16 years, 20 years, we invested not in
smart diplomacy or smart power, we only invested in diplomacy, and this
was one, in hindsight. We are using hindsight, but is your party, the
SPD, now ashamed of its former chancellor, Gerhard Schroder, the
deals he did, the role he played, in enhancing Germany's dependence on
Russian energy? Obviously now there is a certain unease among our party
members regarding Schr der's recent behaviour, not distancing himself
from putting's aggression, and so, yes, this casts a long shadow over
his political heritage, and this is also to the detriment of our party.
Could he be sanctioned, should he be sanctioned, do you think, is a
member of the Gazprom board, the Russian energy company? I think this
is not a solution, it could be, I guess, but the main issue is that we
need to refurbish our energy structure, and I believe that he is
blamed enough. On that point, the energy
energy structure, Sudha, do you think Germans have absorbed what is
coming down the line, not just in terms of increasing costs, but the
question of how on earth supply is going to be changed when this
economy depends on energy to degree it does for manufacturing but I had
the majority of Germans support the government moves in terms of
isolating Russia, and I think the consumer is ready to sacrifice, they
have said, freeze for the cause of freedom. But I don't think there is
a real realisation that if Germany cuts off its natural gas supply from
Russia, that it will also cause massive disruption to industry, and
that could mean job losses, although the German National Academy of
Sciences has said that an embargo would be manageable for the German
economy. Nils Schmid, have you modelled the job losses aspect of
this, have you looked into the future and what it might hold,
because it's going to be quite a challenging time for all of Europe,
and Germany in particular? Yes, of course, and our government has
modelled the potential job losses and the potential damage to our
national economy. If we stopped oil and gas imports completely from one
day to the other. That's why it's more about... A what is that figure,
sorry to interrupt? I'm not sure, but what we are sure of is the fact
that in terms of manufacturing, especially when it comes to the
petrochemical industry, we cannot just stop 100% of oil imports from
Russia from one day to the other, but we could speed up phasing out
oil and gas imports from Russia, and I believe that the easiest thing to
do is to end coal imports, because you can switch to other coal
providers quite easily when it comes to oil, this is more complicated,
because it also depends on the nature of oil, is it Brent oil, is
it crude oil from Russia? It very much depends what you want to do
with the oil that comes in from Russia. So, it's not as easy as we
would love to see it, of course.
We talked about the Schroeder legacy, but the Angela Merkel
legacy, people said she wasn't understanding enough of Ukraine and
also made the country as dependent or more so on Russian energy, do you
think history will judge her harshly? I think Putin will cut off
Nord Stream 2 before us. There was a decision to leave the energy without
having an alternative so we should invest in renewable energy, instead
of coal. But we are dependent on Russian energy, because we spent in
our own way against the EU and the European energy policy and this was
a mistake, committed by the government of Schroeder the two
governments of Angela Merkel until 2017. These were severe mistakes.
Also against the foreign politicians we always have been against it,
because it was a specific way that wrong against Europe and we saw the
dependence, but we were not listened to. Let's look forward again now. Do
you think, people have spoken for decades of Franco-German political
motor in Europe, will there be a Franco-German mill military and
security one? Yes the talk of a hundred billion euros to reach the
2% Nato goal, this opens opportunities for collaborations
within Europe and for cementing Germany as a very important partner
for the United States in you're in. - in Europe. This opens up new
opportunities for the security architecture in Europe.
architecture in Europe. Do you anticipate the day when President
Trump may get re-elected and as Emmanuel Macron and Olaf Scholz said
the European dimension may have to come to the fore? Yes we would like
to ride the two horses in the future. I think with the Trump
experience in mind, Europeans should be better prepared to defend
themselves in the case of a American withdrawal from Europe. Lastly and
briefly, what about Britain's role in this crisis and in this future?
Do you think Britain now reengages on the security and foreign policy
plain, or does Brexit remain an obstacle. We need their resources in
naval and secret service energies they have and I believe that the
co-operation with Britain could become a role model also for Ukraine
for the western Balkans and with if we have a joint defence arrangement
with Britain this would offer opportunities to other regions in
Europe. Thank you.
Ultimately the German position will be heavily influenced
by Ukraine and its government which will have to decide
its terms for peace.
And the worse the civilian loss of life and damage to the country,
the harder it will be for them to make compromises.
Well this afternoon a theatre in the besieged port of Mariupol
being used as a shelter by hundreds of civilians was bombed, with
reports of a heavy loss of life.
Yalda Hakim is in Lviv and joins us now.
What can you add to these apparently tragic events in Mariupol? The pure
horror for the people of Mariupol continues. You will remember last
week that the bombing of the maternity and children's hospital
and this afternoon we learned that that drama theatre which had about
1,200 people in it, has been hit by a Russian bombardment F you look at
footage on social media of the drama theatre, you can see big white
signs. One at the front and one at the back. In Russian it says
"children". That was to deter any attempt to hit or strike that
particular theatre. The authorities tell us they still don't know the
number of people who were killed, or stuck under the rubble, because this
has been the situation in Mariupol for the last few weeks with the
shelling and bombardment. Dead bodies have been lying in the
streets. They have had mass graves, because they have not had time to
individually bury people. The authorities say that they don't know
how many people have been killed, but they know that the majority of
people who were in there, all of the people in there, were sheltering
from the bombing, many of them children. Do we have any clearer
idea what form of possible framework peace agreement might be taking
shape between Russia and Ukraine? Well, as we have been reporting,
this is the fifth round of talks and you will remember that last Friday,
Sergey Lavrov met with the Ukrainian foreign minister and rather than
sort of coming up with any kind of draft agreement there has been a lot
of finger-pointing about humanitarian corridors for example.
But in the last 24 hours we have seen sign of optimism. President
Zelensky said he is aware that Ukraine may never be part of Nato.
This has been something that both Kyiv and Brussels have been aware
for some time. But in the in the course of the last 21 days we
haven't heard Volodymyr Zelensky say that. He said he knew the door was
open but that was also closed in many ways. We are seeing signs of
concessions and we are expecting some draft agreement from both
sides. But we will have to see how Ukraine is placed. Because of course
the Ukrainian people, they would need to be some kind of referendum
if they were to put within their constitution that they would never
join Nato and they would pledge a neutrality. This is a demand that
Russia has made on Ukraine, saying that one of reasons for the invasion
is that they wanted neutrality and the Crimea and the don Bas to be
recognised as Russian territory. It will have to be seen how much the
Ukrainians are willing to compromise. Thank you.
Well as this crisis develops, Nato is centre stage.
How far does it go to help Ukraine and what will happen if that country
has to renounce its pledge to join the western alliance Is that part
of the price it must pay for peace?
Earlier, I spoke to Jens Stoltenberg,
Nato's Secretary General, and began by asking what sort
of difference Germany's big new defence spending
commitments would make.
The German decision is historic, partly because it affects the shift,
the pivotal moment that we face in Europe because of
the invasion of Ukraine.
But also because it will of course add significantly
to Nato's capability.
Germany is the biggest economy in Europe, and when they say
spending more than 2% on defence, it really makes a difference.
And one of the first announcements is that they will now also acquire
fifth-generation aircraft, which is extremely important,
that Germany continues to have these kind of planes,
or will have these types of planes, it will also enable them to be part
of Nato's nuclear deterrent or nuclear sharing arrangements.
So, this is big, and I commend Germany for the leadership they have
shown over the last weeks after the invasion of Ukraine.
Now, one of the narratives that was quite widespread in recent
years was this idea that Nato enlargement was a threat to Russia,
was encircling Russia - if a country like Finland joins
Nato, that's another 1,300 kilometres of Nato front line
on Russia's borders, are you at all worried
that there might not be some retaliatory action by Russia?
This is for Finland to decide, whether they want
to join Nato or not.
Second, Nato enlargement over the last decades has
been a great success.
It has helped to ensure the security, stability, democracy,
freedom across Europe and helped to preserve peace
across this continent.
Now, I want to ask you about Ukraine in Nato, because we've
heard interesting words from President Zelensky in the last
two days about this, if Ukraine decides that Nato's door
is closed to Ukraine, as seems to be the case,
is there some way that Nato members can give meaningful guarantees
of Ukrainian security in the future?
Well, Nato's policy is clear, we respect the sovereign right
of Ukraine to choose its own path, to decide whether it aspires
to Nato membership or not, and then it is for the 30 allies
to decide on the issue of membership, if Ukraine
meets the standards for joining the alliance.
So, this is for the aspiring country, Ukraine, and for the 30
Allies, no-one else has a say.
Of course, if Ukraine changes its ambition,
then, of course, we will respect that, too.
When it comes to potential security guarantees,
I'll not speculate about that, there are talks going
on between Ukraine and Russia, and I think anything I say will only
complicate and confuse those talks, so I support the talks
going on between Russia and Ukraine, and I really hope that
that will lead to some rapid end of the war,
so that we have a political, negotiated, diplomatic solution.
But if Ukraine withdrew its application as a result of those
talks, you would accept that, you'd have no choice?
Of course.
We respect sovereign, democratic decisions by free,
sovereign nations, and Russia should do the same.
The problem is that Russia is not respecting sovereign nations
when they make their own decisions.
We do, regardless of whether they apply for or don't
apply for Nato membership.
And lastly, in terms of that support, I just want to ask
you about one detail, some reports today that Nato members
have started supplying Ukraine with Russian-made anti-aircraft
missile systems, that is in addition to the previous
shipments, is that true?
For operational reasons, I will not go into every detail
of what Nato allies are providing, but Nato allies have
provided and continue to provide advanced systems,
air defence systems, anti-tank weapons, and other weapons systems,
to help them to fight back also in the air, including drones
and other air defence capabilities.
So, we do that, but I think it's important that we also understand
that we wish to not expose everything we do, that will only
make it harder to provide the support allies are providing
to Ukraine, to help them uphold their right for self-defence,
a right which is enshrined in the UN charter, and we help them
to uphold that right.
Secretary-General, thank you very much indeed
for joining us on Newsnight.
Thank you.
Of course, this dizzying month, a bonfire of certainties in German
foreign policy goes much wider than this country.
Before the invasion, there seemed to be all sorts
of divisions in Europe - about energy, arming Ukraine,
or cutting off Russia's banks.
But since then, there has been a broad consensus.
Countries like Poland and Hungary that were once so irritating
to the Commission in Brussels are now front line
players needing support.
Those hooked on Russian gas are looking elsewhere and it's open
season on the oligarchs.
Our international editor Gabriel Gatehouse assesses
the landscape of a newly united Europe.
Three million refugees in three weeks. It is the biggest migration
crisis Europe has seen since the Second World War and yet... What we
have seen so far is unprecedented solidarity shown by European
citizens. And solidarity shown by officials, the border guards and
police they are working extra time without payment. What a difference
seven years makes. In the summer of 2015, the war in Syria sparked a
huge influx of refugees into the EU. Germany opened up its borders,
setting off a mass movement of people. Other countries responded
with fences and angry rhetoric. The crisis nearly broke the EU. Fast
forward to 2020 and even the most migrant-sceptical states have
approved a method giving Ukrainians the right to stay and work
throughout the EU. There was several factors at play. Certainly an
element of Islamophobia in 2015 when the refugees were mostly men from
Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Today, the refugees are Ukrainians, people
who share with their hosts in Poland and other states many cultural and
religious roots. But there is something else. It is almost as if
in the face of a very real threat of conflict, the EU has remembered what
it was created to do.
it was created to do. Amid the ruins of war-torn Europe, a French Foreign
Minister with a German surname had an idea.
NEWSREEL: Is immediate aim is to thin out... The Schuman declaration
put the coal and steel industries of France and Germany under a single
authority, BA was to bind France and Germany together so that war would
become effectively impossible. Schuman called it a de facto
solidarity, it was the start of the European project. I was born in 55,
after the Second World War, in western Germany, as a post-war
child, and my whole life was strongly influenced by a message my
parents passed to their children, growing up in very poor times,
turbulent times, and as young people facing a wall. And there for we are
pro-Europeans, we are in favour of cross-border co-operation, socially,
politically, culturally, to avoid that countries and nations in Europe
for back into these times. The founding mission of the European
Union was peace through prosperity. But somewhere along the road, after
the fall of the Bernie wall, after the end of history, the EU's central
purpose as a peace project seemed outdated. Russia's attack on Ukraine
has changed all that. It's a defining moment in which the
European Union wakes up to the dangerous world it is in, and
particularly to the fact that Russia is now a power to your east, and the
United States may no longer be your security guarantor to your West. So,
people are now facing up to the fact that the European Union has to be a
three-dimensional power, not just economic and cultural, but also
military. Over the past decade, Russia has been adept at exploiting
Europe's divisions, supporting Eurosceptic parties, particularly on
the right, politicians who flaunted their appreciation of Vladimir Putin
as a badge of dissent against Brussels. That cosy symbiosis seems
to have evaporated almost overnight. When Matteo Salvini of the far right
party visited the Polish Ukrainian border last week, the local mayor
publicly shamed him with a copy of his own Putin T-shirt. Yesterday,
the Prime Minister is of Poland, Slovenia and the Czech Republic,
three countries that have in recent years push back against closer EU
integration, travelled by train to war-torn Kyiv. They brought with
them a message of de facto solidarity, of the kind of dream dog
by the EU's founding fathers. It was a powerful moment. But this union of
27 states with often diverging governments, priorities and values
remains structurally prone to paralysis. The power of the European
Union, which is economically enormous, and politically very poor,
because we have this principle of unanimity, and if one member state
out of the 27 disagrees and puts a veto, the European Union is
paralysed. Because the divisions that Russia has been able to exploit
quite successfully over the past ten years will not have magically
disappeared in the last three weeks? For sure not, and therefore repeat,
the answer should be more united action, and I'm relatively
optimistic that all of the member states of the European Union have
understood that this is the need of our time. The current unity in the
EU extends beyond the warm welcome for refugees. On foreign policy, on
defence, on energy, Europe seems to be speaking almost with one voice.
But is it a moment or a turning point?
Gabriel Gatehouse there.
So, if Putin had hoped his invasion might help sow discord in the West,
how might a sense of renewed unity across Europe and Nato have gone
down in the Kremlin?
Well, we're joined now from Moscow by Mikhail Kasyanov,
who served as Prime Minister in Putin's first term as President.
And has since been an opponent of his. Do you think people assumed in
the Kremlin and more widely in Moscow that they would be a
disunited response to this act in Ukraine? I think initially that was
a great mistake, but that mistake was based on the previous occasions,
we remember what happened in 2008, when Putin invaded Georgia, and what
the response of the Western world was, it was very simple, just none
of the ceasefire agreement was implemented by the regime and in
fact three months after, it appeared to be business as usual between
Russia and the European Union and other Western countries. Putin
decided that is a committed behaviour, and that's why we just
see in 2014, annexation of Crimea and war in eastern Donbas, and
again, sanctions were not so heavily targeted, and not created major
difficulties for Putin, four Russia's economy, but today, I think
we see Putin and his inner circle, they are shocked about unity,
transatlantic unity and the unity of the European Union, and these
sanctions which were imposed recently, they have a real
devastating effect, and people in the Kremlin are shocked about this,
and today, when I discussed this, that was evident.
that was evident. You know the economy intimately, how big a blow
are the financial sanctions on the bank transfer system, on Russia's
lines of credit, will it bring about a default, do you think, and the
possible collapse of the entire Russian economy? Not at the moment,
of course not, but it is very serious, on the financial system
first of all, and we see the most important thing is the blockage of
international resources of the country. I mean, central bank
resource. And in fact central bank is not in a position to support the
ruble, and that's why the national currency was devalued by 40% within
three days, and in the Chinese currency, they do not want to
exchange it for dollars or euro, that's why this part of the
international resource also blocked, that's why this is a very serious
situation on the financial system. In terms of potential default, I
think just today they have heard from the Treasury Secretary of the
United States that payment of debts, it's not prohibited, it is not
blocked. I think just the interest service of the bonds will be made
tomorrow. Let me justJump in with a last question which is about the
speech that President Putin made tonight, excoriating people who he
said would prefer to be on the French Riviera and easting oysters,
but he also talked about a fifth column internally in Russia, how
ominous a signal to you think that speech was? Absolutely awful signal,
that is a reminder somehow of Stalin's a spirit of the time, not
just about French Riviera, oysters, it's about fifth column, it's about
as Putin says traitors, those people who disagree with Putin's policy,
announced to be traitors, and he called just a cleansing of the
society, that means it opens to a massive repression against those who
don't agree with Putin's regime, and in fact that is a very serious
signal and I think just more thousands of Russians will flee from
Russia just in the upcoming days. Thank you very much indeed for
joining us, on a sobering note there, Mikhail Kasyanov.
We'll digest further the impact of the seismic change we've
witnessed here in Berlin and across Europe in a few minutes.
But first, let's turn to another important story this evening,
the imminent return to Britain of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe.
She's expected to touch down soon at RAF Brize Norton along
with Anoosheh Ashoori, another Anglo-Iranian
who was being held.
Both flew out of Tehran earlier today.
They were taken initially to Oman on a jet belonging to their air
force, before heading back to the UK.
About the same time she left, the Foreign Secretary confirmed
that the £400 million that Britain owed Iran for an aborted tank
contract from the '70s had been paid back in full.
That, it seems, was a key reason for her detention
of nearly seven years.
Well, we're joined now from the UK by Penny Madden QC,
a lawyer who's worked closely with the Zaghari-Ratcliffe family.
You've been talking to them throughout the day, Penny Madden,
tell me about their spirits and their mood this evening? I think
absolute jubilation and huge relief, the last few days have been a real
seesaw of emotions. On Monday, when Nazanin's passport was returned, it
felt like a complete seachange, this was the moment we had been hoping
and praying for, and then a nerve-racking and anxious wait.
Yesterday there was some hope that Nazanin would be on a plane by
yesterday evening, that was not to be, and then an agonising wait at
the airport this morning, absolute nailbiting moments, real stress and
anxiety from Richard, and Richard having to control a very excitable
young Gabriella who, all she wanted was her money to come home. So, you
can imagine that when Nazanin sent Richard a picture of her sitting on
the plane with the small plane windows behind her with a huge smile
on her face, that was a moment of absolute relief. And I presume that
was the moment, because Richard spoke quite cautiously this morning,
didn't he, about, he will believe it when it happens, sort of thing, that
was the moment when it became real for him, was it? It was, I don't
think anybody allowed themselves to really believe that this was
happening until Nazanin was on the plane. There was an anxious wait
when we didn't quite know what was going on at the airport, we knew
that she was at the airport but still there was nothing official in
terms of, she would be allowed to board the plane. So, yes, and there
have been windows when we thought things were moving, obviously
nothing like as positive as what has been experienced over the last few
days, but we have had moments of optimism and those moments have been
dashed with great and bitter disappointment. So, it was a huge,
enormous relief and celebration when she actually boarded the plane and
it was wheels up and she was on her way. This has been going on for
years, there have been different foreign secretaries, different
people trying to mediate my trying to resolve this, in your own mind,
who do you think is the person who should most be credited for bringing
about today's result? I think that is a very difficult question, I
think on the one hand you should say, why hasn't this happened over
the last six years, because it's been a very long and agonising six
years? I think there are a number of people who've done some very
positive moves in the past, obviously when Jeremy Hunt invoked
Diplomatic Protection Group Nazanin, when he was Foreign Secretary, all
the work of redress, Alastair Macdonald QC, Tanya, the legal team
that have been working really hard. But ultimately it's very difficult
to know what the catalyst has been moving things forward, but what we
are very clear, and we've been agitating for a long time now, is
that what was blocking Nazanin coming home was payment of this IMS
debt. So, clearly, whoever made that decision, that was a real game
changer. Penny Madden, not long to wait now, thank you very much indeed
for joining us with that update.
Back now to Germany's great paradigm shift.
What have these historic last few weeks felt
like for the people of this country?
And to what extent are they ready for it?
We're joined now by the Berlin Bureau Chief
for the New York Times, Katrin Bennhold.
And a biographer of former Chancellor Merkel and journalist at
the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Ralph Bollmann.
Welcome to you both. Katrin Bennhold, how have people you know
responded to what has happened in the last few weeks, here in Berlin?
Most people said that they couldn't quite believe their eyes and their
ears, when Olaf Scholz stood up in Parliament, and really within three
days of the invasion broke half a dozen taboos that seemed untouchable
before. In 30 minutes, he raised military spending beyond the 2%
target, he said that in addition to that, there would be 100 billion
euros special funds available to bolster the military further, he
talked about armed drones, he talked about Tornado succession that is
nuclear compatible, these were all issues individually that were like
small bombs. He basically proclaimed a mini revolution in the space of 30
minutes, in his very monotonous shots voice. So, most people were
slightly shocked. One thing I remember from polling before this
happened, Ralph Bollmann, was a big number of Germans not really
believing in the military instrument, thinking it was futile
and evil and pointless and never achieved its aims, do you think that
attitude has changed? Yes, I think so, it was in the DNA of Germans,
especially of western Germans, since the Second World War, to be a people
of civilians, and the role of the army in society was always a little
bit complicated, even the former Conservative Chancellor Helmut Kohl
would rather spend money than participate in military actions are
Kuwait in 1991, for example. And now, it's a really, really change in
attitudes, you see left-wing demonstrators here at Brandenburg
gate to say, we have to deliver weapons to Ukraine. That's really
new. But I'm not completely sure how long it will last, I think that
depends on what will happen with Russia and Ukraine. That's a very
important question,
important question, isn't it, Katrin Bennhold, because if as a result of
sanctions or whatever, President Putin soon fell, I guess people
might want to be back to business as usual? I am a journalist, I'm not in
the business of predicting the future, but I wouldn't be so
cynical, I think something real has shifted here, and the Germans have
reinterpreted their history quite quickly and have realised that yes,
we were reluctant in the past to use military intervention partly because
we know what it is like to be on alongside of history, we didn't
quite trust ourselves. I think today, they have internalised the
sense that freedom comes with a pricetag, we have to defend our
democracy, and in fact our history is every reason to become more of a
military leader in Europe is that a sort of normalisation of Germany in
terms of its attitude to defence and security? Yes, I would say it's kind
of the final possible big step Germany as a country takes to become
a more normal country. Ralph Bollmann, Germany has been
enormously successful through an economic model, exporting including
quite a lot to Russia and China and relying on cheap energy, how big a
shock is this going to be to people? I think we are in a deep crisis of
the German economic model, that is a point which is not so much yet in
the mind of many Germans, but the German model depends on exporting to
dictatorships, to China especially, and importing cheap gas from Russia.
And only this combination was at the root of the German export model, the
biggest export nation of the world during the last decade, and I think
there will be a deep crisis in the upcoming years, much more than for
other countries in Europe or in the West. Please come back on that,
Katrin Bennhold, but also, lastly, is Olaf Scholz the man to lead the
country through this crisis? That is a very difficult question, as a
journalist I have learned one thing, charisma is great, we love charisma,
but judgment is probably more important. I think the jury is still
out, let's give him a bit more time, he has only been in office for 100
days. On the point of energy, I'm not sure it is a huge crisis, I
think it is a necessary jolt to push us into the carbon neutral future
that we have promised ourselves to go. And the fact that our liberal
finance minister now talks about freedom energy, when he talks about
renewable energy, tells you something about the narrative shift
in that sense, too. But that will take time, I think that is the
problem. And it is not so easy in a company like
company like -- in a country like Germany which is not so open to
changes. We just changed in three days!
That's it from us tonight.
Our week of special programmes from key capitals continues.
As we speak Kirsty is heading into Washington DC from where she'll
be presenting tomorrow.
In the US capital there's a single question that's occupying minds -
how on earth does the United States confront Russia, oh,
and by the way China, without triggering World War Three?
That's your appointment to view tomorrow, but that's all from us
here in Berlin for tonight.
Next up is John Simpson's new global current affairs show Unspun World.
Good night.