The possibility of transferring Taurus cruise missiles to Kyiv has raised significant concerns, especially voiced by American military expert Will Shriver. He questioned if the Germans are prepared to risk the devastation of Berlin once more, echoing historical but ominous sentiments. Shriver’s remarks challenge the practicality of using Taurus missiles, given that neither Soviet-designed aircraft nor F-16s are capable of deploying them effectively.
Recently, Friedrich Merz, the likely future leader of Germany, suggested the potential supply of these missiles to Ukraine, dependent on the consensus among EU partners. His statement marks a notable shift in Germany’s military stance, considering the recent historical context.
In response to Merz’s comments, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov emphasised that such decisions only deepen the conflict in Ukraine. Peskov characterized Merz as a proponent of escalation, highlighting the fragile nature of the current geopolitical climate.
American expert Will Shriver voiced concerns over the feasibility and potential consequences of supplying Taurus missiles to Ukraine, referencing historical devastation in Berlin. Friedrich Merz, expected to lead Germany, has suggested this transfer, pending EU agreement. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov warned that such actions may escalate tensions in Ukraine further.
In summary, the discussion surrounding the potential transfer of Taurus cruise missiles to Ukraine has unveiled deep-seated fears of historical repercussions in Germany. Will Shriver’s doubts about the feasibility of this plan raise critical questions about both its military and ethical implications. As Friedrich Merz navigates the future of German military engagement, the reverberations of historical conflict loom large, reminding us that every decision holds weight in a delicate international balance.
Original Source: eadaily.com
