After a long wait, Germany now wants to deliver 14 of the long-desired Leopard 2 main battle tanks to Ukraine. The new Defense Minister Boris Pistorius (SPD) describes the decision as “historic”. Now defeated Ukraine wants even more weapons, including fighter jets and long-range missiles. But what do we want? Where does it all end? Where are the famous “red lines”? And what is actually to be thought of Olaf Scholz now? Anne Will debated these questions on Sunday evening in her ARD talk show.

The only one in the group who fundamentally argues against arms deliveries to Ukraine is, as expected, the head of the Left Party, who constantly warns against an “escalation logic”, against the “playing down of the war”, for example by some Greens. But she’s not a keen pacifist either. However, her constant demand for a “negotiated solution” suffers from the fact that she cannot really say how the world can now achieve that at least the two warring parties now negotiate seriously with each other. There is always talk of “more pressure”, and yet it remains a little nebulous. “At the moment I don’t know what to negotiate,” says Georg Mascolo from the “Süddeutsche”.

On the other hand, Carlo Masala, a professor of international politics, argues with refreshing clarity: “Yes, of course the arms deliveries are prolonging the war.” In his opinion, delivering none, or at least significantly fewer, weapons to Ukraine would also have meant that “there would be no Ukraine today.” In order to negotiate, says Masala, you have to support the attacked country against the overpowering enemy. With good weapons, and “sustainable” at that.

If the Left Party had been followed from the start, Ukraine would have been “overrun” long ago, says Olaf Scholz, chief explainer Kevin Kühnert. The Chancellor’s critics would say “nonsense” in order to realize “small-minded political gains”, complains Kühnert, who praises the Chancellor’s hesitation as “pausing” and attests Scholz – albeit not quite rightly – that he has the answer of arms deliveries “never drew red lines”.

Marina Weisband, who used to be a big hit with the Pirates when it still seemed to be a relevant party and is now with the Greens, Weisband thinks that Scholz’s long silence is “a big problem”: “What is Germany’s goal “, she asks – but there is no right answer that evening either. Weisband, who is German and Ukrainian, advocates sending as many weapons as possible to Ukraine as soon as possible. That much is quickly clear. Ukraine is being kept “on a drip,” she criticizes: too few weapons to win, too many to lose, just enough, so late, not to anger Russia too much. “Putin was given too much time by the West,” says Weisband.

Which brings us back to Olaf Scholz and his “pausing”. But he doesn’t have to listen to too much criticism from Messrs. Masala and Mascolo. Even if he didn’t deliver “a communicative masterpiece”, as the professor attests, who also criticizes the recent “shouting” in the traffic light coalition. In any case, that didn’t happen that evening: Ms. Strack-Zimmermann from the FDP was invited just as little as Toni Hofreiter from the Greens.

“Nothing is out of the question,” says journalist Mascolo, with a view to further arms deliveries. Well, except for ground troops from Germany, of course. “It’s not in our hands when Putin escalates,” says Professor Masala.

You can see “Anne Will” in the ARD media library.