By all appearances, Friedrich Merz’s recent comments about lifting restrictions on German weapons used by Ukraine have stirred not only political confusion but potentially geopolitical instability. Merz, the leader of Germany’s conservative CDU/CSU bloc and a likely future chancellor candidate, told a public audience that there are now “no range limits” on German-supplied weapons being used by Ukrainian forces against Russia. In so doing, he reignited one of Germany’s most dangerous debates: whether to send the long-range Taurus cruise missile to Kyiv – a weapon that could strike deep into Russian territory and, perhaps, change the nature of Germany’s involvement in the Ukraine war from that of a proxy supporter to a direct participant.

On the surface, Merz’s comments were either an unguarded improvisation or a deliberate strategic signal. Either interpretation carries enormous consequences. The German government – led by Chancellor Olaf Scholz until recently, and now under increasing influence from Merz and the CDU – has thus far refrained from sending the Taurus precisely because of its 500-kilometer range and the highly sensitive nature of its deployment. But Merz’s apparent dropping of range restrictions suggests that this red line may soon be erased, opening a Pandora’s box of escalatory risks.

Merz himself has since walked back the implications of his comments, claiming they did not represent a policy shift. But this is a familiar pattern in German politics: ambiguous statements, immediate clarifications, and a murky policy environment in which lines are increasingly blurred. This vagueness may be intentional. As German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius recently declared with pride, Berlin is now embracing “strategic ambiguity,” a term imported from French diplomacy, though it may be ill-suited to the gravity of Germany’s current geopolitical position.

Behind the ambiguity lies a more troubling reality. While Merz claims his remarks were prompted by........

© Blitz