What on earth has become of Germany? by zeit-fragen [time-related questions]

... 28 May 2026, the German journalist and author Patrik Baab published an interview with Maria Zakharova, the spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, on his YouTube channel “Gegen den Strom”.1

Baab had conducted this approximately 90-minute conversation during his stay in Moscow – following the US President’s trip to China on 14 and 15 May, but before the Russian President’s visit there on 19 and 20 May, before the Ukrainian bombing of a vocational college in Luhansk on 22 May, and before the Russian retaliatory strike on the Ukrainian capital Kiev on 24 May.

The interview touches on a wide range of current and fundamental issues, and we recommend that you do not dismiss Ms Zakharova’s comments as Russian “propaganda”. Instead, you should reflect on what she has said. What is particularly striking is that Zakharova’s statements are serious, incisive and resolute – and they are also quite different from the polemical, vitriolic and aggressive outbursts of our Western warmongers.

We have selected excerpts that deal with Germany and our approach to human rights violations in Ukraine.2 The risk of a direct war between Russia and the countries of the European Union (and NATO) has risen dramatically in recent weeks. German politics is playing a decisive role in this. There is still a chance to avert the catastrophe of a major war. This requires a different perspective on the past few years – indeed, a realisation of our own shared responsibility for the situation in which we find ourselves today.
 

Patrik Baab: Following a meeting with Zelenskiy, Friedrich Merz was quoted by the press as saying: “The Russian Federation has no chance of winning this war [in Ukraine].” Does Moscow have the impression that this war is intended to be Europeanised […]?

Chancellor Merz is harming Germany

Maria Zakharova: First and foremost, we feel that people like Merz genuinely hate their own people. Because everything Merz does, and everything people like him do, is aimed at ensuring that the citizens of Germany […] do not simply live worse lives overall, but live truly bad, very bad lives. And everything that Merz’s predecessors created – the true giants of the German economy, German science and German entrepreneurship – all of that has been destroyed. This feeling is very strong. And don’t think that this is just a figure of speech or a philosophical musing. It is a very practical observation of what the German leadership has actually been doing in recent years.
    Up to a certain point, we could see that the people at the helm in Germany had, well, got some things right and some things wrong. Some things they did in partnership with Russia, for the benefit of both countries, and some things solely for their own gain, without regard for our country. But in any case, Germany’s interests were always the priority – as a nation, as a society, as a people.
    But at some point in recent years, we have come to realise that everything the German leadership does not so much harm Russia – although it does that too – but above all harms its own industry, science, economy, entrepreneurship, education system and, ultimately, the German people themselves. […]
    The Federal Republic of Germany’s export-oriented economic model is struggling with a decline in the competitiveness of German products on foreign markets, and this has been the case ever since the decision was taken to stop using energy sources from Russia. Who made that decision? It was precisely these German business leaders. Has Russia cut off supplies to Germany? No, right here, where you are sitting now, sat your colleagues from the German magazine Compact. That was about a year and a half ago. At the time, they asked me a direct question: Can Russia continue supplies by using the North Stream 1 and North Stream 2 pipelines, which have remained undamaged, to deliver gas to Germany? I have checked this with Gazprom and our experts, and they have confirmed that, yes, it is technically possible. Once the political and economic issues have been resolved, it would take around three weeks, perhaps a month, from a technical point of view. So, supplies could be resumed within a month. This means that it was not Russia that cut off gas supplies to Germany, but rather that Germany turned its back on Russian energy resources under pressure from its own politicians.
    The German Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy forecasts a further decline in Germany’s share of global markets. […] The foreign trade balance shows a negative trend: –1.4 per cent in 2025, –0.5 per cent in 2026 and, according to the current forecast, –0.2 per cent in 2027. All of this has, of course, also had an impact on the situation facing German manufacturers. To be honest, I was shocked by the following news. […] Apparently, Mercedes-Benz has announced that it intends to sell or make available part of its industrial – that is, its production – capacity for military purposes. This is, after all, a company that was one of the world’s most successful in the automotive and vehicle manufacturing sectors. It had fantastic prospects in the Eurasian region. I am talking about Russia now. After all, it wasn’t Russia that drove Mercedes out of our country, closed its dealerships or shut down its service centres. Mercedes left of its own accord. Why? Not because it was economically disadvantageous for Mercedesto remain in our market, but because German politicians forced Mercedes to withdraw. Now Mercedes is talking about possibly selling off part of its production capacity for military purposes. And why? Because they know full well that, in the foreseeable future, it will be impossible to recapture the market they themselves have abandoned. That market was immediately taken over by companies from other countries that didn’t leave. On the contrary, many of them came here when they saw that Mercedes had gone.
    We have always regarded Germany as the country that is essentially seen as the driving force behind the European economy. According to the IMF, it is now the weakest link in the so-called G7. […] Just five years ago, I would have said that something like this could never happen. Germany, in particular, had the brightest prospects not only on the European continent, but worldwide. Why? The ability to work, the highest level of qualifications and professionalism – these were the basis for selection – and, of course, resources from Russia, combined with German technology. All of this together produced a fantastic result. […] All of that was destroyed in just a few years.
    It is not we who are Germany’s enemies, but those who are currently leading Germany. Look, production volume has fallen by 5.3 per cent year-on-year. And according to German experts – these aren’t my figures; I’m referring to German experts – capacity utilisation is currently 5 per cent below the level that is normally considered a recession. If you think I’m pleased with these figures, you’re wrong. I regret this. Germany was one of our strongest partners. Economically speaking, yes, a true business partner indeed, but that is now a thing of the past. And I’ll say it again: has anyone attacked Germany? Has anyone occupied it? […] No, it is the citizens of Germany who have come to power, who promised prosperity and who have destroyed everything that Germany has built up over the last few decades. […]
    May I ask a question? Not to you. I’d like to put a question to every German who will see this, who might spit at the screen or shout: “That’s Russian propaganda.” I’m just asking a question, and every German who sees, hears or reads it should answer it for themselves: Did Russia really do all this? […]

Patrik Baab: What do you think? Is the Federal Republic of Germany already a direct party to the war?

Germany is belligerent

Maria Zakharova: Do you really have no answer to that? Do you need any further confirmation of that? When it is Germany, in particular, that is arming the Kyiv regime in the first place, when the so-called Ramstein formula3 forms the basis of this arming, when representatives of the German state apparatus are personally coordinating the combat operations of Zelenskyy’s troops and the Kiev regime, supplying weapons and equipment, providing funds and exchanging information, then surely that is obvious.
    I remember, about two years ago, perhaps a year and a half – yes, probably closer to a year and a half – on the fringes of the conference in Antalya, a piece of news literally sent shockwaves through the entire media landscape. It was about high-ranking German officers allegedly discussing a further attack on civilian infrastructure, on the Crimean Bridge and so on. Do you remember, these recordings were published about a year and a half or two years ago. That’s roughly how it was. What else can you call it?
    […] No one really doubts that Germany is fully involved in this. What is more, representatives of the Berlin establishment are saying this quite openly. They are not hiding it. They do not mince their words. They state quite clearly that the aim is to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia, and they are taking part in the hostilities on the side of the Kiev regime.
    But that’s not quite right. They aren’t actually taking part in the fighting on the side of the Kiev regime. They are using the Kiev regime to achieve precisely what I mentioned at the start: their aim of inflicting what they call a strategic defeat on Russia. What other reasons could we possibly have for seeing things differently? I see no way of not calling a spade a spade. I simply can’t; I don’t have a single argument to refute your question. Not a single one. And even Berlin says exactly the same thing. And what they are doing is exactly what they are talking about. Both in the theory and in the practice of world history, this is described in exactly the same way. They are using the Kiev regime to, as they put it, inflict a defeat on Russia, to deal blows. Call it what you like.
    […]

Patrik Baab: In the eyes of the public, at least in the West, the war in Ukraine takes a back seat to the problems in the Middle East. […]

No compassion for the victims

Maria Zakharova: That’s a brilliant line: in the eyes of the Western public, the conflict in Ukraine is taking a back seat because of events in the Middle East. Do you see? They’re worried about the Western public, but not about the people. They don’t care about those who have been killed, injured or maimed. They don’t care about the terrorist attacks targeting civilians, nor about the maimed children. They are only bothered that the conflict is being overshadowed.
    But why, I ask, does this Western public not mind that their governments allocate hundreds of millions of euros and dollars to this conflict every week – yes, literally every week? By now, the figure has already reached billions, and that too amounts to tens of billions, which then turn into hundreds of billions of euros and dollars.
    Why does this not concern the Western public? Why are they not interested in this fact? Why do they not care about the much-vaunted human rights, of which nothing remains in Ukraine? Absolutely nothing. These human rights have long since ceased to be observed there, and not only in relation to the Russian-speaking population, Russian citizens, people of Russian origin or Orthodox believers. Above all, these rights are being violated against Ukraine’s own citizens. Just look at what is happening there.
    Forced conscription, mistreatment of people who have their own views on this situation, or who are exempt [from military service] or have health reasons that make service impossible for them. Physical abuse, even murder. Look at what is happening to freedom of expression. There is nothing left of it. There is only one perspective left: that of Bankova [the Ukrainian Presidential Office] and Zelenskyy. Everything else is to be shut down, put on hold and silenced.
    Why is the Western community not bothered by the enormous scale of corruption? This is not simply corruption involving the theft of money in Ukraine. This corruption is linked to illegal trade, particularly in weapons, to the distribution of these weapons on the black market, and to a black-market transport network that has, in fact, even been enshrined in Ukrainian law. Why is the Western community not addressing the corruption that now affects not only those in power in Kyiv, but also Western leaders directly? Quite simply because it is obvious that neither Zelenskyy nor any member of his team could dispose of Western aid so freely if it were actually subject to Western controls or monitoring structures. If there were proper accounting practices in place there, with clear records of debits and credits, they wouldn’t be able to steal on this scale. Of course, this is corruption, and it is directly linked to Western advisers and sponsors. And it is precisely they who are at the centre of this corruption.
    Why doesn’t the Western community care at all? Now they’re worried that the whole thing might somehow vanish into the shadows, but that’s a misrepresentation of the situation. Yet you were right to say it. That is precisely what concerns them. The shadows, not the substance of what is happening. But one must look at the substance. That is why we are discussing the actual causes of the crisis. That is why we are talking about what is really happening there.
    […] Everyone is only paying attention to the superficial trappings, do you see? The main thing is that the issue stays on the agenda, so that Zelenskyy can apparently travel endlessly to award ceremonies like the Oscars or to San Remo, to various song contests, to receive prizes for whatever, and to take part in various summits. What’s the point of all this? To provide a sort of ideological justification for what Western Europe has been doing for many years. In other words, he is being used as a sort of absolution for all the mistakes they have made.
    And they are terrified that one day it will lose its shine and fade into the shadows. That is exactly what they fear. The worst thing is that they fail to realise that every day, every week, every month, they are funding terrorism – which has long since become international terrorism – with huge sums of money; that every day, children, women and the elderly are being killed with their money. People in hospitals, schoolchildren, people on the streets, every single day. And this is being funded by Western Europe. They ought to be horrified by this, but they aren’t, because the Western media don’t show them any of it. •

https://www.zeit-fragen.ch/en/archives/2026/no-12-16-june-2026/what-on-earth-has-become-of-germany

READ FROM TOP.

PLEASE VISIT:

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT — SINCE 2005.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

         RABID ATHEIST.

         WELCOME TO THIS INSANE WORLD….

Russia Hearing the European Clamor for War, Announces it is Ready

by Alastair Crooke

The de-escalation framework that unfolded in the US-Iran Lucerne talks largely stayed true to the original Iranian 10-point plan. Meanwhile, President Trump and Vice-President Vance deliberately muddy the waters, claiming that Iran has already agreed to IAEA inspections of Iran’s nuclear facilities (a claim repeatedly denied by Iran): Vance announced that the IAEA could have begun inspections this week. No – – the “Framework” only refers to the possible IAEA supervision of the dilution to the 60% enriched stockpile subject to a final agreement with the US having been reached.

Trump, writing on social media, later falsely asserted: “Iran has fully and completely agreed to highest level Nuclear inspections long into the future.” In fact, the IAEA are only inspecting the joint Iran-Russia power station in Bushier at Russia’s request, because Russia wants to ensure compliance on its involvement. In other words, it is a Russian request to satisfy its own IAEA compliance commitment.

Trump then warned Iran that he may have to “finish the job [militarily]” — (if he doesn’t get a very good deal) — which, he says, would take “ about a week,” and adds that Iran will be required to use any unfrozen Iranian funds to be held in ESCROW accounts (accounts controlled by the US) to buy “corn and soybeans for their people, because right now their people are very hungry — and they’re buying exclusively from us.”

So, it’s pretty clear what’s ahead — Trump is reverting to his New York real-estate mode of negotiations. In the Art of the Deal, his 1987 book, ghost written by Tony Schwartz, the text advises the use of “extreme and unpredictable demands to create anxiety and force concessions from rivals.”

Thus, we are back to the General Kellogg playbook – – Kellogg advised Trump that the only thing that works with Putin or the Iranians is pressure — and then still more pressure.

Familiar Trumpian tactics. Show a little initial flexibility to tease out adversaries in order to pull them into negotiations; subsequent false claims of Iranian concessions and extreme demands are then used to increase pressure on Iran (whilst Trump appears tough to the angry neocon constituency and to his “base” back home).

This style of pressure may work for New York real-estate deals, but will be ineffective with both Iran and Russia.

Such threats will be counterproductive with Iran, and place the US on a collision course. “The Islamabad understanding was not the result of pressure and coercion, but rather the result of the resistance and authority of the Iranian nation,” Mr Qalibaf, the chief Iranian negotiator, retorted.

In practical terms, as Will Schryver, a shrewd observer of the US military, notes, Iran has pressure points “more numerous and capable than the US can bring to bear on the battlefield” —

“In my view, [Schryver says], a powerful US military presence in the Persian Gulf region has become utterly untenable. They’re just trying to save face now. I do not believe, [he concludes] the US military can mount even a 72-hour high-intensity operation at this point in time.”

“But I think they’ll try. Probably just Trump bluff, but it would not surprise me if they try to play one last card to gain the upper hand.” (Maybe after the midterms, and with the US having rebuilt somewhat its munitions shortfall).

To which Iran likely will respond by closing the Strait of Hormuz again, and attacking, pari passu, regional (Gulf) infrastructure. Trump will be gaming the economy who first plays “Chicken.” A further military venture likely will only further erode American military standing.

Quite possibly, however, Trump may be prepared to cut his losses in Iran — the war anyway is a liability to his Midterm electoral calculus — by circling back to Ukraine and Russia. The Kiev Independent released a report yesterday, quoting a “senior Ukrainian official saying that Trump had privately given Zelensky the greenlight to act “more boldly” against Russia.”

Here we go again, roundabout time — “Trump says he doesn’t really believe Putin will do anything without pressure,” the Ukrainian official added.

Simplicius speculates:

Trump has clearly been frustrated by his inability to settle any of the conflicts he had promised easily. And recently, on the heels of the Iranian memorandum saga, he even admitted that he would now be “turning his attention” back to Ukraine.

As such, it’s plausible that Trump would have given secret encouragement to the Europeans to ‘shape the battlefield’ in order to ‘soften’ Russia up ahead of whatever next Trump might have planned.

If this is true (and it probably is), the Europeans are playing with matches and risk lighting a conflagration.

The E3 leaders, Starmer, Merz and Macron, met on 7 June with Zelensky to promise both unwavering support and — in the context of pledging further pressure on Russia —

…underlining the urgent need to scale up the production of interceptors; deep strike capabilities and anti-ballistic missile co-development — and further to support the future sustainability of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

In short, the Europeans intend to ratchet up deep strikes into Moscow and St Petersburg, which will likely kill and unsettle their inhabitants.

The E3 carefully planned how to stage-manage the upcoming G7 summit, the EU summit, with Zelensky showcased at both events, promising to increase the pressure on “President Putin to agree to an immediate and complete ceasefire, taking the current contact line for its start-point.” European leaders also pledged to co-ordinate ahead of the NATO summit in Ankara (7-8 July) to achieve increased pledges of military support for Ukraine.

The E3 states are explicitly gearing up with new missiles to strike deeper, and more destructively, into Russia. The British government, for example, has announced that —

…the UK project to develop low-cost advanced long-range strike weapons for Ukraine has reached a significant milestone, with three British-designed systems successfully flight tested. The ground-launched strike weapons reportedly are capable of hitting targets more than 500km distant, at a speed of 600 km/h – whilst carrying a 225 kg warhead.

According to the Financial Times, Trump was “hugely impressed and enthusiastic” with Ukraine’s recent campaign of long-range strikes on targets deep inside Russia at last week’s G7 summit. At the summit, Trump also agreed to increase sanctions on Russian energy.

It is clear that the E3 had been plotting a major psy-op to convince Trump that Ukraine was not on the back-foot against Russia (as Trump may have been briefed); but rather had regained the front foot, and that the US should support the European agenda to force a Russian capitulation agenda (ceasefire, borders unchanged, reparations paid by Russia and war-crimes trials for Russian officials indicted with crimes, etc).

These developments have brought two major developments out of Russia:

Firstly, senior Kremlin aides, notably Yuri Ushakov, Putin’s spokesman, have been saying over the past three days the “spirt” of the Anchorage summit, and its concomitant understandings, “have effectively collapsed” — “The US abandoned them.” Moscow no longer expects those commitments to be honoured and is focused solely on securing its own “victory” through military means.

Foreign Minister Lavrov went further, describing the Alaska meeting as an American “ploy” designed to buy time for Ukraine to rebuild and rearm its military — essentially likening them to the Minsk Accords that similarly were mounted as a deceit.

Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said:

We also see Washington’s line moving closer to the most rabid anti-Russian policies pursued by the US’s closest European allies – namely, the UK and France.

This represents a huge strategic shift. Russia no longer seeks a relationship with Washington, though contact with DC will continue.

The second development stems from President Putin’s address at the St George’s Hall to military cadets on 23 June. Putin, in summary, told the young officers that the West manufactures a Russia threat, then accuses Russia of creating that very threat. This, said Putin, is a historically repeated pattern going back to 1941.

Putin implied that a threshold had now been crossed: He stated that whilst, until recently, NATO countries had limited themselves to supporting the Kiev regime to wage war on Russia, the West today is openly talking about preparing for a war against Russia, and is building up their military offensive budgets. German Chancellor Mertz has been quite vocal in this regard, Putin said.

Russia’s response, he said, is focused on modernising its nuclear triad and its Army, and strengthening the combat capability of the Aerospace Forces and the Navy. The explicit mention of the nuclear triad in direct proximity to the discussion of Western preparation for war against Russia was certainly a pointed message to Trump and the Europeans.

Russia has heard the European clamour for war. It has now made the strategic decision in response to prepare for war in Europe.

https://strategic-culture.su/news/2026/06/29/russia-hearing-the-european-clamour-for-war-announces-it-is-ready/

READ FROM TOP.

PLEASE VISIT:

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT — SINCE 2005.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

         RABID ATHEIST.

         WELCOME TO THIS INSANE WORLD….

MAKE A DEAL PRONTO BEFORE THE SHIT (WW3) HITS THE FAN:

NO NATO IN "UKRAINE" (WHAT'S LEFT OF IT)

THE DONBASS REPUBLICS ARE NOW BACK IN THE RUSSIAN FOLD — AS THEY USED TO BE PRIOR 1922. THE RUSSIANS WON'T ABANDON THESE AGAIN.

THESE WILL ALSO INCLUDE ODESSA, KHERSON AND KHARKIV.....

CRIMEA IS RUSSIAN — AS IT USED TO BE PRIOR 1954

TRANSNISTRIA TO BE PART OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION.

RESTORE THE RIGHTS OF THE RUSSIAN SPEAKING PEOPLE OF "UKRAINE" (WHAT'S LEFT OF IT)

RESTITUTE THE ORTHODOX CHURCH PROPERTIES AND RIGHTS

RELEASE THE OPPOSITION MEMBERS FROM PRISON

A MEMORANDUM OF NON-AGGRESSION BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE USA.

A MEMORANDUM OF NON-AGGRESSION BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE EU.....

EASY.

THE WEST KNOWS IT.