FROM THE ANALYST

TAURUS: THE REAL REASON GERMANY WON’T SUPPLY IT

I admit I knew about this and never said - largely because it was never really clear how well known the information really was and there’s been a lot of speculation and research that shows there’s more publicly known than in the past. Even so I still feel like I shouldn’t be saying anything! Old habits die hard, and for that I am remiss.

Germany is not a nuclear power. It has access to and can deliver American nuclear weapons of the B-61-12 tactical bomb type. But it can only use them if the US gives active permission. They are not a partly German bomb. None of the Nuclear Partnership weapons are. Partner nations merely deliver American weapons.

Storm Shadow and SCALP-EG are a lesser variant of the much more advanced Taurus. You can easily find the technical details on the Taurus online - it has the most incredible warhead capable of penetrating massive amounts of silo grade concrete and protected bunkers as much as three floors deep.
It was never designed or intended to be used as a surface level destroyer of air defence sites or to knockout above ground facilities.
It’s true purpose was to break up russian command and control systems in their bunkers, but principally to strike at nuclear weapons storage sites and the many missile silos in the russian west before they launched a nuclear attack. The plan was, that as soon as russia began deploying nuclear weapons of any kind from reserve bases in wartime, Germany would use Taurus to attack and destroy C2/C3 sites and the launch sites, silos and other structures enabling that nuclear launch.

You have to remember that this was before the days of the collapse of the Soviet Bloc and the Warsaw Pact; many of these weapons were forward based in the DDR and Poland when Taurus was first planned and authorised. The venerable Panavia Tornado strike fighter was the main means of delivery - and until F-35 arrives still is. To the Germans this is their antidote to russian nuclear weapons in Kaliningrad and Belarus.
And they seem to be taking the threat of these more seriously.

There has been a rush program to refurbish the entire stockpile - about a third of them were operational. That’s said to have doubled and all of them have been brought to combat readiness by the end of this year. There is even rumour that more have been ordered from SAAB-MBDA. Sweden also uses the missile and it works on the Gripen.
Germany did look long and hard at the Taurus but in many ways they could find little reason Ukraine really needed such a weapon. The StormShadow/SCALP-EG in their minds, was more than sufficient for Ukrainian needs. Besides which even France and the UK had restricted the use of those to inside the 1991 borders, just as America has with ATACMS.

There were sufficient technical changes that it would be difficult to get the Su-24 to deliver the missiles and they are much heavier than the short range SS/SEG versions. It’s not unfair to say that Germany had more than a few good reasons that the Taurus wasn’t viable enough. Yet they understand the importance of the signal it sends.
The main russian command centres in Crimea have been largely destroyed. The real centre of command is in Rostov-on-Don inside russian territory and out of bounds.
ATACMS and SS/SEG are enough for what Ukraine needs.

Post war, I wouldn’t be surprised if Ukraine was allowed to purchase such missiles. What it did with them in the event of a new war would be up to them. But in this one Germany has its reasons for retaining the Taurus and, because there is very little willingness to discuss nuclear weapons issues in Germany, the politicians would rather take the heat for not supplying than they would confess to the real reason they had them in the first place. A reason that’s very much returned to the fore, as Putin rattles his nuclear sabre every other day and only this week, threatened again to attack western nuclear bases if deemed necessary.
I understand the German point.
Both practically and essentially, the missiles are probably a bit over the top for Ukrainian needs when you understand their true purpose.
It would in reality, be better if France and the UK resumed production of their versions (and they were supposed to have done so, contracts were said to be announced last July but never happened). That way more - and ideally longer ranged versions could be supplied, de-risking the delivery aircraft of which Ukraine has few left.

Gripen on the other hand has a handy capability to fire both versions with little modification. Sweden needs to make a decision on delivering these aircraft soon.

Olaf Scholz does make himself look like an idiot by not being willing to discuss difficult issues publicly. Yet it’s fair to say Germany has now done more than almost anyone else to supply what it can as quickly as it is able to. For that it must be given credit. Scholz may appear to be naive, but it’s on his watch that much has been forthcoming - and more is en route. Hopefully the above will help with your understanding of the difficult situation and practicalities Germany finds itself in. When you have a history such as theirs, responsibility weighs heavily on modern leadership in ways it’s hard for non-Germans to fully comprehend. Japan has started to move away from its past and endless atonement. Germany is still some way behind.
@ukrainejournal