The Russian-Ukrainian conflict has been fought so far, and the performance of the Ukrainian army on the battlefield has become more and more inadequate. After the loss of Avdeyevka, the Ukrainian army lost ground one after another. A few days ago, Zelensky visited the frontline positions, and the newly repaired fortifications were as clean as new, and they looked quite strong, resisting the Russian attack.
But waiting for the domestic people to be happy, Zelensky himself immediately exposed a bad news, the Ukrainian army's artillery is finished, and if the Russian army launches an offensive, the defense of the front line is a big problem. Zelensky's purpose, of course, is to ask the West for weapons assistance, but this lack of ammunition is real.
Moreover, not only is there a shortage of ammunition, but Ukraine is also short of troops. Syrsky, commander-in-chief of the Ukrainian army, said that the need to mobilize 500,000 troops has been greatly reduced. Is it because the Ukrainian army does not need to recruit another 500,000 soldiers? I don't think so, it is more likely that the Ukrainian army has been unable to recruit 500,000 soldiers now, so it can only lower its target.
It can be said that the Ukrainian army can no longer support the "great cause of resisting Russia". The situation between Russia and Ukraine is gradually getting out of the control of the West. Seeing that Ukraine is so uncompetitive, some countries in the West really can't wait to roll up their sleeves and personally go out to fight with Russia. For example, a few days ago, there was a lot of hype on the Internet, Macron said that he would not rule out sending troops to Ukraine, as well as Poland, the three Baltic countries, etc.
However, even within NATO, there is a great deal of disagreement on this matter. The main concerns of those who oppose it are that they do not want to involve their country in the conflict and that it is a violation of international law to do so.
But just two days ago, the German parliament came up with a report saying that NATO's sending troops to Ukraine is actually in line with "international law", and that these troops were attacked by the Russian army, which will not trigger NATO's Article 5 - the principle of mutual defense. This clause is only valid if the mainland is attacked.
Let's not say which international law Germany is in compliance with the so-called international law, but once the NATO member states really send troops, it will be tantamount to actually participating in the war, and the tacit understanding between Russia and NATO will be broken. After all, how can Russia stand NATO's continued "fueling" like this?
Of course, these are all off-topic, let's get back to the point. According to what Germany said this time, it is equivalent to helping NATO, countries that want to end up, and remove the obstacles to sending troops. I remember that before, when Macron threw out the "theory of sending troops", the country with the strongest opposition in Europe was Germany, and Scholz also had a war of words with Macron for this. Why is it that Germany is still paving the way for Macron now?
In fact, many people think wrongly, the reason why Germany is doing this is not to help Macron, on the contrary, this is to put Macron in the army. Why?
We have to figure out whether Macron really wants to send troops to Ukraine? More importantly, he still wants to compete for the dominance of Europe. The rest of NATO won't agree anyway, so there's no risk in him amplifying it. But now it's different, Germany says that France can send troops on its own, which pushes Macron into a corner. If you send troops, you will harm France's interests, and if you don't send troops, you will not be slapping yourself in the face.
Moreover, the implication of Germany's words is that if it sends troops, it will bear the consequences, and it should not think about pulling other countries to the end, because other countries will not give them a funeral. I have to say that Germany's trick is really ruthless enough.