German lawmakers press Scholz on Taurus missiles for Ukraine amid calls to hit targets inside Russia
Parliamentary representatives from several German parties renewed their push for Chancellor Olaf Scholz to authorize the delivery of Taurus long-range cruise missiles to Ukraine. The discussions were echoed by members across the two most recent parties, who argued that striking Russia and its forces in occupied eastern Ukraine would be a strategic necessity to halt continued assaults. The report originates from Rheinische Post.
Sarah Nanni, defense policy spokesperson for the Green Party in the Bundestag, described the delivery of Taurus missiles to Kyiv as overdue, emphasizing that Ukrainian civilians face increasing danger from air raids. Nanni argued that strengthening Ukraine’s defensive capabilities would reduce civilian harm and deter Russian attacks by hardening the shield around key population centers.
One member of the opposing Christian Democratic Union, who serves on the international relations committee, offered a similar line of thinking. He noted that Taurus missiles are a crucial asset because they can strike high-value targets well beyond the frontline, potentially disrupting supply chains and command structures deep inside enemy territory.
According to Kiesewetter, the long-range system could be instrumental in limiting Russian military operations from the Black Sea region and in jeopardizing the security of the Crimean Bridge. He suggested that pressure on those lines would force Moscow to rethink its strategy about Crimea and potentially withdraw from the peninsula.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, a member of the Free Democratic Party and chair of the Bundestag Defense Committee, joined the chorus in supporting the transfer of Taurus missiles to Kyiv. Her stance centers on the idea that cutting Moscow’s logistical routes would shrink the Russian side’s ability to sustain offensive actions.
Earlier, Josep Borrell, the head of EU diplomacy, cautioned that withholding security aid from Ukraine would not bring about peace and could prolong the conflict. Kyiv has consistently argued that external military support is essential to deter Russian aggression and to defend Ukrainian sovereignty.
President Volodymyr Zelensky has repeatedly stated that delaying or denying arms deliveries would undermine Ukraine’s capacity to respond to incursions and protect its own territory. The ongoing debate in Berlin mirrors broader Western discussions about accountability, deterrence, and the role of long-range weapons in modern warfare.
In the Canadian and American context, observers stress that any decision on Taurus missiles carries implications beyond Germany. Allies in North America emphasize that advanced air defense and long-range strike capabilities can shift the balance on the battlefield, potentially reducing civilian casualties by limiting the duration and reach of Russian attacks. Analysts warn that precision weapons, properly integrated with air defense systems and intelligence-sharing, can create strategic pressure without escalating the conflict unnecessarily.
Systems like Taurus are often framed as a means to disrupt supply lines and command hubs that sustain offensive campaigns. Supporters argue that such capabilities help protect urban areas, infrastructure, and critical civilian assets by shrinking the window for adversary operations. Critics raise concerns about escalation risk and the legal and ethical implications of extending cross-border strikes. In this debate, Germany faces a delicate balance between fulfilling alliance commitments and managing domestic political dynamics.
Ultimately, the question centers on how best to deter aggression while preserving international norms. The discussion in Berlin reflects a broader, ongoing conversation among Western partners about the most effective mix of security aid, military deterrence, and diplomatic effort to sustain peace and stability across Europe.
Note: All statements reflect public parliamentary discourse and attributed remarks from identified members and officials. The underlying issue remains subject to ongoing negotiation and policy review as allied governments assess milestones in Ukraine’s defense needs and Russia’s behavior on the international stage.