Köppel on Merz and the EU Questions invasion's law

Nov 2021

Roger Köppel argues that EU leaders are exploiting the Ukraine war and anti-Russian rhetoric to concentrate power and restrict dissent, democracy and national sovereignty. He invokes Orbán's peace mission, alleges a Magyar-led purge and effective closure of Mathias Corvinus Collegium, criticizes Jacques Baud's sanctions and unspecified consideration of an AfD ban, and objects to a newly discussed EU mechanism for withdrawing national voting rights. He portrays the latter as a route to French and German dominance; these are his claims and political judgments, without a reported vote withdrawal or party ban. Köppel criticizes Friedrich Merz's recent Kyiv appearance with Zelenskyy, his accusatory appeals toward Russia and their remembrance of fallen soldiers. He says Tagesthemen imagery showed a Wolfsangel and later also a skull symbol, but expressly qualifies that he may have seen the screen incorrectly and that the image still needs to be isolated. He contrasts the visit with German wartime crimes and a German education minister's Babyn Yar remembrance, estimates about a million Jewish victims on Ukrainian soil and alleges present Ukrainian glorification of Bandera and Melnyk. His symbol identifications and collaboration, glorification and motive claims are not independently established by this monologue. He also criticizes NIUS and Apollo News for accepting Merz's rhetoric. In a sustained retrospective, Köppel assigns the war's causes to NATO expansion, Western efforts to weaken Russia and alleged mistreatment of Russian-speakers in Ukraine. He questions whether the invasion can be unequivocally classified as unlawful aggression, invokes minority assistance, self-determination and preemptive-war arguments, and calls Putin defensive rather than the aggressor. He alleges that a US–Ukraine deal in November 2021, tentatively the 17th, envisaged retaking Crimea and could have produced a Russian–NATO clash; he does not name or quote the document. He acknowledges his earlier criticism of Putin's invasion and miscalculations and later explicitly says Russia shares responsibility. His closing argument favors dialogue and inclusion of Russian perspectives, rejects an imperial-restoration explanation, relays brief Tokayev praise, and repeats his warning that the Western approach risks a wider war and authoritarian EU rule. Legal conclusions, causal explanations and predictions remain his assessments.

Köppel recalls an unnamed US–Ukraine agreement in November 2021, tentatively dating it to the 17th, and alleges that it envisaged retaking Crimea together. He uses this claim in a preemptive-war argument and warns it could have brought Russian and NATO forces into conflict. The precise document, operational-plan claim and day are not established by the broadcast. This is an attributed retrospective about a reported undertaking, not evidence of a completed recapture operation or a verified joint war plan.