The Ongoing Debate on Taurus Missile Delivery to Ukraine

Germany has emerged as a pivotal military ally for Ukraine in its defense against Russian aggression, yet the provision of Taurus cruise missiles has remained a contentious subject. The question now arises: will this change?

Since the onset of the Ukraine conflict in February 2022, the delivery of specific military equipment has sparked intense debate in Germany. However, no topic has generated as much discourse as the potential supply of Taurus missiles to Ukraine. Despite Ukraine's persistent requests, Chancellor Olaf Scholz has refrained from approving their delivery. The political landscape is further complicated by the stance of Friedrich Merz, a potential successor to Scholz, who has expressed a willingness to support Ukraine with these advanced weapons.

The Taurus KEPD-350 is recognized as one of the most sophisticated missile systems in the German arsenal. Its range of up to 500 kilometers allows pilots to launch strikes without entering enemy airspace. These approximately five-meter-long missiles, weighing around 1,400 kilograms, are equipped with a dedicated engine and four independent navigation systems. Their ability to fly at low altitudes--below 50 meters--makes them challenging for enemy air defense systems to intercept.

Upon impact, the missiles are reported to be capable of penetrating heavily fortified targets, such as bunkers, due to their 480-kilogram explosive payload. This capability could enable Ukraine to target Russian military installations, including bases that launch missile and drone attacks. Additionally, the Taurus missiles could potentially reach key locations like the Crimea bridge, which has already been targeted but remains operational. Furthermore, they could pose a direct threat to Moscow.

Currently, Ukraine possesses similar missile systems, including British-supplied Storm Shadow missiles and France's Scalp system. While these weapons also allow for precision strikes on critical infrastructure, their range is significantly less than that of the Taurus.

The U.S. has also provided Ukraine with ATACMS short-range missiles, which can be launched from the ground and have a range of up to 300 kilometers. However, these missiles follow a ballistic trajectory and are generally less precise compared to cruise missiles.

Chancellor Scholz has articulated his concerns regarding the delivery of Taurus missiles, arguing that such action could risk drawing Germany into the conflict. He has emphasized the need to avoid becoming a party to the war, citing the importance of preventing further escalation. Scholz has stated his opposition to supplying weapons capable of striking deep into Russian territory.

In contrast, Friedrich Merz has advocated for providing Taurus missiles to Ukraine, arguing that they could be essential for disrupting supply routes used by Moscow to conduct attacks against Ukrainian civilians. Merz has reiterated his desire to support Ukraine without directly involving German forces in the conflict, emphasizing the necessity of coordination with European partners.

The coalition agreement between the Union and SPD does not explicitly mention the Taurus missiles but underscores Germany's commitment to supporting Ukraine's defense efforts against Russian aggression. The text expresses the importance of a strong, democratic Ukraine and reaffirms the intent to enhance military, civilian, and political support in collaboration with international partners.

Whether the SPD will reconsider its position on the Taurus remains uncertain. Defense Minister Boris Pistorius has acknowledged the merits of providing the missiles, while also noting the valid counterarguments against such a decision. Meanwhile, some members of the SPD have criticized the public discourse surrounding military support, emphasizing the urgent need to prioritize peace efforts.

As discussions continue, the Taurus missile system stands at the center of ongoing debates within German politics. CDU foreign policy spokesperson Johann Wadephul expressed optimism about reaching a consensus on the issue, highlighting the necessity of a unified approach to address the challenges posed by Russia's aggression.