ARD Public Broadcasting Expects Regular Germans To Eat Worms, Live In Squalor
By P Gosselin | No Tricks Zone | March 4, 2023
Privileged ARD German Public Television journalist Anja Reschke wants to turn Germans into worm-eaters, to save the planet. From paternalism to abuse.
Generously funded, spoiled ARD public television treats its regular viewers like Cinderellas who are to be exploited, to live in squalor and eat worms instead of meat. AI generated image by DALL E 2.
Hat-tip: By Daniel Matissek, AUF 1
Germany’s ARD public broadcasting network is funded to the tune of more than eight billion euros by compulsory fees levied on every German household each year.
But the network has gone far beyond its original charter of keeping the public informed and educated, and now appears to have even drifted past being an paternalistic institution with the self-assigned role of properly upbringing the masses of the working uncouth.
Let them eat worms
Today, if the latest is anything to go by, it seems the massive ARD network has gone yet a step further and now sees its viewers as Cinderellas who are to be exploited and relegated to live under forsaken conditions. Not long ago one highly paid and pampered ARD commentator even gleefully welcomed the energy price shocks and seemed glad that the uncouth masses would soon have to wear rags and live in attics. “That’s good!” said Detlef Flintz.
The latest comes from ARD left-wing know-it-all Anja Reschke who appeared in the early evening program “Wissen vor Acht” (Knowledge before Eight) with a new nutrition tip for those who don’t want to wean themselves off “climate- destroying” meat: They can can simply grow worm meat in their “kitchens of tomorrow”.
“Round and juicy” after 6 weeks!
In the ARD show, Reschke demonstrates how worms can be grown and then fattened in six to eight weeks until they become “round and juicy”.
Then all they have to do is put them in the freezer “and later they can be processed into minced meat,” says the leftie journalist Reschke. Supposedly, the plant yields 200 to 500 grams of meat per week, but uses “only a fraction of the land, food and water compared to cattle or pig farming,” Reschke enthuses.
While a kilogram of beef produces around 70 kilos of CO2, a kilo of worm meat produces “just under three kilos.”
People will just have to get over their disgust
There’s only one obstacle: We only have to “overcome our disgust against insects as food, because insects surely belong on the menu of the future,” says Rescke. It just takes a little getting used to, Reschke seems to imply as she and her dim-witted daughters at the ARD ready themselves for the royal evening ball.
Meat eaters like “consumers of child pornography”
“This is no April Fools joke,” writes AUF 1. The ARD is dead serious about it: “This madness is meant dead-seriously. The climate mania serves to encourage people in all seriousness to eat vermin in order to save the world.”
Deutschlandfunk, also a part of the massive German public broadcasting organization, recently compared meat eaters to “consumers of child pornography”.
Wow! Even Cinderella’s evil stepmother never went that far.
Most Americans believe feds helped incite Capitol riot – poll
RT | March 4, 2023
More than six in ten Americans believe it’s at least “somewhat likely” that federal government agents helped provoke the January 2021 Capitol riot, a new poll has revealed, suggesting that legacy media outlets have largely failed to brand the incident as an insurrection incited by then-President Donald Trump.
The poll, released this week by Rasmussen Reports, shows that among the 61% of US voters who think the feds probably helped spur Trump supporters to breach the Capitol, most see that scenario as “very likely.” Just 30% of Americans believe it’s unlikely that undercover agents were involved in the riot, including 18% who say it’s “not at all likely.”
Rasmussen said its findings reflect a dramatic shift in public opinion in the two-plus years that have passed since the riot. For instance, a survey done during the week immediately after the incident found that half of Americans believed Trump should be removed from office and jailed for causing his supporters to storm Congress and disrupt certification of President Joe Biden’s election victory. By the end of 2021, 58% of voters believed the congressional panel appointed to investigate the riot had become a “partisan committee weaponized against innocent Americans.”
More than 1,000 people have been charged with federal crimes for their alleged involvement in the riot. Many of the defendants have been held in jail, allegedly under harsh conditions, without being given the option of posting bail. Republican lawmakers have suggested that undercover government agents were involved in the riot and have questioned why an Arizona man named Ray Epps, who was seen on video urging Trump supporters to go into the Capitol, hasn’t been indicted.
The latest poll found that 70% of Republicans and 57% of both Democrats and independent voters now believe it’s likely that feds helped provoke the riot. Around 80% of all voters agree that all video footage of the riot should be released to the public. Earlier this week, US House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, a California Republican, gave riot video footage that had been withheld by the congressional panel to Fox News host Tucker Carlson.
A separate Rasmussen poll this week showed that 34% of US voters believe Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene’s idea of a “national divorce” between Republican- and Democrat-controlled states. Only one in three believes Biden is keeping his campaign promise to unite the country.
Top Scientists Find ‘Substantial Scientific Evidence’ RF Radiation Causes Cancer
By Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D. | The Defender | March 3, 2023
Four of the world’s top experts in environmental health are calling for prevention and precaution when it comes to public exposure to radiofrequency (RF) radiation.
The scientists — including the former director of the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) — last month published a preprint review of the most recent studies on the effects of electromagnetic radiation (EMR) and RF radiation on different life forms and humans, and the epidemiological evidence for cancer due to RF radiation from cellphone use.
The authors concluded there is “substantial scientific evidence” that “RF radiation causes cancer, endocrinological, neurological and other adverse health effects” — and that the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has failed to protect public health.
They accused the FCC of ignoring the “Precautionary Principle,” commonly used in toxicology, and also the Bradford Hill criteria, a set of principles commonly used in epidemiology for establishing a causal relationship, in evaluating the risks of RF radiation.
“This article is a clarion call for prevention and precaution,” said Devra Davis, Ph.D., M.P.H., a toxicologist and epidemiologist who co-authored the paper.
“We know enough now to take steps to reduce exposure to this. … It’s time,” said Davis, who also is founder and president of the Environmental Health Trust, and founding director of the Center for Environmental Oncology and the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute.
The paper’s other authors are:
- Paul Ben Ishai, Ph.D., a physicist at Ariel University in Israel.
- Hugh Taylor, M.D., a professor and department chair of Obstetrics Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences at Yale School of Medicine.
- Linda Birnbaum, Ph.D., a toxicologist and former director of the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and the NTP.
Birnbaum and Taylor are members of the U.S. National Academy of Medicine, the nation’s premier association of distinguished researchers.
Davis was founding director of the Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology of the U.S. National Research Council for the National Academy of Sciences, a private society of distinguished scholars.
Cumulatively, the four authors have published more than 1,600 peer-reviewed articles.
Davis told The Defender there is a “plethora” of experimental and epidemiological evidence that establishes a causal relationship between EMR-RF and cancer.
Studies also have shown that EMR/RF can cause DNA damage, and that it can adversely affect fetal development and the endocrine system.
“EMF/RF functions like a classic endocrine disruptor by impairing both male and female reproductive functions,” the authors said.
They pointed out that senior advisers to the World Health Organization, including Dr. Lennart Hardell, have said that if RF radiation were evaluated based on more current studies, it would likely be upgraded to a probable — if not confirmed — human carcinogen.
Davis said the paper is a “landmark” article — “but the landmark is built on the shoulders of a number of others,” she added.
Many researchers — including James Lin, Ph.D., Louis Slesin, Ph.D., Joel Moskowitz, Ph.D., Lennart Hardell, M.D., Ph.D., Cindy Sage, M.A. and Dr. David Carpenter — have worked “relentlessly” on the issue of RF radiation, she said.
‘Industry-affiliated scientists’ distort public discourse on RF radiation
According to the authors, the public discourse around RF radiation has been distorted by some “fundamentally flawed” yet widely publicized reports — written by “industry-affiliated scientists” — purporting to show “no health risk.”
The paper evolved from the authors’ discussions of “several peer-reviewed papers that provided biased analysis, most notably the 2021 review by David Robert Grimes, Ph.D. published in JAMA Oncology,” Davis told Microwave News.
“It is imperative to insist on a complete picture of the evidence and not the whitewashed or distorted version currently promoted,” the authors said.
More independent research on RF radiation — free from bias by the telecom industry — is required. Without this, the authors said, “We are effectively conducting an uncontrolled experiment on ourselves, our families, and our children.”
The authors also criticized the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for dismissing many of the studies that have shown adverse effects from RF radiation, including the $30 million NTP study done in 2018, which showed “clear evidence” that electromagnetic radiation is associated with cancer and DNA damage.
According to Davis, the FDA’s rejection of the NTP study was “deeply flawed” and “deeply hypocritical.”
The FDA in 1999 requested the NTP study cellphone radiation, she said. FDA officials were intimately involved in reviewing the study design plans.
“Then when the results came out and some people didn’t like it, the FDA began to trash talk their own study,” Davis said.
Davis said the scientific and regulatory battle around RF radiation today reminded her and her co-authors of the earlier battle around tobacco.
“We were there in the early days when — believe it or not — 70% of surgeons smoked. And in the 1970s and 1980s, the tobacco industry gave the National Cancer Institute $11 million to study how to make a safe cigarette,” Davis said.
There was a scientific debate “that went on for years longer than it should have” about whether or not tobacco was safe for the environments of children.
“In 1983, when I was the executive director for the National Academy of Sciences Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology, we put together a committee to answer the question of whether it was okay to have smoking on airplanes,” Davis said.
At the time, that was a scientific question, she said, adding that the committee — after reviewing the research — became the first in the world to issue a ban on smoking in airplanes.
Davis said scientists and the public realized the studies suggesting tobacco was safe were “manufactured” by the tobacco industry — and the same thing is happening now with RF radiation and the telecom industry, she added.
Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D., is a reporter and researcher for The Defender based in Fairfield, Iowa. She holds a Ph.D. in Communication Studies from the University of Texas at Austin (2021), and a master’s degree in communication and leadership from Gonzaga University (2015). Her scholarship has been published in Health Communication. She has taught at various academic institutions in the United States and is fluent in Spanish.
This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.
The ‘fact checkers’ can’t find the target never mind hit it
By Norman Fenton | Where are the numbers? | March 3, 2023
One of the most tiresome features of the covid era has been the growth industry of ‘fact-checkers’ generously funded by Government, Pharma companies and the likes of Bill Gates to silence anybody challenging the ‘official narrative’. The Law, Health and Technology Newsletter has covered this extensively.
There have been a few ludicrous attempts to ‘fact-check’ my own work but, as an example of how biased and incompetent these people are, I present a request I received today from an AFP fact-checker asking me to help ‘debunk’ something …. and my self-explanatory response to it (I have spared the ‘fact-checker’ personal embarrassment by removing their name).
From: XXXXXX
Sent: Thursday, March 2, 2023 9:17 PM
To: Norman Fenton
Subject: Media Request (AFP) – Addressing Misinterpretations of ONS Covid-19 DataHello professor,
I hope you are well. I am a fact-check reporter at AFP based in Washington DC. I am working to debunk online articles that claim English health data indicates that fully vaccinated people are far more likely to die of Covid-19 than those who have not received the shots. Several articles have made this allegation, citing this ONS dataset: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathsbyvaccinationstatusengland
For reference, I will archive examples of these articles making the claims here and here.
Based on this ONS insight and a previous bulletin, which says the data is not intended to show vaccine efficacy, it seems like the article is misinterpreting the dataset. Would you be able to offer comment with a brief explanation as to how this sort of data is supposed to be read and used?
Thank you for your consideration,
XXXXXXXX
Agence France-Presse (AFP)
Office #: (202) 414-0527
From: Norman Fenton
Sent: Thursday, March 2, 2023 9:44 PM
To: XXXXXXX
Subject: RE: Media Request (AFP) – Addressing Misinterpretations of ONS Covid-19 Data
Dear XXXXX
Like all mainstream “fact checkers” you clearly have no understanding of what it is you are checking.
The ONS dataset is so flawed and biased that even the Statistics Regulator agreed with us that it could not be used to make any inferences about vaccine efficacy or safety. But you are missing the big problem here.
Instead of focusing on those who are using the data to suggest the vaccine is not as safe and effective as claimed, what you should be focused on are the government and mainstream media who (against the advice of the Statistics Regulator) are using the ONS data to claim the vaccine is safe and effective. Have a look at this article in the Daily Mail – this is one you should be fact checking. Why aren’t you doing that?
Our most recent article covers this whole issue of the ONS data:
In fact, if you make adjustments for the multiple flaws and biases in the ONS data, then it is increasingly clear that the vaccinated have a higher all-cause mortality in many age groups, especially the under 50’s. In other words, the evidence increasingly points to the need for the covid vaccine programme to be shut down completely. But that isn’t the message you want to portray is it, because your funders are the ones pushing the vaccines?
Only one of the links to examples of reports you were seeking to ‘debunk’ seems to be working, namely the article in The Expose. The claim there is that the ONS report reveals that “the Vaccinated account for 9 in every 10 COVID Deaths over the past TWO Years”. Based on the ONS dataset this is correct. Of course, without knowing the true proportion of vaccinated in each age group, we still cannot conclude that the vaccinated are at higher risk of death from covid. But the article is not claiming that, it is simply stating the FACT that a far higher number of vaccinated people have died of covid than unvaccinated since Jan 2022. That the number of vaccinated people who have died of covid is 25,768 is relevant, because we were told by people like you that this could not possibly happen; the vaccines were supposed to have ‘stopped hospitalisation and death from covid’.
Yours
Norman Fenton
WHO moves forward with plans to target “misinformation” “infodemics” through international pandemic treaty
By Tom Parker | Reclaim The Net | March 4, 2023
The global health agency, the World Health Organization (WHO), this week held a meeting to advance the international pandemic treaty — a legally binding instrument that will enhance its powers to target anything that it deems to be “false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation” if passed.
The scope of the WHO is vast and its 194 member states (which account for 98% of all the countries in the world) will have to comply with the treaty under international law if it passes.
During this meeting, which began on February 27 and ended on March 3, a WHO intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) discussed a zero draft of the pandemic treaty that was released earlier this year.
This zero draft empowers the WHO to target so-called misinformation and disinformation via Article 17 (“Strengthening pandemic and public health literacy”).
Specifically, WHO member states are instructed to “tackle false, misleading, misinformation or disinformation, including through promotion of international cooperation” and manage “infodemics…through effective channels, including social media.” Infodemics is a term that the WHO uses to describe “too much information including false or misleading information in digital and physical environments during a disease outbreak.”
Additionally, Article 16 (“Whole-of-government and whole-of-society approaches at the national level”) recommends that WHO member states collaborate with non-state actors and the private sector when carrying out their obligations under the treaty.
As the treaty has progressed, it has faced increased political pushback from elected officials in member states, with US Republican Senators recently introducing a bill that would require the treaty to be approved by two-thirds of the Senate.
But despite this pushback, the Biden administration committed to the international pandemic treaty on the first day of the recent WHO meeting.
And the WHO is continuing to discuss the treaty and plan for its future. The global health agency has another meeting to discuss the treaty scheduled for April 3 to April 6, plans to present the treaty to its decision-making body, the World Health Assembly (WHA), in May, and hopes to finalize the treaty by May 2024.
The WHO intends to adopt the treaty under Article 19 of the WHO Constitution through an international lawmaking process where a group of mostly unelected diplomats vote on the treaty.
If the treaty passes, WHO member states will be required to “raise financial resources for effective implementation” of the treaty and commit to allocating at least 5% of their annual health expenditure to “pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and health systems recovery.” Additionally, the treaty tells member states to commit an undisclosed amount of their gross domestic product (GDP) to “international cooperation and assistance on pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and health systems recovery.” This equates to billions of dollars in annual expenditure for many WHO member states and hundreds of billions of dollars per annum for some.
We obtained a copy of the zero draft of this international pandemic treaty for you here.
This WHO push to crack down on speech via this international pandemic treaty is being made in tandem with another WHO effort that targets “misinformation” and “disinformation” — proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005).
Like the treaty, these proposed amendments will be legally binding under international law if finalized. The amendments include provisions for the WHO to “counter misinformation and disinformation” at “the global level” and to develop member states’ capacities to gain “leverage of communication channels to communicate the risk, countering misinformation and dis-information.”
In a report that was released alongside the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR), the WHO suggested it would use its new misinformation and disinformation targeting powers to go after content that could “undermine public trust in health agencies and impede public confidence in, and compliance with, governmental or WHO guidance.” It also called for “a balance between ensuring more accurate scientific information on one hand and freedom of speech and the press on the other.”
We obtained a copy of this report for you here.
As the WHO makes its move to take action against alleged misinformation and disinformation via international law, more and more evidence is being made available that supports the perspectives of those who were censored by Big Tech after being accused of spreading misinformation or disinformation. This evidence includes admissions about the Covid vaccine’s ability to prevent infections and growing support from officials for the Covid origins lab leak theory.
While many were censored by tech platforms for making these claims, the WHO was allowed to freely amplify a misleading claim from Chinese authorities that there was “no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission” of the coronavirus.
The WHO’s attempt to curb speech is just one part of the power grab the unelected health agency is vying for with this treaty and the proposed IHR amendments. It’s also planning an expansion of its surveillance powers and laying out plans for global vaccine passports.
Irish grandmother jailed for calling Ukrainians ‘rapists and criminals’
RT | March 4, 2023
A homeless grandmother in Ireland has been sentenced to 16 weeks behind bars for entering a hotel housing Ukrainian refugees and shouting that they were“rapists and criminals.” The woman had sought accommodation, but was told no rooms were available.
Margaret Buttimer appeared before a district court in Bandon, County Cork on Thursday, where police told the judge that they were called to a disturbance at a hotel in the town in late January.
They found Buttimer shouting in the reception area, recalling that “she wanted to know how many Ukrainian nationals were staying in this hotel, what was the cost to the Irish people, and saying ‘these Ukrainians are rapists and criminals’,” according to a report by the Irish Times.
Police said that she refused to desist and leave the hotel, and they had “no option” but to arrest her.
Buttimer was sentenced to six weeks in prison, with half the sentence suspended on the condition that she stay away from any facility housing Ukrainian refugees.
The 68-year-old woman has 13 previous convictions, including for a similar incident at the same hotel in December. The court heard that she entered the premises and asked staff “why are all the Ukrainians getting a room and there is no room for me, an Irish citizen?
Buttimer’s earlier convictions involved breaches of coronavirus restrictions.
It is unclear if the hotel in Bandon was housing migrants from other countries in addition to Ukrainians. Ireland took in more than 70,000 Ukrainian refugees last year and more than 13,000 migrants from other countries. The arrival of the latter group, the majority of whom are male and hail from the Middle East and Africa, has triggered protests in the communities where they have been housed.
The migrant influx has come amid a record housing shortage in Ireland. House prices and rents have more than doubled in the last decade, and according to the government’s most recent figures, there are more than 8,300 homeless people in emergency shelters in the country.
Powerless and ridiculous for US to cry for its recognition as regional leader
Global Times | March 2, 2023
“Being powerful is like being a lady. If you have to tell people you are, you aren’t,” said former UK prime minister Margaret Thatcher. From this, we know how powerless and ridiculous it is when the US tries to persuade others by repeating, “I am still a leader, and you have to believe and admit it!”
In a video released Tuesday by NBC News, Nicholas Burns, the US Ambassador to China, who spoke by video link at a US Chamber of Commerce event, said Beijing must accept that Washington is a leader in Asia. He declared that China must now understand that “the US is staying in this region – we’re the leader in this region in many ways.”
What the US politician said implies two messages. First, he seems to criticize China for not understanding US’ presence in the Asia-Pacific. Second, Burns wants Beijing to acknowledge Washington’s leadership in the region. Yet, both are far from the truth.
Washington has always had the strategic miscalculation: It believes Beijing wants to push it out of the Asia-Pacific region. But China not only recognizes US’ presence in the area, but also seeks peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation with the US on the premise of mutual respect. What Beijing refuses is to be led by anyone else, including Washington.
Burns’ words are extremely US-centric, as they come entirely from Washington’s perspective of its regional role while ignoring the actual opinions of other Asia-Pacific nations. Such arrogance aims to satisfy the US’ strategic need for maintaining global hegemony.
“US continues to live in an alternative reality fuelled by hubris,” one tweet said, commenting on Burns’ remarks. This hits the nail on the head regarding US’ current status.
Washington has to understand that most Asia-Pacific countries do not want to be stuck in a Cold War-like confrontation again, nor do they want to see conflicts between major powers. The US’ desire to lead regional affairs and get the recognition of other countries is wishful thinking, which is completely at odds with the trend of development in Asia-Pacific.
Besides, against the backdrop of the deteriorating domestic problems and the relative decline in US’ national power, there’s also a sense of lack of confidence in Burns’ remarks: In fact, it actually sounds like a self-affirmation the US has to make.
“In the past, the US could confidently intervene in the affairs of any region and use force or coercion to maintain its leadership. But now it is increasingly incapable of acting as a leader, because Washington finds it more difficult to focus on other regions,” Zhang Tengjun, deputy director of the Department for Asia-Pacific Studies at the China Institute of International Studies, told the Global Times.
Almost one year in office, Burns has increasingly fueled the deterioration of China-US relations. As Washington’s megaphone for Beijing, the ambassador has frequently criticized China’s policies in public, including on social media. Many of his comments are damaging to US-China relations and inappropriate to his ambassadorship.
For instance, an exclusive report by the Global Times on Monday noted that Burns recently sparked discontent among the attendees of the 22nd Annual Appreciation Dinner American Chamber of Commerce when he criticized China in his address to the event.
The US Ambassador to China is the executor of US policy toward China. After taking office, Burns has been following Washington’s order on many China-related issues tightly and expressing what the White House wants him to say. Therefore, it is easy to see that Burns’ actions of fueling the fire essentially stem from the hysteria of the US’ containment policy toward China.
Over the past year, it seems that condemning China has become an instinctive reaction of any US official when dealing with China, especially in the current US political environment that promotes anti-China sentiments.
Nevertheless, politicians like Burns should understand that “pride and prejudice” toward China will only bring more danger and chaos to the region and the world. No matter how harsh they want to sound when talking about China and how assertive when talking about the US, they can never fool other countries by trying to sugarcoat US hegemony as “leadership.”
UK Embassy Sought to Pay Sudanese Students to Protest Against Russia
By Wyatt Reed | Sputnik | March 4, 2023
Britain’s Embassy in Sudan attempted to pay students who had studied abroad in Ukraine to participate in anti-Russian protests, a new report indicates.
Sudanese outlet Al-Rakoba wrote Friday that its staff spoke with an unnamed student who reports being approached by British embassy officials, who urged him to help put together an organization called the “Association of Sudanese Students in Ukrainian Universities” which would engage in anti-Russian provocations outside Sudan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The student in question, who “refused to reveal his name for security reasons” according to the report, reportedly said the Brits offered the students money as well as protection from Sudanese authorities if they participated in the alleged plot.
As some of those contacted by the UK’s diplomatic staff have participated in anti-government protests, they were told they would be shielded from prosecution, Al-Rakoba writes.
Just how successful the British embassy officials were in their apparent efforts is unclear — as is the identity of the culprits. But British intelligence officers are known to use diplomatic cover which employment at their embassy provides to carry out their clandestine activities.
If true, it wouldn’t be the first time the Brits organized chaos in the streets of a foreign land to effect their political will.
Decades ago, former MI6 officer Norman Darbyshire spilled the beans about his personal role in overseeing the bloody 1953 coup in Iran, which overthrew its democratically-elected prime minister, Mohammad Mossadegh.
“My brief was very simple,” Darbyshire revealed. “Go out there, don’t inform the ambassador, and use the intelligence service for any money you might need to secure the overthrow of Mossadegh by legal or quasi-legal means.”
After bragging that he spent “vast sums of money, well over a million-and-a-half pounds,” Darbyshire added, “I was personally giving orders and directing the street uprising.”
Germany’s Rheinmetall in Talks With Kiev on Construction of Tank Plant in Ukraine
Sputnik – 04.03.2023
German arms manufacturer Rheinmetall is currently holding “promising” talks with Kiev on the construction of a tank plant worth 200 million euros ($213 million) in Ukraine, Armin Papperger, the head of the company, said on Saturday.
“A Rheinmetall plant could be built in Ukraine for about 200 million euros,” Papperger told the German newspaper, adding that the negotiations were “promising.”
Such a plant will be able to produce up to 400 Panther tanks per year, the company’s chief said. He expressed hope that a final decision on the deal would be made “in the next two months.”
Ukraine needs from 600 to 800 tanks to win in the conflict with Russia, so even if Berlin gives Kiev all 300 Leopard 2 tanks from the reserves of the German armed forces, this will still “not be enough,” Papperger told the news outlet.
Over the past months, the German arms manufacturer has been an active participant in projects aimed at providing military support to Ukraine. Rheinmetall is supplying ammunition for German-made Gepard self-propelled anti-aircraft guns used by Ukraine in the conflict, as well as providing Kiev with high-mobility HX swap-body trucks and automated reconnaissance systems, among other items.
Western countries have been supplying Ukraine with various types of weapon systems, including air defense missiles, multiple launch rocket systems, tanks, self-propelled artillery and anti-aircraft guns since Russia launched its special military operation in Ukraine over a year ago. Moscow has warned that arms deliveries do not contribute to a peaceful resolution and further escalate the conflict, risking full-scale NATO involvement in the fighting.
EU must shift to wartime economy – industry commissioner
RT | March 4, 2023
The European Union’s industry chief has said the bloc will have to shift to a “wartime” economic model if it hopes to meet Kiev’s battlefield needs, with senior Ukrainian officials voicing hopes for a massive influx of shells from their foreign sponsors.
Commissioner for Internal Market Thierry Breton discussed plans to bolster arms and ammo shipments to Ukraine during a sit-down with the Financial Times, saying he is working with the EU’s foreign policy head Josep Borrell to expand industrial capacity in Europe, slash supply bottlenecks and pressure banks to boost their lending to facilitate military transfers to Kiev.
“I believe it is time that the European defense industry moves to a wartime economy model to cater for our defense production needs,” he told the outlet on Friday, adding that he and Borrell are “fully determined to support the production ramp-up of the European defense industry to face the realities of a high-intensity conflict – starting with the question of ammunition.”
Though unnamed diplomats voiced their doubts to FT – with one asking “How are we going to pay for this?” – the efforts to speed deliveries to Kiev and replenish Europe’s own domestic stocks come after Ukrainian Defense Minister Aleksey Reznikov pleaded with the bloc for 250,000 artillery shells per month, vastly outpacing any existing EU plan.
In a letter to European defense chiefs on Friday, Reznikov spoke of the “crucial role” played by artillery on the battlefield, claiming Ukrainian troops burn through 110,000 155mm shells every few weeks.
Ukrainian troops are “limited by the amount of available artillery shells” and need at least 356,400 rounds per month to “successfully execute” their tasks – or a whopping 594,000 shells monthly to use their artillery power to full capacity, Reznikov claimed.
According to the Times, Borrell is aiming at a “less ambitious” scheme, instead hoping to disperse €1 billion over “the next few months” to partially cover the bill for donated shells from allies.
With costs soaring amid growing shortages on the continent, 155mm shells produced in Europe could run as much as €3,300 for a single round, a recent weapons contract inked between EU members suggests. Based on that estimate, the ammunition sought by Kiev could cost the bloc some €825,000,000 for just one month, though officials have yet to confirm any specific figures.
It is hard to trace how many shells Ukraine has been getting from the armories of its European backers, but over the past year the United States alone sent “over 1,000,000 155mm artillery rounds,” according to the Pentagon’s latest data.