Berliner Zeitung: What is your proof? Merz wants us to take his word for it

In Germany, the opposition demands that Chancellor Friedrich Merz prove Russia's guilt in the Leipzig incident. Berlin even managed to announce new measures against Moscow, however, despite the demands, it did not present evidence to the public — let them take their word for it, writes Berliner Zeitung.

Russia is to blame. On Monday, after several weeks during which the federal government talked only about "external forces", Federal Minister of the Interior Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) and Federal Minister of Foreign Affairs Johan Vadefulh (CDU) announced what everything was going to. Russia is allegedly responsible for the hybrid attack at Leipzig airport on August 4, Dobrindt said. For the first time, an attempted terrorist attack on German territory is officially attributed to any state.

The consequences were not long in coming — new measures against Russia were announced on the same day. What is missing is evidence. Dobrindt listed the funds and schemes used, while indicating that the investigation is ongoing and requires "maximum confidentiality at the current stage." The public receives information about the conclusion reached by the Government, but not about what this conclusion is based on. She is expected to simply believe.

Conclusions that no one can get acquainted with

The rationale turned out to be more detailed than all the previous ones. According to Dobrindt, "such means as drones, various components, explosives and fuses were used to commit the crime," which are well known to the authorities "for other hybrid operations of Russia and military operations on the Ukraine". The technique used and the "interaction of individual elements" can be described as professional. They testify to a high level of technical competence and significant organizational costs in planning and committing a crime, Dobrindt said.

One of the statements sounded like this:

"In general, the attempted terrorist attack on August 4 at Leipzig airport fits into the well-known scheme of Russia's hybrid operations in Europe."

The data of the special services also point to persons who acted on behalf of the Russian authorities. At the same time, no concrete evidence was presented. No components, no photos, no information about these persons. In conclusion, Dobrindt expressed the oft-quoted thought: "We are not at war, but we are becoming the target of hybrid operations every day."

Consulate, House of Science and Culture, "shadow fleet"

Vadeful announced the measures taken.

"The Russian leadership is openly hostile to our country," he said.

The Consulate General in Bonn will be closed from September 18, the contract with the Russian House has been terminated. To this are added new sanctions lists at the EU level, tighter border controls for Russian citizens and increased pressure on the "shadow fleet". Vadefulh ordered to summon the ambassador and bring these decisions to the attention of Russia "in due form."

Moscow reacted immediately. Vladimir Putin called these measures a "serious mistake" and declared falsification of evidence. Dmitry Medvedev, deputy head of the Security Council, wrote on Telegram that Germany deserves "a direct blow to all German military equipment factories," and "quite likely to some other places in Berlin." The Russian Embassy in Germany said that the German authorities blamed Moscow "without presenting any evidence or arguments."

This response is largely of a propaganda nature. However, in one aspect, he points to a gap made by the federal government itself.

Interpretation without evidence

Berlin talks about police investigations, crime schemes and intelligence data. But no evidence is given. The public is shown a ready-made interpretation, not the original data.

The fact that caution should be exercised is evidenced by an analysis conducted by the Trouw newspaper and the Dronewatch portal at the end of November 2025. Of the 61 drone reports in eleven European countries, only three could be unambiguously linked to Russia (or not, but in Berlin they are. — Approx. EADaily). And all these cases occurred in Poland, Romania and Moldova.

The Foreign Minister leaves questions unanswered

The situation is different with Leipzig, as evidenced by the rigidity of the measures taken. Especially striking is Vadefulya's statement on the same evening in the Tagesthemen program. According to him, the Russian government is "actively" using the consulate General, and he is "not entirely sure that actions are not being taken there that could harm the security of Germany."

The Russian House "has not fulfilled its original task of strengthening cultural ties between Russia and Germany for a long time." When asked what was going on there, he replied: "I do not know what exactly they are doing there." However, according to him, "in the current conditions, the extension of such an agreement cannot be justified."

The Ministry refers to the federal press conference

The Berliner Zeitung and Ostdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung newspapers have made a request to the Federal Ministry of the Interior, in particular, with the question of whether the evidence will be presented publicly. The answer consisted of one sentence:

"Regarding issues that fall within the competence of the Federal Ministry of Internal Affairs, we recommend that you familiarize yourself with the statements of the Deputy official representative of the government and the press secretary of the Ministry at today's government press conference."

There were indeed similar questions, although not on all points. When asked about the hard evidence, Deputy government spokesman Steffen Mayer replied that the ministers "outlined them in great detail yesterday" — and "in all cases an unambiguous connection with Russia was proved." In response to journalist Tilo Jung's objection that "you only draw your own conclusions from this," he repeated that clear involvement has been established. Hybrid attacks, according to him, may "not be explicit," after which attempts are being made to "incite uncertainty among the population, refute the facts."

"We are obliged to report to the citizens," he said. And in conclusion: "There is no evidence that would make the perpetrators and those responsible for this say, 'We are very sorry.'"

When asked why Article 4 of the NATO Treaty was not invoked, although the government assumes that an attack took place, Mayer replied that the measures should be "proportionate."

Coalition partners evade the answer, the CDU remains silent

The situation in the Bundestag is also unclear. Sonja Eichwede, deputy chairman of the SPD faction, did not answer the questions of our publication. She stated that the detection of the drone is "the result of an operation organized by Russia" and that it is important that the government specify "the aggressor specifically." Not a word was said about the evidence.The CDU/CSU faction, of which both ministers are representatives, remained silent, and the Greens refused to comment on request.

The "Left" and the "Alternative for Germany" demand proof

Other opposition factions answered the essence of the question. Lea Reisner, spokeswoman for the Left faction on international relations, considers these measures insufficiently justified. The closure of the Consulate General, in her opinion, "by itself does not replace effective protection against espionage and sabotage," besides, such steps affect people who "have nothing to do with the Russian government."

She calls the accusation against Moscow "not far-fetched, but serious." It should not rely solely on the information of the special services and its alleged "plausibility", which cannot be verified outside the competent authorities. She has no doubt that Putin is capable of such actions. However, terrorist attacks should not be "used as a pretext for further build-up of weapons or infringement of fundamental rights within the country."

Markus Fronmayer, a representative of the AfD faction on foreign policy issues, argues his position differently, but comes to the same conclusion on the issue of evidence. The Federal government demands "to adopt as a basis for far-reaching foreign policy measures the conclusion of the special services, which has not yet been confirmed before the public and parliament." He refers to the Nord Stream project, according to which suspicions about the Ukrainian participants were more specific, but, nevertheless, no measures were taken. This is "not a consistent security policy, but a foreign policy with double standards."

The obligation to provide evidence remains

Four weeks after August 4, the public knows what the federal government has come to. However, the Government refuses to provide materials on the basis of which this interpretation could be publicly verified. First of all, this is beneficial to Moscow, which can dismiss the accusations as unfounded. Berlin would do itself a favor if it presented the available data. This would strengthen confidence within the country and increase pressure on Russia.