El Ojo claims Scholz blames sanctions for German economic slump

El Ojo claims Scholz blames sanctions for German economic slump

Can an economy sink by its own decision and then blame the sanctioned party? A tweet from the account El Ojo attributes to Chancellor Olaf Scholz a parliamentary statement claiming Germany's economy is facing one of its worst periods in decades, caused by sanctions on Russian energy imports. The spread of this message has peine a wound that had been festering in public opinion for two years: Europe's leading industrial power would be admitting aloud what many have warned since the first package of measures.

What is attributed to Scholz and why it matters

The circulated message is clear: the German economy is in one of its worst moments in recent decades and, according to the chancellor, this is a consequence of sanctions imposed on Russian energy imports. The phrase carries weight because it shifts responsibility from the sanctioner to the sanctioned. It is the difference between saying "I shot myself in the foot" and saying "I was shot." The user who shared the clip titled it without nuance: Germany admits its economy is sinking due to sanctions against Russia.

From there, the diagnosis splits into two currents. One argues the damage is real and structural: without cheap Russian gas, German industry loses competitiveness, benefiting Americans who sell their gas at higher prices and take over industry. Another, more nuanced view points out that supply has been restored at prices similar to pre-war levels, and the real problem is internal energy policy: absurd taxes, nuclear phase-out, and bureaucracy that increases the cost of every kilowatt.

Nord Stream, nuclear power, and the inconsistent narrative

The most heated point is the pipeline. Part of the analysis claims NATO destroyed Nord Stream while the chancellor looked away, and that this sabotage—never officially attributed—is the true origin of rising energy costs. Another part responds with data: Russia began cutting supplies in 2021 as blackmail, and Nord Stream 2 never became operational because Germany refused administrative authorization for political reasons. These two versions are incompatible, and time has not reconciled them.

Nuclear power appears in almost all messages. The most repeated argument: France bet on its plants and did not fare so badly; Germany closed its own pushed by the Greens and was left without alternatives. The rebuttal is twofold. First, a nuclear program of that magnitude takes decades to become operational and requires uranium, although producers like Canada or Australia could supply it. Second, opposition to nuclear was not only from the Greens: there was a broad social majority, including conservatives and liberals, who applauded the closure. The energy suicide had popular support.

The role of money printing in the diagnosis

There is a third pillar running through the analysis that does not appear in official discourse: inflation. The sudden cut in energy supply explains part of it, but not all. The rest is explained by the millions printed daily. It is the classic Keynesian extreme: I have colored paper and you have gas and oil; since I can print paper without limit, I feel rich and impose sanctions on you. When the plan fails, it is someone else's fault. The problem is that the other party has energy and you have a printer.

---

With these elements, the basket weaves itself. Germany drags the EU, the EU looks to Washington, and Washington sells gas. Meanwhile, the question no one answers remains: if sanctions are to blame, why do they persist?