**Summary of Enchanting and Whimsical Details about Royal Pets and Corgis:**

- **Queen Elizabeth II's Central Role:** Queen Elizabeth II famously adored corgis, owning over 30 throughout her reign.

Her love for the breed – often seen by her side, featured in quirky anecdotes, and referenced in pop culture – single-handedly elevated the corgi's popularity worldwide.

- **Royal Treatment & Whimsy:** Royal corgis were often perceived as being a bit "spoilt."

Their pampered lifestyle, from custom meals to dedicated staff, contributed a sense of enchantment and humor.

Sightings of the Queen carrying an unwrapped dog biscuit in her handbag affirmed their affectionately privileged status.

- **Historical Bond:** The royal family's relationship with corgis dates back to King George VI, who acquired the first Pembroke Welsh Corgi, "Dookie," in 1933.

The breed quickly became family favorites, symbolizing loyalty and playfulness at the royal court.

- **Corgis as Cultural Icons:** The Queen's corgis became cultural icons, appearing in countless illustrations, children’s books, and heartwarming stories.

Their importance to the Queen even led to them being represented in monumental public displays, such as the Platinum Jubilee drone show, where a giant illuminated corgi was featured above Buckingham Palace, watched by millions globally.

- **Influence in Media & Popularity:** Corgis have been depicted in animation, art, and theatre.

Recent social media trends highlight emotional moments with corgis during royal events, like Florence the corgi at the Queen’s funeral.

The breed's unique charm is again and again used in children's stories and jokes about palace life, capturing both British wit and royal whimsy.

- **Wider Cultural Impact:** Community events such as the "Tour de Corgi" celebrate the breed, acknowledging a shared affection inspired by the Queen herself.

**Summary of Enchanting and Whimsical Details about Royal Pets and Corgis:**

- **Queen Elizabeth II's Central Role:** Queen Elizabeth II famously adored corgis, owning over 30 throughout her reign.

Title:

Content: Sunday, Sep 11, 2022

Annual ‘Tour de Corgi’ event to include new ‘Queen Elizabeth’ costume category to honour the monarch

“We all have a very strong affection for her as a fellow corgi lover," Tour de Corgi founder Tracy Stewart was quoted as saying

Queen Elizabeth II is seen walking in the private grounds of Windsor Castle, in England, on steps at the rear of the East Terrace and East Garden with four of her dogs: clockwise from top left Willow (corgi), Vulcan (dorgie), Candy (dorgie) and Holly (AP/PTI)

As a tribute to the late UK monarch Queen Elizabeth II, who passed away at the age of 96 at her Balmoral estate in Scotland on September 8, after reigning for 70 long years, the Tour de Corgi parade — an annual event that celebrates the dog breed corgi — will include a new element this year that is likely to make fans of the British royal family and corgi lovers happy.

Buy Now | Our best subscription plan now has a special price

It is no secret that the queen was extremely fond of dogs, especially corgis, from a very early age, and that she had been breeding them until 2018, when she finally realised that she may have to leave some of them behind after her death.

According to Country Living, the queen had four dogs at the time of her death: two Pembroke Welsh Corgis, a Dorgi (Corgi-Dachshund mix), and a Cocker Spaniel named Lissy, who joined the family only this year, in January 2022.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by The Royal Family (@theroyalfamily)

In her lifetime, she reportedly bred 14 generations of corgis, and even famously declared: “My corgis are family.”

According to an Independent report, Queen Elizabeth‘s love for her four-legged friends was well-documented during this year’s platinum jubilee celebrations in the UK, when the sky above Buckingham Palace was lit up with images of the dog breed.

The publication mentioned that the Tour de Corgi parade this year — which has been taking place in Fort Collins, Colorado since 2014 — will include a “Queen Elizabeth and her corgis” costume competition, in “memorium and to honour her”, quoting the event’s organisers who shared this with a local newspaper ‘The Coloradoan‘.

This is a May 12, 1973 file photo of Queen Elizabeth II sitting with her corgis, at Virginia Water to watch competitors, including Prince Philip in the Marathon of the European Driving Championship, part of the Royal Windsor Horse Show.

Tour de Corgi founder Tracy Stewart was quoted as saying, “We all have a very strong affection for her as a fellow corgi lover. I think it is just, you know, our dogs are such a big part of our hearts that it creates a very heartfelt connection.”

Advertisement

The aforementioned event will take place on October 1, 2022, and will conclude with a corgi parade through the town.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by @bronskiandfriends

According to a Reader’s Digest report, the queen was fond of corgis because of their “energy and untamed spirit”, and the fact that her parents welcomed the family’s first corgi, Dookie, in 1933. Eleven years later, in 1944, the queen’s father gifted her a corgi named Susan for her 18th birthday. The pupper even accompanied her on her honeymoon, and gave birth to a pair of puppies in 1949, which reportedly marked the beginning of the royal line of corgis.

📣 For more lifestyle news, follow us on Instagram | Twitter | Facebook and don’t miss out on the latest updates!

First published on: 11-09-2022 at 07:10:45 pm
Next Story

Bombay High Court says judicial system answerable to accused, fair and speedy trial expected

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Her love for the breed – often seen by her side, featured in quirky anecdotes, and referenced in pop culture – single-handedly elevated the corgi's popularity worldwide.

- **Royal Treatment & Whimsy:** Royal corgis were often perceived as being a bit "spoilt."

Title:

Content: Skip to main contentSkip to navigation

‘I love writing for children’: Emma Thompson and Axel Scheffler on their amazing shaggy dog story

The Oscar-winning actor and the Gruffalo illustrator have teamed up to create a tale about a scruffy hound. They discuss corgis, comic books and how their friendship began

Axel Scheffler was an unknown illustrator, working largely for Good Housekeeping magazine, when he received a letter in response to a small exhibition of his work. It was from Emma Thompson, a young actor who had begun to attract attention with TV series such as Fortunes of War and Tutti Frutti. Neatly written in fountain pen, it inquired whether he would accept a commission. “Ken Branagh, my chap, runs his own theatre company,” it explained. He was playing Hamlet to her sister Sophie’s Ophelia and she wanted something to commemorate a moment in time. “I have a vague notion of what you charge for your work, which doesn’t seem to me to be enough,” it went on. “I enclose a picture of Ken and Sophie in case it’s of use.”

Scheffler still has the letter and has brought it along 34 years later to an interview to mark their first literary collaboration, on a children’s picture book, Jim’s Spectacular Christmas. “That’s amazing,” says Thompson of the letter, which predates her six-year marriage to Branagh and was written from the flat they shared in 1988. Then she trumps it, by announcing that she still has the envelope in which Scheffler sent the two pictures. It was decorated with a picture of Hamlet sitting on a skull “looking really depressed” and it sits framed above a loo in her home to this day.

So began a correspondence that continued over the years with requests to Scheffler to design letterheads for both Thompson and her actor mother, Phyllida Law. Though they never actually met in person, they exchanged gifts on the birth of their first children; hers to him was a food hamper; his to her was a picture of a pig wheeling a pram. A pig? Yes, she explains, a pig is her letterhead emblem. When she later became a dame he drew her a picture of a pig wearing a dame badge. “So, without ever meeting, Axel has been part of the illustration of my la-i-ife.” She draws the vowel out into a camp diphthong as part of a running joke with Scheffler as to which of them will seem most exciting to the children for whom their new book is intended: the actor who starred as Nanny McPhee and now as Mrs Trunchbull in the film of Matilda the Musical or the illustrator of the mega-selling Gruffalo books.

We’re sitting in a grand upstairs room at the V&A museum, having skittered along corridors, through porticos and galleries just like the protagonist of their book. He’s a small scruff of a dog named Jim, with a “gamey whiff” and a “rheumy eye”. He’s based on a terrier that was, in real life, the faithful companion of the V&A’s founder and first director, Sir Henry Cole, who left a handy sketch of him and commemorated him with a plaque in the museum. In Thompson’s telling, Jim is rescued from life as a canine chimney brush after tumbling down a flue in a cloud of soot into a gathering of museum worthies. From that inglorious beginning he goes on to become part of the 19th-century invention of Christmas, presenting Queen Victoria with the world’s first commercial Christmas card.

The card, drawn to Cole’s design by his artist friend John Horsley, still exists and copying it has given Scheffler an unprecedented opportunity to depict a child drinking wine: “That’s really not allowed in children’s books,” he points out. Other historical details include the small printing press on which the cards were produced for Cole, an innovator who was also instrumental in introducing the world’s first postage stamp, the penny black. Humorously told and drawn though it is, this is a history book as well as a shaggy dog story – a delicate balancing act that became clear when it came to the portrayal of Queen Victoria, whose chest is being dabbed by her solicitous husband, Albert, to rid it of a tea stain when Jim catches his first glimpse of the royal family. “I thought she was still very young but you describe her as round, so I made her a little bit more – well – round,” says Scheffler.

Thompson, who has always taken her historical research seriously, points out that Victoria would indeed have still been young by 21st-century standards – she was only 42 when Prince Albert died and he is still very much alive in the story – but by that time she was somewhat altered by having given birth to nine children in 17 years. Underpinning Jim’s story is the bigger history of the creation of Albertopolis, the west London museum quarter that was dreamed up by the prince as part of a vision of culture for the masses and is now the home to the Science and National History museums as well as the V&A. “When you start reading about Albert you realise what an incredible bloke he was,” says Thompson. “He was so much more cultured and sophisticated really than our lot are. It was a great tragedy that he died so young, because I think he would have made lots of changes.”

Royal corgis do not come out of it so well: Thompson depicts a stoutly entitled one chasing poor Jim out of the palace. “I just feel as though the corgis might be a bit spoilt,” she says. “But I think actually it’s very likely that the Queen [Elizabeth] was quite fierce with them and that they were very well trained.” This isn’t entirely a matter of conjecture. “I did actually see her do this once. She opened her handbag, in which she had an unwrapped dog biscuit, and when she drew three circles over the head of three corgis they all rolled over. It was like a circus trick, but the thing I really loved was that she had an unwrapped dog biscuit in her handbag. I thought, well, that’s got to make your hankie smell a bit.” This prompts a bit of banter between the duo as to what else she might have kept in her omnipresent bag: carrots for the royal horses, perhaps.

Thompson writes like she talks: irreverent, refreshingly un-grand and with a comic timing that is accentuated in the book by Scheffler’s deployment of mini-tableaux: Jim having a bath, reading a book or slurping up a bowl of custard. The actor was an early connoisseur of comic-book humour, who once wrote a fan letter to the creators of Asterix and received the reply that they were delighted to have made a small English girl laugh. Scheffler, growing up in Germany at around the same time, was a devotee of a comic-strip bear called Petzi, by the Danish husband and wife team Vilhelm and Carla Hansen.

It was Thompson who brought Scheffler in on Jim’s Spectacular Christmas, having already written the story, complete with character sketches, and folded them up into a little book. Though an award-winning screenwriter, she had no ambition to diversify into picture books, she says. But she agreed to this one because it was pitched to her as an invitation from Henry Cole himself, just as the three Peter Rabbit books she has previously written were pitched as invitations from Peter: “There’s still a little bit of me that thinks it was Peter Rabbit himself who asked me,” she says. “I love writing for children. I think it’s perhaps a legacy from dad.” Her sister, Sophie, also now writes books for children. Their father, Eric Thompson, presented the children’s TV programme Play School and went on to create and narrate The Magic Roundabout.

The question is not if, but when, Thompson and Scheffler will collaborate again – they circle around the idea during the interview as if neither can quite believe that the other would actually stoop to it. When time’s up we’re ushered out along the corridors to a staircase that museum staff have identified as the exact one that Scheffler has depicted, where an excited gaggle of east London schoolchildren awaits.

Settling herself on the steps in their midst, beside a large cardboard cut-out of Jim, Thompson asks who has heard of the Gruffalo and a rafter-rattling cheer goes up. Scheffler lurks in the shadows as she starts to read from the book. “Now what,” she asks, “do you think ‘a gamey whiff’ means?”

Jim’s Spectacular Christmas, written by Emma Thompson and illustrated by Axel Scheffler, is published by Puffin (£14.99). To support the Guardian and Observer order your copy at guardianbookshop.com. Delivery charges may apply

Most viewed

Most viewed

Their pampered lifestyle, from custom meals to dedicated staff, contributed a sense of enchantment and humor.

Title:

Content: South Tyneside-based brand Barbour has revealed its heart-warming Christmas advert starring Paddington Bear.

The two British icons have teamed up this festive season to promote an important message of sustainability. Barbour's festive film follows the adventures of Paddington as he comes up with an idea to gift his neighbour a re-waxed and recycled Barbour jacket.

The brand, which has its headquarters on Bede Industrial Estate, cleans, re-waxes and repairs jackets to help customers extend the life of their products and also offers them the chance to recycle their old waxed jackets The brand's focus on sustainability has been championed by King Charles, who even visited the factory in South Tyneside last year to have a go at re-waxing a jacket

READ MORE: Tapas Revolution to open Metrocentre restaurant - and this is how shoppers can try its food for free this weekend

And teaming up with the much-loved children’s character will mean all the more to people this year, as Paddington became closely associated with the late Queen Elizabeth after she appeared in a sketch alongside the Peruvian bear as part of her Jubilee celebrations.

The advert was created by the acclaimed trio of directors 'againstallodds' and produced by Triple Academy-Award-winning production company PASSION Pictures. Every frame of the animation has been hand drawn and painted, with more than 3,000 hours of work going into the design, animation, and composition of the final film.

Paul Wilkinson, group marketing director at Barbour, said: “We are delighted to feature Paddington in our Christmas film. Extending the life of our garments has been at the heart of our brand for over 100 years and through Barbour Re-Loved, a key focus of our Wax for Life initiative, we have been able to demonstrate in a humorous and sentimental way, the importance of upcycling and how much a thoughtful and unique present can mean particularly at Christmas time.

Barbour was originally established by John Barbour in 1894 in South Shields to provide outerwear to fishermen, sailors, and mariners to protect them from the worst of the British weather and is now a global brand.

READ NEXT:

Sightings of the Queen carrying an unwrapped dog biscuit in her handbag affirmed their affectionately privileged status.

- **Historical Bond:** The royal family's relationship with corgis dates back to King George VI, who acquired the first Pembroke Welsh Corgi, "Dookie," in 1933.

Title:

Content: Meet the team behind THAT dazzling Jubilee light show: With 400 dancing drones, six months' intense planning, a secret rehearsal in a Yorkshire sheep field and a command centre in the Queen's tea tent, JENNY JOHNSTON reveals how the spectacle came together

When a giant illuminated corgi, a teapot, a jumping horse and other symbols associated with the Queen appeared in the skies above Buckingham Palace last Saturday night at the end of the Platinum Jubilee concert, the world gasped.

How bonkers. How beautiful. How brilliantly British. We'd never seen anything like it, everyone agreed.

This is not quite true. Three members of the public — and some baffled sheep — had seen the corgi and his chums before.

For two weeks before Saturday's display, which involved 400 drones taking off from the palace gardens and lighting up the sky with a meticulously choreographed 'dance', the organisers staged a full dress rehearsal at an 'off-grid' location.

It may sound very James Bond, but in reality it was more James Herriot.

'It was at a farm in Yorkshire, which the farmer kindly lets us use,' says Mungo Denison, director of Skymagic, the Leeds-based drone company who masterminded the event. 'Because of the secrecy, we couldn't test at the palace, but we did a full rehearsal, sending all 400 of the drones up, so the farmer, his wife and the shepherd had pole position for viewing.'

They had to be particularly careful with the sheep. 'In the past, they've managed to get into the command centre and have tried to nibble things!'

When a giant illuminated corgi, a teapot, a jumping horse and other symbols associated with the Queen appeared in the skies above Buckingham Palace last Saturday night at the end of the Platinum Jubilee concert, the world gasped

On Platinum Party night, the showstopper images were visible across London. 'The big 'Thank You, Ma'am' display, and a giant '70', could be seen two kilometres away. The sky is the biggest canvas we have,' says Mungo.

Many assumed the Buckingham Palace display was the result of computer-generated wizardry, or fancy light projection. Then, when they heard about the drones, they had visions of '400 pilots sitting in the palace gardens flying them'.

Not so. In such displays — which are increasingly taking over from fireworks — only a small team is needed. There were seven core members of the Skymagic team at the palace — four in the garden, launching the drones and three front-of-palace, to ensure that everything happened with military precision.

Mungo and his technical director, Stuart Fairhurst, were in the garden. They have staged similar displays all over the world, often for presidents and royals in the Middle East. 'I once directed a display in Abu Dhabi with 100 snipers aimed at me,' says Mungo — just in case he was a terrorist.

Being ushered into the Queen's garden was next level. 'Our command centre was in the tea tent the Queen uses for garden parties,' says Stuart. 'The palace gardeners had mowed the lawn for us.'

They had been able to do a few mini-tests in situ in the days before the event — sending up 20 drones at a time 'to try out some positions'. But it was a first for everyone to see 400 drones being laid out in a giant grid (for safety reasons, display drones have to be two metres apart).

Stuart explains: 'We usually use chalk to mark out the positions the drones need to sit on, but we didn't want to mess up the Palace lawn so we used the little plastic tripods you find in your takeaway pizza box to stop the lid hitting the topping. We bought 400 and pressed each one into the palace lawn.'

Many assumed the Buckingham Palace display was the result of computer-generated wizardry, or fancy light projection. Then, when they heard about the drones, they had visions of '400 pilots sitting in the palace gardens flying them'. Not so

The contract was a coup for this company, which has only 20 full-time staff. Skymagic was launched in 2015, when drone displays were in their infancy. Their first show used 40 drones, but now the sky really is the limit. The world record for the number of drones used in a display is just over 3,000.

The team won't reveal what the Jubliee display cost, but the starting price for a basic display of 200 drones is $120,000 (£96,000).

Drone displays are popular as they are more environmentally-friendly than pyrotechnic displays and can be customised to a degree that fireworks cannot, with specific company logos for example.

Audiences have been wowed by drone displays at mega events such as the Tokyo Olympics and the Super Bowl. It was more than six months ago that the Jubilee party organisers asked Skymagic to devise ideas to tell the story of the Queen's 70-year reign. The brief was that the images should be celebratory, suitably regal, but not too stuffy. They should reflect the Queen's service, lifetime of duty and her hobbies.

Their designers got to work with paper, pencils and crayons. 'The corgi, the teapot and the horse were some of the earliest ideas, and immediately got the green light from the BBC,' says Mungo.

Drone displays are popular as they are more environmentally-friendly than pyrotechnic displays and can be customised to a degree that fireworks cannot, with specific company logos for example

Another must was a huge image of the Queen's head on a postage stamp.

Next came the process of getting the designs perfected on screen.

The firm uses animation software where initial sketches, once plotted into the computer, can be overlaid with images. This process is painstaking.

Mungo says: 'Getting a dog that looks like a dog isn't that difficult, but it had to be recognisably a corgi, so there was a lot of poring over images, making the ears more pointy.'

Getting horses moving in the sky is trickier still.

'Because of our work in the Middle East for big horse-racing shows, we've learned the hard way that getting a horse jumping is incredibly difficult. Get the back legs wrong and it will look like a pantomime horse — or a donkey! 'People who know horses really know horses. They will tell you that the horse in your display is too old because when it's jumping, the shoulder is too low.

'As the Queen is such an equestrian fan, the horse had to be just right. The designer must have watched a thousand showjumping videos.'

A key stage in the process was creating a 3D replica, on screen, of not only Buckingham Palace, but everything around it, down to trees and lampposts, so the drones knew where to go in relation to their surroundings. GPS plotting was vital in positioning the corgi, say, at exactly the right point in the sky so it would look as if it were peering over the palace.

'It was quite tricky to get that right, and get the bone in just the right position so it wasn't obscuring the corgi's face. In the same way, the horse had to seem to jump over the palace.'

Crucially, the power of a drone display is that it doesn't simply project an image into the sky — it gives a complete 3D experience.

While the design team was focusing on corgi ears, the aeronautical experts were getting the drone fleet prepared.

Securing the necessary permits for a drone display can be a logistical nightmare. Civil Aviation Authority permission is required, but in this case it was made more straightforward, 'because the skies over Buckingham Palace are among the most secure in the world,' says Mungo. Another key factor is the weather. High winds and downpours can cause havoc with drone displays.

Crucially, the power of a drone display is that it doesn't simply project an image into the sky — it gives a complete 3D experience. While the design team was focusing on corgi ears, the aeronautical experts were getting the drone fleet prepared

The Skymagic drones are kept in two locations — one outside London and the other in Singapore.

Its drones are fitted with powerful LED lights which are capable of producing 16 million colour combinations. Each drone is battery-powered but a charge can only last for ten or 12 minutes.

This isn't generally a problem. 'Most displays don't last for longer anyway, because, as in firework displays, the audience can get bored after the initial dazzle. Technically, we can just bring one fleet of drones down and send another up if we want a longer display, but we didn't need to here.'

Watching hundreds of drones take off , in formation, is a spine-tingling experience, even on YouTube.

Mungo says: 'Watching a whole fleet land is just incredible. When they are ten metres out, they turn red and then these beautiful red droplets come through the sky, landing exactly where they take off.'

Both Mungo and Stuart speak of the drones as if they are living things. 'They are our children,' Mungo laughs. 'And some can misbehave. Thankfully, they all behaved very well at the Palace and did exactly as they were told. But we have had some naughty drones who haven't lit up when they were supposed to.'

He also recalls a display in Hong Kong which fell victim to hackers who brought all the communications down. Although drones are programmed to land safely, in this case the 300g devices descended into the surrounding water and Stuart says the team watched them all disappear. 'That was quite an insurance claim.'

For Buckingham Palace, all 400 drones were in the air at the same time. 'The same drones which made up the teapot made up the corgi, for example. We had them all in the air at once, but the process is that you might not need all 400, so you can have 50 or so with their lights off.'

All communication between command centre and drones is done via radio signal. No one sits twiddling a console as all the commands are pre-programmed so the drones get into place themselves.

'On the night, we only had to give them three commands — 'turn on the propellers', 'take off' and 'go to show'.'

Obviously hearts were in mouths as the drones lifted off and transformed themselves into the corgi and his friends.

What was the atmosphere like down below? 'Electric,' says Mungo. 'We could hear the cheers go up and it was just amazing. Most people there had never seen a drone display. All the Buckingham Palace staff were watching, and even the police protection guys were clapping us on the back, saying they'd never seen anything quite like it.'

And Her Majesty? We will never know how it felt for her to see her own image projected onto the biggest canvas on earth. Or whether she has since queried why there are strange little holes all over her back garden.

For more info on the drones, go to skymagic.show.

Advertisement

JENNY JOHNSTON: Meet the team behind THAT dazzling Jubilee light show

The comments below have not been moderated.

The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.

The breed quickly became family favorites, symbolizing loyalty and playfulness at the royal court.

- **Corgis as Cultural Icons:** The Queen's corgis became cultural icons, appearing in countless illustrations, children’s books, and heartwarming stories.

Their importance to the Queen even led to them being represented in monumental public displays, such as the Platinum Jubilee drone show, where a giant illuminated corgi was featured above Buckingham Palace, watched by millions globally.

- **Influence in Media & Popularity:** Corgis have been depicted in animation, art, and theatre.

Title:

Content: A corgi named Florence has captured the hearts of social media users after her owner, Jacqui, shared a snap of her looking 'emotional' while they watched the Queen's state funeral.

Posting on Twitter as @vanbommelj, Jacqui uploaded an image of five-year-old Florence (also known as Flo) spread out on the floor in front of the television, with the Queen's funeral procession on in the background.

She captioned the tweet, writing: "It's been an emotional week for a corgi too."

Dozens of people have since liked the tweet, with Jacqui following it up with an image of Flo also stealing the show during the Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations this summer.

You can leave your tributes to Queen Elizabeth II here

The image, taken at a street party, shows a cardboard cut out of the Queen, with Florence's lead around it's hand, and the pooch sat obediently below, looking up at the cardboard monarch's face.

Speaking about Florence, Jacqui told The Mirror: "This is Florence a pedigree corgi who we bought from Mary Davies, a breeder in Wales. Mary Davies is part of the Welsh Corgi League and was in the documentary on the Queen’s Corgi’s as her kennel provided a sire for the Queen’s corgi’s.

"Florence has just turned five years old and is lovely natured, she qualified for Crufts but then ruined her looks by knocking a tooth out. She is much happier running on the beaches and wild spaces of the south coast where we live."

Jacqui continued to say: "She is our daughter Ruby’s dog.

"Six years ago Ruby researched the best small dog to fit our family. She settled on Corgis as at the time they were on The Kennel Club's endangered breed list, plus they are known as being a big dog in a small body. Ruby saved all her babysitting and pocket money and did a paper round to pay for half of Florence. The other half being in lieu of three birthday and Christmas presents."

Jacqui added: "Now Florence spends her time out walking every day, promoting the breed to everyone she meets letting them know that Corgis are strong obedient little dogs bred for cattle herding and will happily trek for miles which helps with weight control.

"Her other duties include keeping an ear alert for anyone passing by and attending our street parties (also posted on twitter).

"She was pictured stealing the show as we watched the funeral with my 80 year old parents who watched King George's funeral together as children. They were in the same house crowded around a small black and white TV, my mum remembers this fidgety boy, they later married and had five children. But that’s another story..."

This comes as the Queen's corgis were seen waiting for the coffin to arrive back at Windsor Castle.

Prince Andrew was seen with his late mother's dogs, Muick and Sandy as they were walked inside the grounds of the castle ahead of the Committal Service.

You can follow more updates on the Queen's funeral on our live blog here.

Recent social media trends highlight emotional moments with corgis during royal events, like Florence the corgi at the Queen’s funeral.

The breed's unique charm is again and again used in children's stories and jokes about palace life, capturing both British wit and royal whimsy.

- **Wider Cultural Impact:** Community events such as the "Tour de Corgi" celebrate the breed, acknowledging a shared affection inspired by the Queen herself.


**Nuggets Summary on Germany’s Move Away from Nuclear Energy and Its Impacts:**

1.

**Nuclear Phase-Out Timeline:**
   - Germany closed three nuclear reactors in 2021 and planned to shut down the last three by the end of 2022, as part of a long-standing commitment to end atomic power.

- Previous attempts to extend nuclear use (“as a bridging technology”) were short-lived.

**Green and Safety Arguments:**
   - German policymakers have argued that nuclear power is not “entirely clean” and is both risky and expensive.

- The government highlighted concerns over nuclear safety and the challenge of waste disposal as core reasons for the exit.

**Contrasts in EU Energy Policy:**
   - France continues to rely heavily on nuclear for its electricity (~77.6%), while Germany rejects its inclusion in the EU’s taxonomy for green energy.

- Spain and Germany both opposed classifying nuclear (and natural gas) as “green” by EU standards.

**Energy Market Adjustments and Vulnerabilities:**
   - The end of nuclear power has made Germany more dependent on Russian gas and other energy imports, exposing its grid to geopolitical risks.

- The Russian invasion of Ukraine triggered a major energy crisis, with high gas and electricity prices affecting German consumers and causing social unrest fears (“autumn of rage”).

- Inflation, especially food prices, has soared, putting pressure on households and prompting welfare interventions.

**Temporary Policy Flexibility:**
   - The German government considered—at least temporarily—extending the operation of the last nuclear plants in response to the gas shortage, provided it could be done safely.

**Societal and Political Reactions:**
   - The phase-out policy was driven by the Greens but enjoys support across major parties.

- However, parts of the population and some policymakers have called for reconsidering the nuclear phase-out, especially in light of the energy crisis.

- Discontent is visible but hasn’t yet led to strikes or mass protests.

**Nuggets Summary on Germany’s Move Away from Nuclear Energy and Its Impacts:**

1.

Title:

Content: Three nuclear-fired power plants will be taken off the grid in Germany on Friday as part of the country's plan to end atomic power.

"The nuclear phaseout makes our country safer and helps to avoid radioactive waste," said Federal Environment and Nuclear Safety Minister Steffi Lemke.

"It is now essential to ... advance the search for a final repository for high-level radioactive waste as well as permanent solutions for low- and medium-level radioactive waste," the environment ministry said.

Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel speeded up the phaseout following the 2011 Fukushima accident in Japan.

Friday's shutdown affects power plants in Brokdorf in Schleswig-Holstein, Grohnde in Lower Saxony and Gundremmingen C in Bavaria.

Germany's remaining three nuclear plants — Emsland in Lower Saxony, Isar 2 in Bavaria and Neckarwestheim 2 in Baden-Württemberg — will be closed by the end of 2022 "at the latest," the environment ministry said.

"Since 2011, Germany has been drawing a line under a highly problematic technology in an orderly, reliable process," Lemke said.

Nuclear accounts for about 10 percent of Germany's electricity production. The shutdown has sparked criticism as Germany will have to dramatically ramp up renewable energy and has also increased its reliance on highly polluting coal-fired power.

"Security of supply in Germany continues to be guaranteed," said Robert Habeck, federal climate and economy minister. He added that reliable and "sustainably generated electricity" is a "central requirement for aligning our economy and industry toward climate neutrality."

That stance puts Berlin at loggerheads with France, where nuclear is the largest element of its energy mix (and also helps supply Germany).

EU Internal Market Commissioner Thierry Breton said in September that existing nuclear plants, which provide low-carbon electricity essential to the green transition, can be kept running "for two, five, 10 years," adding: "Why deprive ourselves of this production capacity?"

France is planning to scale down the share of nuclear in its electricity mix from 75 percent to 50 percent by 2035, but President Emmanuel Macron said in November that France "will restart the construction of nuclear reactors" while "continuing to develop renewable energies."

Macron also said France will invest €1 billion into research and development, notably into small modular reactors.

Belgium recently decided to shut down all its nuclear power plants by 2025, but plans to invest €100 million in new generation nuclear reactors and research.

More from ... Louise Guillot

**Nuclear Phase-Out Timeline:**
   - Germany closed three nuclear reactors in 2021 and planned to shut down the last three by the end of 2022, as part of a long-standing commitment to end atomic power.

Title:

Content: World

Berlin against, Rome is silent, Paris in favor. Nuclear power explodes in the EU

Germany closed three reactors in 2021 and plans to do the same with the other three in 2022. Belgium shares the same idea, “shut down” its seven plants by 2025. Spain, which has some reactors in operation as well, does not consider them “green” at all. Luxembourg dismisses the proposal to include the atom in the green taxonomy as a “provocation”. Austria of the atom does not want to know, with 82% of its primary energy production made from renewables (data 2019), and is studying a legal action against the Commission. France is delighted to see nuclear power (77% of its domestic production) taken into account by Brussels. Italy, which is fond of Minister Cingolani’s idea of increasing its gas extractions, is currently silent and at least hopes for a golden rule to exclude “green” investments from the calculation of the deficit. A few days after the publication of the draft of the European Commission on the green taxonomy, the distances between the 27 instead of narrowing, are widening and if yesterday they seemed divided, today they show themselves to be shattered.

The definition of the green taxonomy is fundamental in orienting investments: with the “green” stamp, industrial and infrastructure projects can be much more attractive for private capital. However, the decision to include nuclear and gas in the EU’s green taxonomy has met with harsh criticism already in recent weeks, when rumors had not yet taken the form of a draft Commission. The technicians from Brussels and the team of experts who collaborated in the drafting of the central document for the definition of the EU energy planning in the context of the Green New Deal tried to circumvent the foreseeable resistance by introducing some conditions for the two sources that are not neutral with respect to the climate and the environment. Nuclear and gas, first of all, will be considered compatible with the green taxonomy only for a defined period of time and “to the extent that they contribute to the transition towards climate neutrality and do not significantly damage the environment”, according to an official of Brussels. “The Commission sees the future energy mix as a predominantly renewable or low-carbon energy system. We really hope that this proposal will help bring about the change we need and channel private funding towards low-emission energy sources ”.

In fact, it means that investments in nuclear power will be “green” only if the projects presented have a well defined plan, funds and site for the disposal of radioactive waste in total safety. Building permits will only be allowed until 2045. It is worth remembering that at the moment there is still talk of third generation or third plus nuclear power. Not the fourth, the (slag-free) fusion that experts believe may have a role on an industrial scale no earlier than the middle of the century. As for gas, investments in power plants will be green only if they contribute to emissions of less than 270 grams of CO2 equivalent per kWh and replace more polluting fossil fuel plants. They will need to obtain a building permit before 2030.

On gas, the Commission’s conditions appear much more stringent. It is a non-solid fossil source, certainly less polluting than coal and to which Italy looks with interest, having unused methane deposits. Moreover, in a European context of high prices and constant reduction of supplies from the main supplier, Russia, for reasons of a geopolitical nature. But it is on nuclear power that the clash risks worsening at the community level.

“We believe nuclear technology is dangerous,” government spokesman Steffen Hebestreit told reporters in Berlin, noting that the question of what to do with the radioactive waste remains unresolved. Hebestreit added that Germany “expressly rejects” the EU assessment on atomic energy and has repeatedly affirmed this position towards the Commission. Germany is now considering the next steps to take. Germany is set to shut down the remaining three nuclear power plants later this year and phase out coal by 2030, while its neighbor France aims to modernize existing reactors and build new ones to meet energy needs. Berlin plans to rely on natural gas until it can be replaced by non-polluting energy sources. The opposite paths taken by two of the EU’s largest economies have led to an embarrassing situation for the Commission. The draft EU executive branch concludes that both nuclear power and natural gas can be considered sustainable under certain conditions for investment purposes.

Hebestreit said the German government’s goal is to use natural gas only as a “bridge technology” and replace it with non-polluting alternatives such as hydrogen produced from renewable energy by 2045, the deadline the country has set for becoming climate neutral. . The spokesman did not say whether Chancellor Olaf Scholz supports the opinion of the Minister of Economy and Climate Robert Habeck that the European Commission’s proposals are a form of “greenwashing”.

Germany has pulled the plug on three of its last six nuclear power plants. The Brokdorf, Grohnde and Gundremmingen C reactors, operated by the E.On and Rwe utilities, were closed on December 31st after 35 years of operation. The last three nuclear power plants – Isar 2, Emsland and Neckarwestheim II – will be shut down by the end of 2022. However, closure does not mean decommissioning, which will take much longer and is expected to take place by 2040 in the case of Brokdorf, for example. .

In 2021, the six nuclear power plants contributed about 12% of electricity generation in Germany. The German energy mix consists of 41% renewables, 28% coal and 15% gas. By 2030, Germany aims to meet 80% of energy demand with renewables. This is not the case in France where – given Eurostat 2019 – 77.6% of its energy produced comes from the atom and only 20% from renewable.

Germany is not alone in the firm opposition to the proposal put forward by Brussels: the draft “is a provocation from a procedural point of view” and “in terms of content it hides the risk of greenwashing”, wrote on Twitter the Minister of Energy of the Luxembourg, Claude Turmes, saying he is ready to “examine the proposal in detail and discuss further steps” together with Germany and Austria, equally opposed to including nuclear power among sustainable investments. The proposal was sent to governments on Friday, “in a nocturnal and nebulous action. This says a lot about transparency ”, attacked Turmes.

The same tones used by Vienna: if these are the plans “we will sue”, wrote on Twitter the Austrian Federal Minister for Climate, Environment and Energy, Leonore Gewessler, highlighting that nuclear energy is “dangerous and not it represents a solution in the fight against the climate crisis ”. Austria has no reactors and produces almost all of its energy from renewable sources.

The Spanish government also rejected the European Commission’s proposal to include nuclear and natural gas energy in the EU’s “green” taxonomy. According to Madrid, this is “a step backwards” and “a wrong signal” for the financial markets. Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Ecological Transition and Demographic Challenge, Teresa Ribera, stressed that “regardless of whether we can continue to invest in one or the other, we believe they are not green or sustainable energies”. Spain – he added – “is a firm supporter of green taxonomy as a key tool to have common references that can be used by investors to achieve the decarbonisation of the economy and climate neutrality by 2050”, but include nuclear and gas “It would be a step backwards,” according to the government official Sanchez. “It makes no sense and sends the wrong signals for the European energy transition as a whole,” he stressed. While admitting that both nuclear power and natural gas have a role to play in the transition, this is “limited in time”. Member States have until 12 January to provide their response to the Commission. Then, once published, it will have to pass the scrutiny of the EU Council and Parliament, where the environmentalist parties are also announcing a battle.

In 2019, France was the country that produced the largest share of energy in the EU (20% of the total), followed by Germany (17%), Poland (9.6%), Italy and Sweden (6%). ). However, the debate on green taxonomy is intertwined with energy security (or sovereignty) in a particular historical phase, marked by risks to the security of supply due to geopolitical and military reasons, as shown by the tensions on the Ukrainian border. Primary energy production in the EU in 2019 was distributed among various energy sources, the most important of which in terms of the size of its contribution were renewables, with over a third (36.5%) of the total. Second place for nuclear power, with 32.0% of total primary energy production, with France in the lead, followed by Belgium (77% of domestic production in 2019) which, however, is about to abound in nuclear power like Germany. However, all European energy production is not enough to meet its needs: more than half of Europe’s energy is imported. The EU energy dependency rate exceeds 50%.

Source link

James Reno

Editor-in-Chief, James loves playing games and loves to write about them more. He knows a lot about entertainment because he has done a drama course. James loves writing, so he is our writer. email: james@d1softballnews.com

Related Articles

Back to top button

- Previous attempts to extend nuclear use (“as a bridging technology”) were short-lived.

Title:

Content: Home / News / World /  Germany quits nuclear power; shuts final 3 plants
Back

Germany has shut its final three nuclear plants, marking the end of the country's end of nuclear era that has spanned more than 60 years.

Nuclear power has long been contentious in Germany.

The move has come as Germany's eyes achieve its green goal. Steffi Lemke, Germany’s Federal Minister for the Environment and Consumer Protection and a Green Party member, "The position of the German government is clear: nuclear power is not green. Nor is it sustainable".

Closure of three nuclear plant's history:

Germany shut three plants-- Emsland, Isar 2, and Neckarwestheim, representing the culmination of a plan set in motion more than 20 years ago.

During the 1970s, a strong anti-nuclear movement emerged in Germany. The movement gave birth to the green party, which is now part of governing coalition.

However, it was in the 2000s the German government pledged to phase out nuclear power and start shutting down plants.

But in 2009, a new government came to power and it seemed brief as if nuclear would get a reprieve as a bridging technology to help the country move to renewable energy.

Then Fukushima happened. In 2011, an earthquake and tsunami caused three reactors of the Fukushima Daiichi power plant to melt down.

Three days later then-Chancellor Angela Merkel who was previously pro-nuclear, announced Germany would accelerate a nuclear phase-out, with older plants shuttered immediately.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine provided another plot twist.

Germany isn’t the only country committed to walking away from nuclear — Italy gave up the technology in 1990, and Lithuania recently struck a deal to dismantle its Soviet-era reactors, which have sat idle for over a decade. But in many advanced economies, nuclear is experiencing a resurgence.

On Sunday, Finland will start regular power production at Europe’s newest and biggest reactor. The 1,600-megawatt Olkiluoto-3 unit that faced years of delays had been planned to enter commercial production on Monday. France is planning to build at least six new reactors by 2050 as well as experiment with smaller, modular ones. The UK has similar ambitions. And even in Japan, after a decade of paralysis following the nuclear accident in Fukushima, the public is warming up to the use of nuclear power. The Japanese government wants to restart reactors that have sat idle since the disaster and to extend the lifespan of existing units.

Catch all the Business News, Market News, Breaking News Events and Latest News Updates on Live Mint. Download The Mint News App to get Daily Market Updates.
More Less
Recommended For You
×
Get alerts on WhatsApp
Set Preferences My Reads Watchlist Feedback Redeem a Gift Card Logout

**Green and Safety Arguments:**
   - German policymakers have argued that nuclear power is not “entirely clean” and is both risky and expensive.

Title:

Content: EU chaos! Macron and Scholz in furious bust-up over EU energy plans: ‘Risky and expensive'

FRENCH President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz are locked in a furious bust-up over EU energy policy plans as disagreements have sparked division in the bloc.

Link copied

Macron wields 'tools to set EU agenda'

While France has been pushing for nuclear to be included in the EU’s sustainable finance taxonomy, Germany is in the process of completely phasing out the energy source in the country. The EU’s taxonomy is intended to hand a green badge to companies and activities — or to withhold it — to “help shift investments where they are most needed". This is part of the bloc’s aim to direct funding towards energy sources with a low or zero carbon footprint.

But this has sparked fury as Germany does not view nuclear power as a form of clean energy.

Mr Macron wants gas and nuclear to be labelled as a “transitional” source under the taxonomy as he claims they are needed for the clean energy transition.

He says that this is because renewables are “intermittent, and thus not totally substitutable, even with our interconnections [in Europe], for non-intermittent sources of electricity production” like gas or nuclear power.

And these calls do not come as much of a surprise, given that 70 percent of French electricity is generated by nuclear power.

Mr Macron has pointed to the verdict from experts on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to back up his calls.

Macron and Scholz are in a furious energy bust-up (Image: Getty )

Emmanuel Macron is pushing for nuclear power to be included in the EU taxonomy (Image: Getty )

They claim that “nuclear power is one of the solutions to decarbonise our economies”.

And this seems to have convinced Brussels, as the EU Commission drew up a draft proposal, circulated on 31 December, for this to come into effect.

Subject to a consultation period until Friday (21 January), It gave EU members and others just three weeks to analyse the proposal and provide their own comments.

Germany is strongly opposed to the nuclear plans and has been phasing out nuclear power for over two decades.

It also plans to shut down its three remaining plants at the end of the year.

READ MORE: World holds breath as Ukraine to fire rocket amid Russia tension

Olaf Scholz's Government is opposed to the EU's proposal (Image: Getty )

But it is not Berlin who disapproves of the proposal.

The EU Platform on Sustainable Finance, a European Commission advisory body, has torn the proposal apart.

In an opinion piece, it argued that nuclear power is not an entirely clean energy source, and that fossil gas is “far from green”.

Under the EU’s draft proposal, gas-fired power plants would get a “transitional” investment label if they meet a certain criteria.

That is if they use “at least 30 percent of renewable or low-carbon gases as of 1 January 2026, and at least 55 percent of renewable or low-carbon gases as of 1 January 2030”.

DON'T MISS
Boris on brink: Red Wall poll signal end of the road for PM [REPORT]
EU Galileo blow as UK’s OneWeb network signs major deals [REVEAL]
EU helpless over Russia thanks to Merkel as Biden poised to step in [INSIGHT]

Germany argued nuclear is not a clean energy source (Image: Getty )

And as of January 1, 2036, the Commission said all gas-fired power plants would have to “switch to renewable or low-carbon gases” to qualify for the EU’s green investment label.

But under EU rules, no technology can be considered green if it causes “significant harm” to any of the taxonomy’s six environmental objectives.

Those are climate change mitigation and adaptation, water protection, the transition to a circular economy, pollution prevention, and biodiversity protection.

Germany has been kicking up a fuss over the proposals, calling them “risky and expensive” in a letter sent to Brussels.

Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck said in a joint statement with Environment Minister Steffi Lemke: “As the federal government, we have once again clearly expressed our rejection of the inclusion of nuclear energy. It is risky and expensive."

Germany has also claimed that there is a lack of safety requirements in the nuclear field.

Robert Habeck sent a letter to Brussels slamming the proposal (Image: Getty )

And it argued that the lengthy construction of new reactors "does not offer a short-term opportunity" to phase out carbon-intensive energy sources such as coal.

But while it has poured cold water over nuclear plans, Germany does not seem so opposed to the inclusion of gas.

In the letter sent to Brussels, it reads that gas used in "ultra-modern and efficient gas-fired power plants forms a bridge for a limited transitional period".

But the German Government did mention that the proposed fuel switch targets to low-carbon and renewable gases laid out by the taxonomy proposal are not realistic.

And Mr Macron is travelling to Berlin today to meet with Mr Scholz.

While the leaders’ meeting will focus on the Russia’s mounting pressure on Ukraine, the energy plans will no doubt be a topic of conversation too.

- The government highlighted concerns over nuclear safety and the challenge of waste disposal as core reasons for the exit.

**Contrasts in EU Energy Policy:**
   - France continues to rely heavily on nuclear for its electricity (~77.6%), while Germany rejects its inclusion in the EU’s taxonomy for green energy.

- Spain and Germany both opposed classifying nuclear (and natural gas) as “green” by EU standards.

**Energy Market Adjustments and Vulnerabilities:**
   - The end of nuclear power has made Germany more dependent on Russian gas and other energy imports, exposing its grid to geopolitical risks.

Title:

Content: How decades of complacency have left Germany facing a cold, dark winter

Betrayed by its own elite, the country is at risk of social unrest

Germany is facing its worst winter for 75 years. The impending catastrophe risks crippling its economy, sweeping away its government and bringing chaos to the heart of Europe.

In 1946-47, perhaps half a million Germans starved or froze to death in their ruined cities. Older Germans still shudder at the memory of the “Hunger Winter”. Some blamed the Nazis, others the Allied occupation. In fact, the British sent food, fuel and clothing they could ill afford to spare themselves.

Now Europe’s largest economy is heading for a winter of recession, rationing and possible blackouts. This time, though, there is nobody to blame except Germany’s complacent – and in some cases corrupt – political establishment.

As Vladimir Putin chokes off Russian gas supplies – already down to a fifth of their pre-war level – by closing the Nord Stream 1 pipeline for “maintenance” yet again next week, the lamps are going out for Olaf Scholz and his “traffic light” coalition of Social Democrats, Liberal and Greens.

'Autumn of rage'

The Bundesbank has been predicting a recession and the latest figures show that business activity is already contracting. Inflation, which hit 8.5 per cent last month, is expected to keep rising along with the rest of the eurozone, probably into double figures.

Yet for historical reasons Germans won’t just accept high inflation as a consequence of the war in Ukraine. The world remembers the hyperinflation that undermined the Weimar Republic a century ago; only older Germans recall the hyperinflation after the Second World War, which lasted longer. For three years Germany’s only stable currency was American cigarettes. No wonder Germans have been allergic to inflation ever since.

It is true that Germans are not yet demanding big pay rises or going on strike. But energy prices are already rising exponentially. The country's one-year ahead power price has skyrocketed to almost €1,000 per megawatt-hour, a jump of more than 720pc since the start of 2022. If Putin turns off the tap, bringing the mighty German economy to a juddering halt this winter, there is a real danger of civil unrest.

Intelligence officials are warning that extremist organisations, such as the neo-Nazis of Combat 18, are planning an “autumn of rage”. As a foretaste, in the old Prussian town of Neuruppin near Berlin, there were ugly scenes this month as Scholz was shouted down by far-Left and far-Right protesters.

But the panic and indignation now brewing go far beyond the ranks of the “unteachable” extremists.

Germans sense that unaccountable elites have ceded control of their country’s destiny to Putin. The more they are must pay him for Russian gas, the bigger his war chest with which to perpetrate genocide in Ukraine.

Forcing Germany to be complicit in a colossal crime against humanity is a diabolical twist in the vengeance that Putin is now exacting upon Europe for backing Ukraine. According to The Economist’s Christian Odendahl, at present prices Germany will need to spend 8.4 per cent of its GDP on gas. Hitherto it was just 1 per cent.

Already preparations are underway for central heating to be rationed or even switched off, forcing residents to seek shelter in schools or town halls.

The country is scrambling to reduce its reliance on gas with a campaign to make households cut back, and a massive national effort has brought gas storage levels up to 81 per cent full.

Food prices, meanwhile, rose at a rate of nearly 15 per cent in July. Those who fear being unable to afford to heat their homes or feed their families are prey to angst and anger.

Actions have consequences... or do they?

Few foresaw the Russian invasion of Ukraine, let alone its devastating consequences for Europe. But it is dawning on the German people that the seeds of the present crisis were sown over the quarter of a century from 1998 to 2022, under Angela Merkel and her predecessor, Gerhard Schröder.

These were the years of plenty for Germany, when Berlin dominated the European Union, ensuring that its export-led economy benefited from the single currency while loading the social costs on to its poorer neighbours. But Germany’s dirty secret was cheap Russian energy.

Under Schröder – who went on to become one of Putin’s “useful idiots” – German industry began to abandon its postwar reliance on coal and nuclear energy in favour of Russian gas and renewables.

In 2011, after the Fukushima accident, Mrs Merkel announced that all German nuclear power plants would be closed down. It was a pyrrhic victory for the Greens but backed by all the major parties. Public opinion had been turned against nuclear energy in the 1980s by the Soviet-funded “peace movement”. Now the Greens are the keystone of the Scholz coalition.

Even in the country’s present predicament, Robert Habeck, the Green Vice-Chancellor and Environment Minister, is refusing to reverse the exit from nuclear to alleviate the energy crisis, though it is still possible over time to reactivate a number of nuclear power stations.

Yet Berlin is demanding that 26 other EU member states make huge cuts in energy use this winter to help Germany – to the irritation of the Spanish and others, who don’t depend on Russian gas and recall lectures from Berlin during the eurozone crisis about actions having consequences.

For decades, the Kremlin acted as Germany’s geopolitical drug-dealer, tempting Berlin to become ever more addicted to the energy that fuelled its manufacturing, pharmaceutical and chemical factories. Now that the Germans are about to go cold turkey, they are discovering how cynically the national interest was betrayed by their politicians and captains of industry.

With Schröder as its salesman, a new Nord Stream 2 pipeline was built under the Baltic Sea — with the blessing of Mrs Merkel, who fended off Anglo-American pressure to cancel what was regarded as a threat to European energy security.

Last year, as Russian tanks massed on the Ukrainian border and Nato warned of imminent invasion, Gazprom redoubled its efforts to keep the flagship project on track.

The Russian energy giant poured €192 million (£163m) into an environmental foundation set up by Manuela Schwesig, the Social Democratic premier of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern — the state that hosted Nord Stream 2 and stood to gain most. She proceeded to denounce the US for opposing the pipeline, claiming that American sanctions were purely self-interested.

Putin’s stooges almost succeeded in persuading Scholz to defy his Nato allies. He dithered until the eve of February’s invasion before shelving Nord Stream 2.

Now, after six months of Europe’s worst war since 1945, some German politicians are once again calling for the pipeline to be opened “so that people do not have to freeze in winter and our industry does not suffer serious damage”, as Wolfgang Kubicki, Vice-President of the German Parliament, puts it.

Meanwhile Ms Schwesig has just been re-elected as leader of the Social Democrats in her state by a large majority. Schröder has yet to be expelled from the party, let alone sanctioned.

Germany’s Achilles’ heel

This is the measure of Germany’s abject reliance, not only on Russian energy, but on the Russian state. For Putin, gas and oil were only ever a means to an end. He has always wanted to reduce the Germans — towards whom Russians have traditionally had an inferiority complex — to a status of servility.

Stalin only succeeded in dividing Germany. Putin seeks to turn the entire Federal Republic into his client state — and thereby impose his will upon Europe.

With the unerring eye of the predator, Putin grasped that energy was Germany’s Achilles’ heel. A single plant of a single corporation, the headquarters of the chemical and pharmaceutical giant BASF at Ludwigshafen, uses as much energy as Denmark.

Over the last 25 years, Germany’s craving for cheap energy led it into an unequal relationship with Russia — what the philosopher Hegel called “the dialectic of master and slave”.

Putin saw that some German politicians could be bought (Schröder), others bamboozled (Merkel), and still others bullied (Scholz). Other EU countries followed the German example by relying heavily on Moscow for energy, influenced by the evasion and ambivalence that has characterised Berlin’s policy for decades.

Germany, whose economy is substantially larger than Britain’s, has given just £1 billion in military aid to Ukraine compared to the UK’s £3.5 billion. The United States has given ten times as much as the EU. Yet Ukraine is a European country under genocidal attack.

The reluctance to provoke Putin that still prevails in wide circles of the Federal Republic is rooted in exaggerated notions of Russian military power, economic importance and cultural pre-eminence.

German fatalism about Russia’s ability to absorb casualties and yet win ultimate victory reflects folk memories of the Eastern Front. But Putin, unlike Stalin, does not have a vast conscript army at his disposal, he does not enjoy technical superiority and he cannot afford the war of attrition that he has unleashed. Nor are the Russian people united against an invading force in defence of their homeland. Only in Berlin do they think this is another Stalingrad.

This historical myopia has much to do with the long-standing German habit of subsuming the other nations that made up the Soviet Union into Russia. To this day most Germans have no awareness of the fact that the Nazis killed millions of Ukrainian civilians and devastated their country.

Ironically, many artists, writers and musicians who have fled Ukraine have found refuge in Germany. One example is the composer Valentin Silvestrov, who fled to Berlin aged 84 with one suitcase, full of his manuscripts. Once there, he discovered that Ukrainian music was unknown in Germany. Now that Silvestrov’s works are being performed, including at the Proms in London, the Germans are slowly waking up to the presence of a greater living composer than any of their own.

Many ordinary Germans, like the British, instinctively warm to the Ukrainian cause. The difference is in leadership – or lack of it. Chancellor Olaf Scholz, unlike Boris Johnson or Liz Truss, has shown only lukewarm support for Kyiv and has been implicitly rebuked by President Zelensky.

Hamburger grilled

Although there is no suggestion that Scholz has been bribed to go easy on Russia, he himself has become embroiled in a corruption scandal. He is accused of helping M.M. Warburg & Co, Germany’s oldest and largest private bank, to avoid a €47 million fine in 2016, during his time as Finance Minister in the Merkel coalition.

The Hamburg-based bank is alleged to have made up to €300 million in a capital gains tax scam which came to light while Scholz was also mayor of the city state. Just as he finds himself facing an unexpectedly grim present and a positively terrifying future, his provincial past has returned to haunt him.

Last week the Chancellor was grilled by a committee of inquiry in Hamburg. The normally meticulous Scholz claimed not to remember any details about his meetings with Warburg’s former chief, Christian Olearius, who has now been charged with tax evasion. Germany’s safe pair of hands, whom millions had entrusted with the nation’s finances, is now accused of being cosy with tax-dodging bankers and being an unimpressive, even unreliable, witness.

In other ways, too, Scholz is failing to live up to the moral example set by the two great Social Democratic Chancellors of post-war Germany, Willy Brandt and Helmut Schmidt. At a joint press conference with Mahmoud Abbas in Berlin earlier this month, Scholz remained tight-lipped while the Palestinian leader delivered an anti-Semitic tirade, accusing Israel of committing “many Holocausts” against his people.

Schmidt, who concealed the fact he had a Jewish grandfather from the Nazis but as Chancellor was an outspoken philosemite, would not have been impressed by his fellow Hamburger Scholz. Nor would Brandt, who famously fell to his knees at the memorial to the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising.

Not for decades has anti-Semitism been such a threat in Germany: in July, Berlin’s Holocaust Memorial was desecrated with swastikas. Now, as Putin’s myrmidons massacre and deport Ukrainians near the site of Nazi genocide, while a quarter of the Russian Jewish population has emigrated in anticipation of pogroms, Germany needs a leader who is not afraid to denounce anti-Semitism even at the cost of diplomatic niceties.

After less than a year in office, Scholz’s personal ratings are plumbing depths never seen during Mrs Merkel’s 16 years at the helm. As Germans brace themselves for unprecedented hardships in peacetime, they are led by a weak and indecisive Chancellor at the head of a fragile three-party coalition.

Post-heroic, post-patriotic

Wednesday’s visit to Kyiv by Boris Johnson – his third – to mark Ukraine’s Independence Day was hugely appreciated not only by Volodymyr Zelensky but by all Ukrainians. Yet it was a gesture of solidarity that did not occur – could not have occurred – to Olaf Scholz.

The German Chancellor’s only visit to the Ukrainian capital last June, accompanied by Emmanuel Macron and Mario Draghi, was an awkward, chilly affair that yielded little more than promises. This week, Scholz posted a short video message, concluding: “Our hearts are with you.” Ulrich Speck, a German foreign policy analyst, commented: “Hearts, yes. But not weapons.”

Johnson, by contrast, knows he is among friends in Kyiv – a friendship symbolised by Zelensky awarding him Ukraine’s highest honour, the Order of Liberty. It is impossible to imagine the lugubrious German Chancellor finding the Prime Minister’s pithy words: “While people [in the West] are paying energy bills, people in Ukraine are paying with blood.” Nor would Scholz echo him in declaring: “I believe Ukraine can and will win this war.”

For his part, Zelensky told his people that they had been “reborn” in the heat of war. “We used to say: ‘Peace’. Now we say: ‘Victory’,” he declared.

Highly educated Germans find it hard to empathise with such Churchillian sentiments. Jürgen Habermas, the eminence grise of German intellectuals, makes condescending comments about Ukraine as a primitive place, still captive to the nationalist illusions of the last century, unlike more sophisticated, “post-heroic” Germany. It doesn’t occur to the 93-year-old philosopher that without the heroism of its soldiers and civilians, Ukraine would by now have ceased to exist.

Prussian military prowess has long since given way to post-patriotic pusillanimity. Where Merkel and Scholz feared to tread and even Biden was hesitant, Johnson was the first to commit himself wholeheartedly to the cause and to visit war-torn Kyiv.

Many other nations – the Poles, the Baltic states, the Scandinavians and the Canadians among them – have been more supportive than the Germans, who owe Ukrainians the greatest moral debt.

Berlin boasts of handing out a handful of howitzers while dithering over clapped-out armoured vehicles. Meanwhile British arms and training, Turkish drones and American rocket artillery systems have proved decisive on the battlefield.

Sold down the Dnieper

Although the Scholz coalition officially sides with Ukraine, the unpalatable fact remains that Germany and its EU partners are financing Russian aggression by paying vast sums for Russian gas.

Will they stand up to Putin in Germany when the enormity of the ordeal ahead becomes clear to everybody? Will public opinion continue to back even the present feeble commitment, or will the voices calling for peace at the expense of Ukrainians prevail? It is all too believable that at some point, probably early next year when gas storage facilities are empty, Berlin – and Brussels – will open negotiations with the Kremlin, regardless of Kyiv’s wishes.

Yet it is then that the ghosts of the past may rise up to intervene in the present. The thought of Germans and Russians redrawing the map of Eastern Europe at the conference table sends shivers down the spines of every Pole, Lithuanian, Latvian, Estonian and, of course, Ukrainian. On August 23, 1940, exactly 82 years ago this week, the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was signed, carving up Poland (which then included Lviv and other parts of present-day Ukraine) and the Baltic states between Russia and Germany. No German Chancellor wishes to be reminded of that precedent.

However, nor can Scholz risk presiding over an even deeper and more lasting recession than that caused by the Covid pandemic. Somehow he must steer a course between the Scylla of appeasing Putin and the Charybdis of economic ruin.

The tension between these positions is reflected in the tripartite coalition. Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock and the Greens are the hawks, Finance Minister Christian Lindner and his pro-business Free Democrats are the doves, while the Social Democrats are deeply divided. The party leadership leans towards Moscow, the rank and file towards Kyiv. This explains why Scholz never says that he wants Ukraine to win the war, merely that they must not lose it.

The opposition Christian Democrats are only slightly more united. They too have a large wing that privately favours a negotiated peace, represented by their pro-business leader Friedrich Merz, and a smaller but not insignificant group led by the foreign affairs expert Norbert Röntgen, who hope for a Ukrainian victory. Merz has papered over the cracks by focusing on a campaign to reverse his predecessor Mrs Merkel’s exit from nuclear energy.

Meanwhile, the “understanding Putin” lobby has the support of both the hard Left Die Linke and anti-immigration AfD parties. German public opinion has slowly tiptoed away from its initial admiration for Ukrainian resistance and towards a compromise peace.

That subtle shift could soon become an overwhelming tide, once Germans are required to make real sacrifices. Vladimir Putin, we may be sure, is counting on it.

From October, Scholz will impose a gas levy on consumers to compensate energy companies for the cost of replacing Russian gas supplies. Germany’s biggest energy company, Uniper, was bailed out in July to the tune of £12.5 billion; it is now claiming another £18.5 billion of levies.

This policy is bound to be unpopular, since it redistributes tens of billions from the poor to the rich — curious thinking for a government of the Left. But this is nothing compared to the prospect of protests sparked by a national shutdown caused, not by a deadly virus, but by Putin’s energy politics.

A change in the air?

Modern Germany has a volatile history of popular protest. It began with the revolution that toppled the Kaiser in 1918. The Nazis mobilised the masses to carry out their “national revolution” in 1933. A workers’ uprising in East Germany was crushed by Soviet tanks in 1953. Student protests brought about a cultural revolution in 1968. Uniquely bloodless and benign was the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. This was Germany’s finest hour.

The defiance that breached the Wall and sent the Soviet army home was a blessing, but the despair that Putin’s revenge may induce this winter will surely be a curse. Gas has given the Russian dictator coercive control over the German political class, which willingly acquiesced in its fate.

In Kyiv, Boris Johnson said: “I can tell you that we in the UK will not for one second give in to Putin’s blackmail.” Olaf Scholz is incapable of speaking like this — because he does not believe it. He has failed to frame the coming ordeal as a battle in which Germans must make sacrifices for their own liberty, not just Ukraine’s. People don’t mind his lack of charisma; they do mind facing a nightmarish winter with spineless hypocrisy at the helm.

Will it become so obvious by next spring that Scholz is unequal to the task that either he or his coalition are replaced? Can the centre of German politics hold — or are we about to see a terrible revolt of the masses against a discredited political establishment? It has happened before. It can happen again.

Daniel Johnson was the Telegraph’s correspondent in Germany and Eastern Europe in the late 1980s. He is now the editor of TheArticle.

- The Russian invasion of Ukraine triggered a major energy crisis, with high gas and electricity prices affecting German consumers and causing social unrest fears (“autumn of rage”).

- Inflation, especially food prices, has soared, putting pressure on households and prompting welfare interventions.

**Temporary Policy Flexibility:**
   - The German government considered—at least temporarily—extending the operation of the last nuclear plants in response to the gas shortage, provided it could be done safely.

Title:

Content: Germany To Postpone Closure Of Last Three Nuclear Power Plants - WSJ

(@ChaudhryMAli88)

MOSCOW (UrduPoint News / Sputnik - 17th August, 2022) Germany, faced with possible energy shortages in the winter as gas supplies from Russia have dropped, intends to postpone the closure of its last three nuclear power plants (NPPs) in a move marking a departure from a two-decade policy to abandon nuclear energy, The Wall Street Journal reported citing German government officials.

The decision, which has to be formally adopted by the cabinet of Chancellor Olaf Scholz and would possibly require a vote in Parliament, could be weeks off, but already now the German government says two key conditions have been met that allow a temporary extension of the life of the three remaining NPPs, currently expected to close December 31: the possibility of a gas shortage and the confidence that a longer operation of reactors would pose no safety concern, according to the officials.

"The reactors are safe until Dec. 31, and obviously they will remain safe also after Dec. 31," the WSJ quoted a senior official as saying.

Scholz last week said for the first time that it could make sense to keep Germany's last three nuclear reactors online.

However, even if the life of the three German NPPs is extended, this will not be a panacea for Germany's looming energy crisis this winter as the country is mainly missing natural gas, primarily used for heating and manufacturing.

The European Union has been seeking to diversify energy imports and reduce dependence on Russia after Moscow started its special military operation in Ukraine.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has repeatedly said that Russia has never used gas supplies to punish anyone, but sells energy solely in its own interests, to increase the welfare of Russians and on a commercial basis.

The German government has also outlined measures to reduce gas and power consumption in the country over the next two years. The measures in particular include lowering the temperature in public buildings. According to Germany's energy regulator, gas consumption will have to be cut by 20 percent if Germany wants to avoid a gas shortfall during this coming winter and next winter.

The three officials who spoke to the WSJ said the extension of the NPPs' life would only be made for several months.

The power plants in question are Isar 2 in the southern state of Bavaria, Neckarwestheim 2 in Baden-Wurttemberg and Emsland in Lower Saxony. They are operated, respectively, by E.On SE, EnBW AG, and RWE AG.

After the start of Russia's special military operation to denazify and demilitarize Ukraine, the West has stepped up sanctions pressure on Russia, which has led to an increase in prices for energy and food in Europe and the United States.

**Societal and Political Reactions:**
   - The phase-out policy was driven by the Greens but enjoys support across major parties.

- However, parts of the population and some policymakers have called for reconsidering the nuclear phase-out, especially in light of the energy crisis.

- Discontent is visible but hasn’t yet led to strikes or mass protests.