The Chancellery should not become the election campaign headquarters. Warns Christian Lindner. Too late – the defiant government headquarters has now obviously become the social democratic control center from which Olaf Scholz is planning his re-election.
Scholz doesn’t want to compromise on the schedule
That’s why the Chancellor told opposition leader Friedrich Merz that he was sticking to his schedule: vote of confidence in January, new elections in mid-March. Scholz doesn’t want to compromise on the schedule.
According to information from the Union, Merz had offered him this: possible approval by the Union for open traffic light laws in the Bundestag, where the Scholz minority government has lost its own power, in exchange for a quick vote of confidence. A thoroughly state-supporting idea. It would enable a quick new start after the failure of a government and at the same time avoid political deadlock.
The Scholz plan, on the other hand, does not have Germany’s well-being in mind, but rather the Chancellor’s personal well-being. There is not a single objective reason to waste another four and a half months until the election.
A standstill for Germany would also be a standstill for Europe
Four and a half months in which nothing works in Germany – in the middle of an economic crisis, the country is practically unable to make decisions. The standstill for Germany would also be a standstill for Europe.
As the President of the European Parliament, the Italian Roberta Metsaola, says: “Europe is not strong without a strong Germany.” But Germany without a strong government is a lame duck. Without Germany, there can no longer be any financial decisions in Europe, warns Finland’s Prime Minister Peteri Orpo. And that during a war in Europe.
Its financing through German aid ultimately led to the collapse of the coalition in Germany. That is the version that the Chancellor tells. Carlo Masala, who has now become Germany’s leading military expert, finds this “framing”, this “narrative”, to be at least strange.
He has a good reason for this: “A Federal Chancellor who does not deliver Taurus, who said just yesterday that there will be no NATO membership for Ukraine, is throwing out a finance minister because, among other things, he refuses to apply the debt brake for aid to Ukraine loosen? Smells funny.”
Germany would be practically unable to make decisions for a few months
The standstill in Germany and Europe is not only problematic from the perspective of Germany’s neighbors, but also because of the election of Donald Trump as the new American president.
Trump will be sworn in after his re-election on January 20th – according to Scholz’s plan, his German counterpart would be practically unable to make decisions for around three to four months. A scenario that you don’t really want to imagine.
It could also be done differently: Scholz could ask the Bundestag for a vote of confidence straight away, at the very moment that you, dear readers, are reading these lines. It is solely in his hands. Scholz has created the conditions.
Wissing’s behavior is disturbingly consistent
The Chancellor has thrown out FDP leader Christian Lindner as Federal Finance Minister. Two other liberal ministers – Bettina Stark-Watzinger and Marco Buschmann – then left voluntarily. Another, Volker Wissing, left the party in order to be promoted to super minister for transport and justice in his interim government with the blessing of the chancellor.
Wissing’s behavior is disturbingly consistent. Hardly anyone was as angry about the unfortunate black-yellow coalition under Chancellor Merkel as Wissing was at the time. After that, he had only one goal: to lead the Liberals away from the Union. In Rhineland-Palatinate he ran a traffic light government with the SPD and the Greens. In Berlin he was ultimately a pioneer. Even before Lindner’s reform paper, party “friend” Wissing vehemently warned of an end to the traffic lights, of which he was the architect. Now he is letting Scholz reward him with a double ministerial office for his loyalty to the Chancellor.
In any case, the path to a new election via the vote of confidence is now clear, because Scholz has ensured sufficient mistrust in a vote. Just for the record: Scholz could simply resign if he failed as chancellor. He decided to ask the question of trust. And in January. Why then?
Chancellery can control election campaign narrative
Until then, he can set the “framing” and “narrative” for the SPD election campaign from the Chancellery. According to which he is the chancellor and statesman to whom the FDP allegedly broke loyalty and prevented him from spending money for the good of Germany (which would have been at least bordering on unconstitutional). A chancellor, according to his further story, whose “wisdom” the Union does not follow for trivial party-political reasons. That’s one reason for the appointment.
The second: Scholz comes from Hamburg and was mayor there. Hamburg is an SPD stronghold, and surveys there currently see the SPD at the top. Hamburg will vote on March 2nd. A success in his old hometown of Hamburg would probably be the tailwind that Scholz wants to take advantage of in his own final campaign campaign.
There’s just one catch with the schedule: the Federal President sets the date for the federal election. This is tricky for Frank Walter Steinmeier because he definitely has leeway.
After a vote of confidence, the president has 21 days
Scholz wants to ask the question of trust on January 15th. If things go according to plan, he will lose them. He then suggests that the Federal President dissolve the Bundestag. Steinmeier can do that. But he doesn’t have to. Then it would remain a minority government – unless the Union, encouraged by the head of state, joined the Scholz government. But it doesn’t look like that.
So: The President now has 21 days to decide whether to dissolve Parliament. But he can also do it immediately. Strictly speaking, he has no reason to wait – Steinmeier is an experienced man and has long dealt with the scenario.
If Steinmeier dissolves the Bundestag, the new parliament must be elected within 60 days. Article 39 of the Basic Law states: “within 60 days” – and not: “after” 60 days. It is now up to the Federal President to decide when Germany will vote.
Does the President follow the Chancellor?
In plain language: Steinmeier can follow Scholz and get elected on March 16th. But he can also leave it alone and choose another, earlier date. This raises the delicate question: Does the President follow the Chancellor, whose schedule is clearly motivated by party and election tactics, or does he confidently ignore this, simply to avoid damaging the reputation of the highest state office?
Steinmeier said goodbye to the three FDP ministers this Thursday with appropriate dignity. He acknowledged their work with as much appreciation as one would expect from a head of state. In terms of style and tone, Steinmeier clearly stood out from the Federal Chancellor. After three years of close collaboration, he insulted Lindner badly and personally.
In doing so, he set a bad example of what is still important to Germans: respectful, if not exemplary, treatment of state institutions. It sounded like a reprimanding answer to the Chancellor when the Federal President said:
“This is not the time for tactics and skirmishes.”
