The traffic light coalition and the Union have recently engaged in a series of heated debates in the Bundestag. But after the failure of the asylum summit, the tone has become even more venomous. The Chancellor has questioned the seriousness of CDU leader Merz, who in turn has accused Scholz of incompetence – and scores points with a trick.
In the verbal exchange during the general debate in the German Bundestag, the Union faction scored points with a simple trick before the first request to speak: Friedrich Merz, as chairman of the CDU/CSU faction, was not the first to take the lectern. Instead of the opposition leader, his deputy, the CSU regional group leader Alexander Dobrindt, came. Shortly before the start of the debate, the Union had changed the list of its speakers and this was clearly calculated: it forced the second-placed Chancellor Olaf Scholz to respond to Dobrindt, the personification of the Attack Department. Merz, for his part, was able to respond to Scholz’s speech for a change – and distance himself from Scholz’s agitated tone by emphasizing calmness.
But the main argument in the Bundestag was whether Merz might have cheated elsewhere. The day before, the CDU chairman had declared the talks with the federal government on measures to limit migration had failed after a brief exchange. “Two or three weeks ago, you wrote a script where you said you would make an offer of cooperation. And if that is possible, you turn it down and say ‘It is not enough’,” Scholz accused the opposition leader of a set-up. “We cannot handle a serious matter in this country like that.”
Scholz explains Merz’s role
Merz was already roaring with anger, but was drowned out by the applause of the traffic light factions. And Scholz – obviously spurred on by Dobrindt’s opening speech peppered with serious accusations – went even further. “You are the type of politician who believes that an interview with ‘Bild am Sonntag’ has solved the migration issue,” Scholz said to Merz. The Union’s offer to turn away all migrants at Germany’s external borders is not serious, said Scholz. “I’ll be happy to spell out the word for you.”
Scholz recalled the asylum compromise in 1992, when the SPD agreed to a change to the constitution while in opposition. “Leadership is not about climbing up on a barricade and making demands with a wild gesture,” said Scholz. “Leadership is about turning around and being able to persuade your own people to compromise. That is leadership, Mr Merz.” Nevertheless, the door to talks remains open.
Scholz also listed everything the federal government had done to reduce immigration numbers and to encourage more deportations of criminals or foreigners who are not entitled to stay: the introduction of border controls, tens of thousands of rejections, the expansion of the list of safe countries of origin, a reform of the European Union’s common asylum policy, the extension of deportation detention, more police powers and, most recently, the deportation of convicted criminals to Afghanistan. “They’ve been saying ‘nothing has been achieved’,” Scholz said indignantly, and told the Union faction: “You’re the ones who can’t get anything done!”
Frontal attack: Dobrindt, Chancellor’s speech: Merz
What had made the Chancellor so angry? The previous speaker was no doubt also angry: Dobrindt accused the traffic light coalition of a “refusal attitude” in migration policy, at the expense of schools and internal security. “Anyone who asks you for leadership will only get excuses.” The green economic miracle has turned out to be green stagnation, said Dobrindt, referring to the gloomy economic forecasts of zero percent growth. “You promised a double boom, but you delivered a double zero,” Dobrindt accused Scholz. The traffic light coalition is pursuing “politics against the will of the majority of the citizens” and is therefore responsible for the increase in votes for the AfD and BSW.
When Merz finally stepped forward in sixth place, the pulse was noticeably down again. The Union’s presumed candidate for chancellor tried to swap roles, spoke more calmly than the incumbent and first of all remembered the victims of the terrorist attack on the USA on the same day 23 years ago. Merz also introduced the part of his speech on migration policy in a statesmanlike manner: “Germany must remain an open and foreigner-friendly country.”
He did not let up on accusations from the SPD and the Greens that Merz was stirring up sentiment against all immigrants for electoral reasons. The problem was primarily “a small minority – no more and no less – of mainly young men who do not want to abide by the rules that apply in this country.” Scholz, meanwhile, was typing away on his cell phone in a deliberately disinterested manner.
Merz feels slandered
“The main part of my proposals was and remains the rejection, at least temporarily, of all asylum seekers at the German borders, all of whom, according to the rules of the European Union, should have applied for asylum in the country they first entered.” The Union will not enter into an endless loop of talks about this. “The claim that this was a staged event on my part yesterday,” and at this point Merz raised his voice, “this claim is infamous, it is infamous.” Malicious and slanderous.
And because a general debate is actually about so much more, and especially about the beginning of budget discussions for the coming year, Merz also looked at the bigger picture. With each of its decisions, the coalition is worsening the competitive conditions for the German economy. Economics Minister Robert Habeck is leading Germany into a “planned economy”. After the Union takes over the government, Germany will not be able to avoid participating in the construction of nuclear power plants in other EU countries. Private investors will have to be brought in to finance the expansion of the infrastructure.
And then a few words about the so-called Draghi report on the competitiveness of the EU: The Union will never agree to joint EU debt in order to boost the economy. “I will do everything to prevent the European Union from entering such a debt spiral,” Merz shouted. Thunderous applause and a beaming face – from the FDP. Its general secretary Bijan Djir-Sarai could hardly contain his joy at so much clarity. Djir-Sarai makes no secret of the fact that he wants to govern together with the Union again as soon as possible.
FDP flirts with Merz
When Djir-Sarai finally took the podium himself, he even openly courted the Union – as if the FDP were not part of the federal government and had not been attacked by the Union in previous speeches. “We as the FDP are ready to implement these things one-to-one with you,” Djir-Sarai promised the audience in the ranks of the CDU and CSU. “The current migration policy is overwhelming the country.”
FDP parliamentary group leader Christian Dürr also refrained from attacking the conservatives, but called the termination of the asylum talks a mistake. The federal government can only implement a U-turn together with the federal states in which the CDU and CSU also govern or co-govern. The goal: “It must be easier to come to Germany to work than to come to Germany and not work.” The FDP speakers did not even contradict the Union’s accusations that blanket rejections at Germany’s external borders had failed primarily due to resistance from the Greens.
Greens attack Merz, Mützenich looks to Solingen
The Greens can also defend themselves, however: parliamentary group leader Katharina Dröge stressed that her party has long been calling for the deportation of serious criminals and violent Islamists. This requires strengthening the police and authorities, something they would have “liked” to discuss with the Union “in the working group that you left so prematurely yesterday.”
Dröge accused Merz of not being interested in internal security at all. “But that doesn’t help at all, really not one bit of security, if you try to use people’s fears to campaign in the aftermath of a terrorist attack, Mr Merz. Just like you did.” Merz is pursuing politics “without heart” and “without sense and reason” if he doesn’t differentiate between legitimate asylum interests and abuse. The proposal for blanket rejections is “nonsense,” said Dröge. “Your proposal would essentially mean that nothing at all will work in the European Union anymore.”
SPD parliamentary group leader Rolf Mützenich, who now acted as the calm SPD speaker instead of the Chancellor, also expressed doubts about the Union’s approach. “I don’t know whether they intended to get up from the table from the start,” said Mützenich. By breaking off the talks, Merz had “done a disservice to democracy and perhaps to himself,” said Mützenich. “You can’t govern this country with ultimatums and unsound proposals.”
And then Mützenich, often praised as a gentleman in the Bundestag, showed his ability to deliver a low blow. The Union will “know in the deepest of secrets that something went wrong in North Rhine-Westphalia under a CDU prime minister.” Perhaps the Union wanted to use its actions to distract from the way the attack in Solingen came about. After all, the perpetrator could have been handed back to Bulgaria long ago. “We will not release those responsible from their responsibility either,” said Mützenich. The SPD – unlike the Greens – does not govern in NRW and – unlike the FDP – is not particularly keen on forming a joint coalition with the CDU and CSU.
Weidel rails against “Chancellor of decline”
The AfD also took part in the general debate and also focused on the topic of migration. Group leader Alice Weidel cited a series of figures on the extent of knife violence and rape, a large proportion of which were committed by immigrants. She called for an immigration moratorium and the immediate deportation of all immigrants who have become criminals or who do not have the right to remain.
Weidel accused both the traffic light government and the CDU/CSU of government failure and complained that the AfD was systematically discriminated against and its voters were excluded from democratic participation because the AfD faction in the Bundestag was denied positions and no one in the East wanted to govern with it. Scholz was a “chancellor of decline,” said Weidel.
In this legislative period, the AfD parliamentary group has involuntarily been given the role of constantly reminding the other parties that there are worse political opponents than those in the political center. After their speeches, Merz and Scholz were actually seen having an extensive conversation on the sidelines of the Bundestag plenary session. Even after three years of a traffic light government, the country still has no idea what it might sound like when the chancellor and the opposition leader talk to each other calmly and seriously.