Almost a quarter of all SPD members of the Bundestag belong to the SPD youth organization Jusos, including Juso chairwoman Jessica Rosenthal. In an interview with ntv.de, the 29-year-old rejects Chancellor Scholz’s plans to arm the Bundeswehr with a special fund worth 100 billion euros in the form presented. That was “too short-sighted,” says Rosenthal. “We need much broader investment.” Federal Finance Minister Lindner should therefore no longer insist on a return to the debt brake.
It’s been two weeks and two parliamentary group meetings since Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced a 100 billion euro special fund to strengthen the Bundeswehr. Has he been able to convince you since then that this type of investment is necessary for this type of financing?
He didn’t have to convince me that the Bundeswehr needs more money and that we have to react to this turning point that Putin’s cowardly war of aggression has initiated. I think it’s right. As far as the sum is concerned: I haven’t seen any analysis of what is actually needed. The way – a special fund anchored in the Basic Law – and that no more money is provided for other areas is much more the problem. And no, he hasn’t been able to convince me yet.
Do you understand what this sum of 100 billion euros is based on if the Bundeswehr did not have a list of requirements at the time of the announcement?
The Bundeswehr’s problems are multi-layered. For many years, especially under CDU ministers, the money was cut further and further. As finance minister, Olaf Scholz has already increased the defense budget in recent years. But procurement is just – and I’ll stick to that – a black hole into which quite a lot of money is being dumped. This problem cannot simply be solved with more money; structural reforms are needed here. I also know that Defense Minister Christine Lambrecht sees the great need for reform and wants to tackle it.
What follows?
The way via the special fund does not convince me and as of today I cannot say that I can agree to that. But, even if that happens and money is released, it must be clear that Parliament will continue to have absolute financial sovereignty over this spending. It cannot be that this falls under the sole responsibility of the federal government. That is the minimum and, with the parliamentary scrutiny for budgetary matters, it is also clearly provided for in the Basic Law.
And beyond?
It’s incredibly important to me that we discuss the topic of a strong security architecture for society as a whole. I think it’s completely wrong to just look at military spending, with an investment backlog of 6 billion euros in hospitals alone. The organizations involved in civil protection say that we have to spend 0.5 percent of the gross domestic product so that we are properly equipped here. If we are now preparing for the turning point, then it is about more areas and not just about increasing military spending, which I think is okay. In order to ensure that civilian infrastructure is able to defend itself, we must also talk about the rail network and renewable energies. We need much broader investment. A hundred billion euros for the Bundeswehr alone is not enough.
Does that mean you link the additional 100 billion for the Bundeswehr to further additional investments in the social sector and in infrastructure?
The problem is that we can’t increase spending the way we want to increase it because we have the debt brake. And because Federal Minister of Finance Christian Lindner wants to comply with this debt brake again in 2023, come hell or high water – in my view completely irrelevant to reality. It restricts us as a society far too much. And we haven’t yet talked about the necessary relief: if people break out in a sweat at the pump because they no longer come to work, then the Federal Government and we as Social Democrats can’t be indifferent. And because that’s not the case, we will have to put together further relief packages – also for companies, especially small and medium-sized ones. Christian Lindner is traveling in a false reality where he simply does not recognize that we have these broad tasks.
The list of open financing tasks could be continued: if economic growth slows down again, there will also be supplies for people who have fled from Ukraine in Germany, as well as humanitarian aid for Ukraine and the traffic light actually wanted one euro for development cooperation and issue humanitarian aid.
I think this one-to-one principle is right, especially when we want to create a stable peace order in the world. I would like to point out again: We will have famines as a result of this war in Ukraine. It’s not clear to everyone yet. If food prices continue to rise, people in the Global South and also people with low incomes in the industrialized nations will feel the effects. The corona pandemic pushed many people back into poverty.
What do you have in mind for the debt brake? An extended suspension, reform or even complete abolition?
The debt brake should be abolished. There’s no way around it. We can and must also talk about tax increases for large fortunes and incomes, but to the extent that investments are necessary, the debt brake must simply be lifted. The minimum is that it remains suspended in the coming year. In fact, we’ve known for some time that debt rules set in stone don’t make sense. This has been seen again and again in other countries in the past and I would now like to see the same realization from Federal Finance Minister Christian Lindner.
Do the leaders of the SPD parliamentary group and party support your demands for a new discussion of the debt brake?
I can’t tell you. I’m not part of the parliamentary group leadership or the party leadership, so I’m not sitting at a table with Christian Lindner, but have to say that he continues to publicly present the debt brake as set. But if you listen to the breadth of social democracy, all or very many will say that we must now make these broad investments possible and that the debt brake must not fail. Christian Lindner has already made some moves in energy supply, but that is not nearly enough. The fact that we no longer want to be dependent on Russian oil and gas shows that the concept of security is a much larger one. The same applies to social security: if people here can no longer afford to heat, it will be a massive crisis.
How can the federal government help people in dealing with energy prices?
Many things that have happened now are already good. But that is not enough. We Jusos asked early on for families to be given an additional amount. Since then, the situation has worsened again. A one-time increase in child benefit of 500 euros would be a real relief in the current situation. A similar solution has already been decided for students and trainees. That’s really good, but there needs to be more. People in rural areas who depend on cars also need answers. You can still do a lot with the commuter allowance.
If you are worried about the cost of living for normal consumers, can you understand from this perspective that the federal government continues to reject an import ban on Russian raw materials?
I can at least understand many of the arguments. Given the atrocities currently being committed by the Russian army – such as the bombing of the children’s hospital in Mariupol – it is a matter of economic strength that the next steps will eventually be taken. We urgently need a ceasefire for the people of Ukraine.
Apparently, ex-Chancellor Gerhard Schröder is also making peace efforts in Moscow. Would any mediation success of any kind change anything in your demand that Mr. Schröder give up his supervisory board mandates and cut ties with Putin?
I find it very strange that an ex-Chancellor is acting past the federal government in this form. Of course it’s good when talks are held, but that’s a relatively absurd procedure. This war needs to be stopped now and if Gerhard Schröder can achieve that, then we’ll take a look. His behavior so far and also his refusal to give up his positions are simply a disgrace.
The federal and state governments must now prepare to take in hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians, if not in the millions. What does Germany have to prepare for?
The people now have to arrive properly and be taken care of. Of course there will be costs, especially in the social sector. Many children come who need to be able to go to kindergarten and school as quickly as possible. However, daycare centers and schools are already under a massive strain due to the corona pandemic. This means that we have to provide broad financial support here too and see that we recruit more specialist staff. This is a subject on which we cannot only think until tomorrow. Rather, we have to prepare ourselves for the fact that this may continue for years to come.
But if so much money is needed, we come back to the starting point of our conversation: the FDP may provide the federal finance minister, but the government is headed by the chancellor of the SPD. Shouldn’t your party leadership and the chancellor open up the issue of the debt brake?
Of course, there has to be more pressure from the SPD. But I also don’t see that the debate is over with Olaf Scholz’s government statement. That was an important contribution to send the signal: We are ready to rethink. In doing so, he filled some parts of the concept of the turning point in time. But it is also right and good that the other forces in society and the SPD are now addressing and filling in the other fields of this turning point. This is my demand. I will not tire of bringing up these points again and again and I would also like to see a strong SPD and I see that in many places, for example in the social sector. The people in the constituencies, where many are involved in refugee aid, know what is in store for us. We are only at the beginning of the question of the turning point and its financing.
Sebastian Huld interviewed Jessica Rosenthal