Merkel Effect on Germany in Crisis

The Germans don’t know what’s going on anymore. With them. With the world – so wild and devoid of reason. And this despite the fact that the famous German philosopher Immanuel Kant, born exactly three centuries ago, called for “eternal peace”; the famous poet Friedrich Schiller proclaimed the ideal: “All men shall become brothers”; Beethoven gave Europeans the melody of their hymn. And on top of that, the Earth’s climate is getting warmer and warmer. All of this cannot but disappoint. In and around Berlin.

Just now – or was it decades ago? – Angela Merkel turned 70 years old. She was Chancellor of Germany for 16 years, from 2005 to 2021. Attention, respect, applause, admiration, reverence, international recognition, she was hailed as “the most powerful woman in the world,” “the leader of the West.” But now her legacy is spoken of in hushed tones. Now that the current German government has resigned after three years in power, things seem different. As Chancellor, Merkel has for 16 years decisively set the political guidelines in the Federal Republic of Germany, determining the mood of the people. In autumn 2021, she voluntarily gave up her further tenure as Chancellor. You have to be able to do all that. To achieve this in a democracy requires ingenious manipulation of governing methods, avoidance of any threats to power, and an unmistakable sensitivity to the feelings of the people. In her 16 years as chancellor, she has witnessed the change of countless heads of government around the world, probably eight in Italy alone, four totally different US presidents. And all this in a world gripped by crises. These are crises that already existed during Merkel’s tenure as chancellor: the war on terrorism in the Middle East; the neighborly confrontation in Europe between Russia and Ukraine; the migration of millions from Asia and Africa to Europe; conflicts over appropriate economic and financial policies everywhere, whether in individual states or in the European Union; contentious activism spreading from within, whether over climate, the status of women, rich and poor, North and South, and so on. In addition, there was excessive moralizing on all issues, with accusations against others, culminating in populism, both right and left. Everything became a matter of controversy, whether views and actions on the coronavirus epidemic or advocacy for or against nuclear power. For that reason alone, these 16 years as chancellor – a month less than Helmut Kohl’s (1982-1998) and eight years more than the American Constitution allows – are worthy of all kinds of respect.

So, what’s Merkel’s secret? Her recipe for political success? Her magic? For all those who are curious: Angela Merkel gave in to inner temptation and outer seduction, and now, in the year of her 70th birthday (July 17), she has published her memoirs: “Freedom: Memoirs 1954 – 2021.” Do they need to be read? It is common for retired politicians to adhere to the ancient Roman obituary commandment in their memoirs: Nil nisi bene, it’s either good or nothing about the dead. Angela Merkel, like a true Signora Machiavelli, follows this commandment. And as a seal of her infallibility, the memoirs are all over the place with the confusing remark that under the circumstances of the time, the decision was “inevitable.” She also knows that when faced with any attacks or provocative questions from the public, a discreet evasion or even silence is better than a quick and sharp notation. Prussian discipline teaches this; and Merkel has it….

That’s how I met her in person. In the German Embassy in Rome, during a confidential one-on-one conversation initiated by her. Then she, as leader of the German Christian Democrats (CDU) party since April 2000, but not yet a candidate for Chancellor of the “Union” (CDU/CSU), asked me, a correspondent of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, the following question: how can I explain the importance of religion, Christianity, and the church for politics and power in the state, i.e. the influence of believers, Christians and Catholics on politicians. My assessment prompted her to ask clarifying questions. Was she then referring to her father, Horst Kasner (1920-2011), a Protestant theologian and influential churchman in the GDR? Or perhaps then-Pope John Paul II (born 1920, pontificate from 1978 to 2005), a Polish-born pope whose contribution to the collapse of communism in 1989 cannot be overestimated. She was interested in German Catholics as voters and their votes; the inner meaning of religion, Christianity, and churches was of secondary importance to her. After my factual, “apolitical” answers, I realized that I had picked up the key to Merkel as a politician and later as Chancellor. Chancellor Helmut Schmidt (1974-1982) was thrilled to meet John Paul II in Rome. Kohl told me in Piazza Navona that he would remain a Catholic no matter who became Pope. Chancellor Merkel, on the other hand, saw nothing wrong in addressing German Pope Benedict XVI (2005 – 2013) at an official press conference with Muslim (!) Kazakh President Nazarbayev in February 2009 because of an internal Church decision and demanded “clarification” from the Vatican regarding the treatment of Judaism. “Protestant Christian” was far less concerned with the appropriateness of such a harsh criticism from the Chancellor than with the fact that this – carefully prepared – boldness was likely to be well received by the majority in Germany. This is how it went. This was the basis of all the Chancellor’s policy decisions based on the victory motto: “Fool, it’s the majority.” It’s not reprehensible in a democratic society. And Merkel has always gotten a majority of MPs to govern in her shifting coalitions – with the SPD and the FDP, and twice with the SPD. A masterpiece of political tactics. Despite her own party having changed, shifting to the left and thus creating space for a new party on the right, the widely criticized Alternative for Germany (AfD), which is viewed with suspicion by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution. The fact that the CDU’s rating since 2005 has fallen from its highest pre-election figure (41.5%) to 35.2% in the election (against the prematurely resigned Chancellor – since 1998 – Gerhard Schroeder) was also a big lesson for Merkel. At the CDU party conference in Leipzig in 2003, she advocated ambitious reforms of the “social market economy” – the credo and blessing of the Christian Union. But more for the “market,” which many have denounced as a trend of “evil neoliberalism,” as a dismantling of the comfortable welfare state, as an unreasonable demand on those who don’t want to do anything. Eight years later, back in Leipzig, Chancellor Merkel turned to prioritizing the social, and voters thanked her in 2015 with 41.5% of the vote. One could be satisfied with this and praise Merkel’s political wisdom. Just as she does now, approving of all her decisions, assuring me that the circumstances were just so, and that therefore she need not admit to mistakes or regret them. We could stop here if this model of democracy based on civility were not repeated over and over again. And that is exactly the big problem today in Germany, Europe, and other countries. She also demolished the principle that was considered her favorite hallmark: as a Doctor of Physics, she thinks “from the end.” It is true that physical laws will continue to apply in the future. But unfortunately, this is unacceptable in politics. It is not without reason that in ancient times people sought advice from the Oracle of Delphi, and in Rome, from the haruspices (who read from the entrails of sacrificial animals). Because now we see that during the 16 years of Merkel’s rule, Germany was slowly but surely rolling down a slope, including to the detriment of other European Union states, and the three-party coalition led by the brave Chancellor Olaf (Scholz) was hopelessly overstretched and doomed to failure. It is almost superfluous to describe all the negative developments of the last two decades – and not only in Germany. But as the problems have become insurmountable, political ambition should be directed now not so much at beautiful goals, but at realistic and rational improvements to the status quo – not at what is most convenient or most pleasing to themselves and others. Chasing high-moral plans usually exacerbates problems. Here is just a brief chronological overview of the wrong paths, failures, and dead ends from which we now have to find a way out: Merkel’s shift in priorities towards an all-powerful welfare state has weakened the unfairly bypassed efficiency economy, so that Germany is now once again considered the “sick man” of Europe, less internationally competitive in terms of industrial location, and many companies are moving their production abroad; sales and profits have either way already ended up abroad. During the international financial crisis of 2008-2009, the Chancellor reassured German depositors. As a result, Germans began to regard “capitalism” with great distrust, and knowledgeable people considered them financial “idiots.” In the face of growing crises around the euro and rising national debt, Merkel preferred solutions that caused the least problems, did not reduce temptations, but increased costs. Up until today, with the German ploy of categorizing government debt as “special assets.” When the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan suffered a tsunami accident in March 2011, Merkel wanted to avert danger on the Danube, Neckar, Rhine, and Elbe by shutting down German nuclear power plants. Why? “Because people were afraid,” she repeats even today. However, it was also because Merkel wanted to increase the likelihood of forming a coalition with the Green Party and to tilt its supporters in favor of the CDU. The fact that this would exacerbate the energy crisis could not escape the attention of Doctor of Physics.

And it’s not that the ambitious climate goals cannot be achieved globally because of the notorious human-caused global warming and that they can only be funded by magic. In autumn 2011, the Chancellor wanted to avoid “ugly pictures” – verbatim quote – due to the flow of refugees from Asia, numbering in the hundreds of thousands, and, to the shock of many Europeans and the outrage of England, opened Germany’s borders. She reassured skeptics with a “culture of hospitality” and teddy bears at Munich Central Station. What happens next, at the end, is a question that remains open and is a growing concern and a growing burden on society. During the coronacrisis, Germany did not stand out too much from the world hysteria – just read Alessandro Manzoni’s balanced description of the plague in Milan. In the best-case scenario, sensitive people noted that in the future they will have to entrust their health to the state out of solidarity, and after the decision of the highest court, they will soon have to entrust it with climate care as well. It is for a reason that Merkel was also called “mommy.” Therefore, we need not go any further with assessing Merkel’s legacy. Because the mother can no longer control her adult children and their interactions with the world. That’s why Merkel will not be held responsible neither for an unpopular, failed foreign policy, nor for Putin’s actions – energy is usually bought where it’s cheapest – nor for terrorism and terror in the Middle East. It was also noticeable that Merkel supported the New Ethics movement – the left-liberal-green-socialist sentiment – without the slightest inner enthusiasm; perhaps she thought they would disappear on their own or win. What is surprising is the fact that Merkel’s autobiography is titled “Freedom.” Neither Germany nor Germans have become freer under Merkel.