Foreign policy, of all things
Who would have thought that corona policy and the climate could be pushed out of the picture so quickly?
Not that these issues have become insignificant.
Think, for example, of the dispute over school openings or vaccinations for young people or the unresolved question of how exactly the coalition's new, more ambitious climate protection law can be implemented.
But foreign policy is undoubtedly driving the political debates, and big time, baby.
Germany and the European Union are being challenged
and forced to act
in an unprecedented manner
, be it through the ongoing smoldering conflict in the Middle East, through the onslaught of refugees on the Spanish exclave of Ceuta, and most recently through the state-orchestrated
kidnapping of blogger Roman Protasewitsch
by the Regime in Belarus.
This show was so bold,
such a blatant encroachment on civil rights
, that European governments could not ignore it.
At its summit at the beginning of the week, the EU showed that it can still react quickly and decisively.
But how would the next Chancellor get involved?
One can assume that in a clear case like Belarus, all three candidates, whether Annalena Baerbock, Armin Laschet or Olaf Scholz, would find clear words.
But what if the situation continues to escalate?
What if the Belarusian ruler Alexander Lukashenko, with Russian backing, launches a veritable annihilation attack on the opposition?
For months, peaceful political activists have been
arrested, beaten up and imprisoned for years, some without cause
, without the regime being particularly impressed by international outrage or sanctions.
What Habeck experienced in Kiev
Germany's word has special weight in the EU - so how would Annalena Baerbock, for example, position herself if it suddenly came down to more than flight bans or punitive measures against individual Belarusian regime representatives?
What if Russian secret services turned out to be the mastermind behind the kidnapping of Protasevich?
In interviews, Baerbock took a tough line towards Moscow
and also spoke out against the Nordstream 2 pipeline project.
At the same time, however, the Greens are at the head of a traditionally NATO-skeptical party that is opposed to arms exports and the purchase of armed drones.
A SPIEGEL team led by Christiane Hoffmann and Jonas Schaible recently traced how deep the gap between aspirations and reality is among the Greens, especially in foreign policy.
Former peace party before the reality test: In foreign policy, the Greens are threatened with hard conflicts
Now there is
a fresh example of the green dilemma
: Co-party leader Robert Habeck traveled to Kiev and in an interview with Deutschlandfunk showed his sympathy for supplying Ukraine with weapons "for self-defense".
It is a position that is categorically rejected in the green election manifesto and by foreign policy spokesmen such as Jürgen Trittin.
So far, it was the only Green Foreign Minister, Joschka Fischer, who managed to get his party to agree to foreign missions by the Bundeswehr.
So Habeck is setting out to become the new Joschka?
Or did the party leader just shoot from the hip without much ulterior motive?
Habeck's move must have been influenced by his talks with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Selenskyj.
Zelenskyi may have described to him how Russia nurses and arms the separatists in eastern Ukraine.
This is exactly what Zelenskyi will have often said to the Chancellor, and even Angela Merkel, whose CDU is much more open to arms deliveries, has always remained tough on this issue.
Perhaps the Greens will be able to convince people of their foreign policy ideals during the election campaign.
The reality test would then only be postponed
- to the time in government.
What happens at Republic 21
“How will Germany become fairer?” Is the key question that our editorial team is currently addressing in the “Republic 21” project for the super election year.
Rachelle Pouplier and Marius Mestermann have once again swarmed out with camera and microphone to prepare this topic for you.
This week, Marius’s
podcast “Voices Catching” is
about intergenerational justice.
German society is aging, and the baby boomer generation will soon be retiring.
How does this affect political decisions?
Do the older ones ruin the future for the younger ones through their lifestyle and voting behavior?
What distinguishes this generation conflict from previous ones?
And what solutions could there be?
For the answers, Marius invited our colleague Jonas Schaible as a conversation partner. In our office in the capital, Jonas is mainly concerned with the Greens, whose
concepts for more justice will
be looked at by
many Germans in particular this election year. The green supporters are characterized by an above-average education and a comparatively high income - the question is whether they also vote for social justice if they don't get any of it themselves, and
possibly even have to pay extra
. And it will be just as curious to see how the Greens will portray the major issues of justice in this election campaign. You can listen to our podcast here from Thursday morning.
My colleague Rachelle Pouplier visited a
single mother from Berlin-Marzahn
, for the second time since the beginning of the pandemic.
The woman has now found a job, but despite her full-time work still has to top up with Hartz IV.
One can wonder whether that is still fair.
What the polls say
On the weekend of Pentecost, a short interview made big waves on our side:
Christoph Ploß, head of the Hamburg CDU
, called for a legal ban on gender-sensitive language for state institutions.
Above all in social media there was criticism of Ploß's approach - but as is well known, Twitter is anything but a representative section of the population.
A survey by the opinion research institute Civey for SPIEGEL shows:
There is a majority in favor of a ban on gender language in government agencies
, even if only a narrow majority.
Around 53 percent of Germans are in favor of the ban, 38 percent against, and at least 9 percent are undecided.
It is noticeable that men (57 percent) and women (52 percent) agree with a ban to a similar extent.
Unsurprisingly,
support for a gender language ban increases
with age: in the group of 18 to 29-year-olds, only 45 percent are in favor, in the age group over 65 it is 64 percent.
Here, too, however, it can be seen that skepticism towards gender-sensitive language seems to be great regardless of age.
If one differentiates according to the parties, there are again major differences: only about
one in four supporters of the Green Party would be in favor of
legally prohibiting
gendering
for government agencies.
It is
almost 70 percent of the
voters of the Union
.
The move to ban gender language strikes me as a bit populist.
Wouldn't such a law set the language police in motion, against which conservative gentlemen (and women) always warn?
The constituency of the week: # 178
Anna Lührmann was
Germany's youngest MP
when she moved into the Bundestag for the Greens in 2002. Seven years later, she voluntarily gave up her mandate to go to Sudan with her husband, a diplomat. More than ten years later, Lührmann, now 37 years old, is drawn back to parliament.
She is applying for the direct mandate
in constituency 178, Rheingau-Taunus - Limburg, which is known for its mineral-rich springs (keyword: Selters), its vineyards and tourist destinations such as Eberbach Monastery, the setting for the film "The Name of the Rose".
In the
traditionally black constituency
, Lührmann meets a strong opponent: Klaus-Peter Willsch has always won the constituency directly since 1998.
The CDU man became known nationwide in 2013 for his criticism of the euro rescue policy, for his openness to AfD cooperation at times, and he is considered the conservative warrior of his party.
On his 60th birthday, however, Willsch, of all people, is not always so
strict
about rules: A shaky mobile phone video showed a
boozy party in Willsch's kitchen
and living room, where at least a dozen guests swayed to the classic "Lemon Tree" party despite the corona pandemic and lay in each other's arms.
Enlarge image
CDU member Willsch
Photo: Christian Spicker / imago images
Willsch got in a lot of trouble, but in the end the party didn't do him any lasting damage: This year he was again
nominated as a direct candidate
with a
large majority
, and the chances are good that he will easily beat the Green Lührmann. Last time, Willsch's green opponent didn't even make nine percent, the other competitors weren't much better either. If the green polls continue, Lührmann should at least succeed in improving this result.
But there is also the long-standing SPD direct candidate Martin Rabanus, who hopes to
finally beat
Willsch in
the fifth attempt
this year
.
The Social Democrat and the Greens will have to share the manageable bourgeois-left-liberal voter camp in the Taunus.
But no matter who wins: Lührmann is almost certain to have a place in the Bundestag.
It is number 5 on the Hessian Green List.
The social media moment of the week
On Instagram this week it was possible to observe how two SPD politicians dealt in very different ways with very unpleasant news on their own behalf.
On the one hand there was Karl Lauterbach, who after Annalena Baerbock and Cem Özdemir now also had to admit the "
huge mistake
"
that he had not properly reported all of his ancillary income to the Bundestag administration
, a total of almost 18,000 euros from 2018 and 2019 as well as an advance for a book fee .
The health expert announced on Instagram that he would donate the money to Unicef for children in India, where the corona situation is
"a human disaster"
.
Franziska Giffey, now retired Federal Minister, also reported on Instagram.
D. for families, senior citizens, women and young people who gave up their office because of the threat of withdrawing their doctorate.
On the day of his resignation, Giffey also wrote of "mistakes"
: If she made any, she regretted them.
But she would have written the paper "to the best of her knowledge and belief."
A day later, Giffey posted the picture of a bird on Instagram, which looks brightly into the camera with black eyes.
In addition the sentence: »A bird is never afraid that the branch could break under it.
Not because he trusts the branch, but his own wings «.
My first thought: what kind of bird is that?
If you are the first to give me a convincing answer to this question, I will give you a copy of my dissertation "The Workforce Voting", a gripping book of disclosure about the abysses of German labor law.
My second thought: how does Giffey know what a bird is afraid of?
And the third: I like Lauterbach's error culture better.
The stories of the week
I would particularly like to recommend these politically relevant stories from our capital city office to you:
A tea party in the Bundestag?
- The CDU's fear of its own right wing
Slap for Meuthen: What the election of the AfD top candidates means for the party leader
Smiling into the radio hole: what has State Minister Dorothee Bär achieved for digitization?
Heartily,
Your Melanie Amann
And once again the note on our own behalf: You can order this briefing as a newsletter in your e-mail inbox here.
