Enlarge image
Baerbock, Habeck
Photo: Michael Kappeler / picture alliance / dpa
Always home advantage with three times more players on the field than the opponent, who has a goal five times larger: That roughly describes the situation in recent years when it came to nuclear power in Germany: the last advocates were swept off the field.
That has now changed, one may say.
According to an ARD survey last week, just 15 percent of Germans were in favor of the planned shutdown of the last three nuclear power plants at the end of the year.
15 percent!
The Greens messed it up spectacularly.
Ironically, in the debate about an actually silly extension of the running time, they lost the framing, the intellectual sovereignty and ultimately the sovereignty of interpretation.
It is a mix of self-referential loyalty to ideology, sausage and inexplicably bad craftsmanship that makes the green debacle a self-inflicted one.
When was the last time this happened to you?
You who succeed in everything.
You, to whom everything seems possible.
From a green point of view, it is the worst-case scenario, the worst possible accident.
Doctoral theses will be written about it.
The Greens' first error
was to believe that Putin's war would not prevent them from sitting out the maturity issue until the end.
The fact that the war is accelerating the geostrategic move away from (Russian) fossil fuels was very welcome to them because of the associated climate protection.
However, nobody wanted to see that the combination of climate and war would also mean something for domestic and CO₂-free nuclear power.
A rookie mistake.
For months, surveys for RTL/ntv, for example, showed how the mood was changing.
According to SPIEGEL, two-thirds of those surveyed are now in favor of extending the term by five years and almost four-fifths by one year.
hit, sunk.
The second mistake
was to believe that the new debate could be contested with old arguments or, alternatively, with assertions whose blatant inconsistency would meet with leniency, because the end of nuclear power remains a noble and good goal.
Of course, there is still no repository for nuclear waste.
But extending the service life does not make this problem significantly greater - especially not if the old fuel rods are only used in "stretching mode".
Of course, a nuclear power plant cannot operate gas heating either, but it can replace gas-fired power generation.
And although Robert Habeck had already declared at the end of March that "every kilowatt hour saved counts," top Greens emerged in rows as the process progressed with declarations that Germany only had a gas problem and "no electricity problem."
According to the Fraunhofer Institute, gas accounts for ten to 15 percent of electricity production, which is quite a few kilowatt hours that can be saved.
In addition, companies are suffering from high electricity prices in a similar way to gas prices.
Separating the two from each other, as a purely tactical dodge in the nuclear debate, offends the common sense of the citizens and laughs at their concerns.
The third mistake
the Greens was losing their nerve.
This includes hectic whataboutism when referring to Markus Söder's energy balance, which is probably just as questionable as Friedrich Merz's sunglasses when the two made a statement in front of the nuclear power plant backdrop.
But that's not the point.
It may also be that the two gentlemen "just want to choke one thing in" on the Greens, as Katrin Göring-Eckardt suspects.
But even if: Faced with the choice of whether the winter energy supply will be a little more secure or whether the Greens will continue to ride on their high horse, I would be in favor of the former.
Incidentally, outbursts of manifest nonsense, such as the triumphant comment that a number of French nuclear power plants are having midsummer production problems, are evidence of bad nerves.
It's correct.
But we're talking about winter and Germany.
Or the claim
that there is "a social consensus" on the nuclear phase-out.
Also true.
But at the same time, a war-related pragmatism has emerged, which in no way fundamentally questions the phase-out and which should not be accused of maliciously serving as a "door opener" for the nationwide construction of new nuclear power plants in Germany.
It's a green bugger.
What remains is the tweet from a long-time spokesman for Jürgen Trittin, who once negotiated the red-green nuclear phase-out: “I fought for the phase-out of #nuclear power for almost 50 years.
Now, just before the last ones go offline, I won't let my success be stolen — neither by Putin nor by @Markus_Soeder, @c_lindner or @_FriedrichMerz.« In its simplicity, that is at least honest.
But at the same time, a war-related pragmatism has emerged, which in no way fundamentally questions the phase-out and which should not be accused of maliciously serving as a "door opener" for the nationwide construction of new nuclear power plants in Germany.
It's a green bugger.
What remains is the tweet from a long-time spokesman for Jürgen Trittin, who once negotiated the red-green nuclear phase-out: “I fought for the phase-out of #nuclear power for almost 50 years.
Now, just before the last ones go offline, I won't let my success be stolen — neither by Putin nor by @Markus_Soeder, @c_lindner or @_FriedrichMerz.« In its simplicity, that is at least honest.
But at the same time, a war-related pragmatism has emerged, which in no way fundamentally questions the phase-out and which should not be accused of maliciously serving as a "door opener" for the nationwide construction of new nuclear power plants in Germany.
It's a green bugger.
What remains is the tweet from a long-time spokesman for Jürgen Trittin, who once negotiated the red-green nuclear phase-out: “I fought for the phase-out of #nuclear power for almost 50 years.
Now, just before the last ones go offline, I won't let my success be stolen — neither by Putin nor by @Markus_Soeder, @c_lindner or @_FriedrichMerz.« In its simplicity, that is at least honest.
to serve maliciously as a "door opener" for the nationwide construction of nuclear power plants in Germany.
It's a green bugger.
What remains is the tweet from a long-time spokesman for Jürgen Trittin, who once negotiated the red-green nuclear phase-out: “I fought for the phase-out of #nuclear power for almost 50 years.
Now, just before the last ones go offline, I won't let my success be stolen — neither by Putin nor by @Markus_Soeder, @c_lindner or @_FriedrichMerz.« In its simplicity, that is at least honest.
to serve maliciously as a "door opener" for the nationwide construction of nuclear power plants in Germany.
It's a green bugger.
What remains is the tweet from a long-time spokesman for Jürgen Trittin, who once negotiated the red-green nuclear phase-out: “I fought for the phase-out of #nuclear power for almost 50 years.
Now, just before the last ones go offline, I won't let my success be stolen — neither by Putin nor by @Markus_Soeder, @c_lindner or @_FriedrichMerz.« In its simplicity, that is at least honest.
In summary: following the green communication on nuclear power is like watching a pile-up on the A3.
Where is the vision with which Robert Habeck and Annalena Baerbock led the Greens to the top of the polls?
Who is responsible in the party if the earth is declared flat if necessary, just to not have to change an iota of the nuclear phase-out?
By whom are we governed in this matter?
Now the Greens are threatened with either an extension of the term, which can incite parts of the sworn followers as the big fall.
Or switching off, which will annoy those eco-affine audiences who care a little less about the green self-centeredness than electricity from the socket or a heated children's room.
The Greens have a firm grip on their own history.
Unfortunately, so does the rest of the republic.
