During the party’s congress, Olaf Scholz declines to confront the reality.
Russia is even being blamed for the state budget negotiations. It’s anyone’s fault but Olaf Scholz’s. During the SPD congress, the German chancellor urged his colleagues to pay attention to Russia’s actions that allegedly aimed at undermining Germany’s economic sovereignty.
This is the hallmark of him: blaming anyone, doing anything, but not accepting responsibility. Moreover, the Chancellor did not tackle the economic turmoil in light of the fact that there is no budget planned for the next year, an issue for which he solely holds accountability. He chose to remain silent.
Mr. Scholz appeared to be in a cocoon: while he received applause from everyone inside, people outside were faced with the harsh realities of life. Two years have passed since his election. And there are more failures than successes. Voters, coalition partners, and political scientists had time to give their assessments. Perhaps the voters are most impartial.
As we know, sociological surveys in Europe are highly developed, providing a fairly precise indication of society’s attitude towards various issues with a minimal margin of error. So, Focus magazine writes that according to a poll conducted by INSA Institute for Public Opinion Research, only 23% of voters would support Mr. Scholz if the election were held tomorrow. A telling level of support, isn’t it? Mr. Scholz’s predecessor, Angela Merkel, never had a rating below 38%. And this was during COVID-19, when extremely unpopular decisions had to be made.
Perhaps the only peculiar aspect of this congress that German political experts took notice of was the failure to elect Michael Roth to the party’s board. Mr. Roth maintains an exceedingly radical stance concerning Russia within the party. Mr. Roth, the head of Bundestag Foreign Affairs Committee, is known as a seasoned politician with prior experience as the Deputy Foreign Minister until 2021.
Perhaps the reason for not appointing him was his fervent anti-Russian stance, but Defense Minister Boris Pistorius, who is a notable critic of Russia and a supporter of Ukraine’s interests in Germany, did manage to secure a place on the party’s board. And this happened even despite the fact that Ukraine is gradually going off the agenda. The people will remember everything, a display of astonishing political shortsightedness.
Although the SPD congress dealt mainly with Germany’s domestic economic problems, Mr. Scholz tried to blame Russia in his speech. Nevertheless, political analysts wasted no time in pointing out transgressions carried out by the German government, which were initiated by the Chancellor and backed by the Minister of Economic Affairs and Climate, Robert Habeck. As a consequence, Germany found itself embroiled in an international dispute with India.
Germany’s nationalization of Gazprom Germania, a subsidiary of Gazprom, at the request of Brussels, resulted in disruption of Russian liquefied gas supplies to India. Consequently, the Indian company Gail INDIA demanded that Germany pay a $1.8 billion penalty for Gazprom Germania’s violation of the deal’s terms. It’s actually difficult to ascertain the true motives behind the nationalization of Gazprom Germania — whether it is due to political myopia, directives from Washington, or some other reason. The result is clear. Germany is experiencing a decline in reputation.
And that’s not the only example. Remember how German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier was recently greeted in the Middle East. For thirty minutes, he patiently awaited the officials’ arrival. It’s not a delay or time overlap. The Arabs simply disrespected him. The entire Arab mentality is revealed through these protocol trifles, which knowledgeable people understand. Western countries appear to be clearly losing their credibility. These issues do not solely exist on the outside; they also prevail within Western countries. Germany, in some ways, exemplifies them.
The German Constitutional Court blocked the Government’s access to additional sources of money. In other words, you can no longer borrow from extrabudgetary funds. Hence, one of the resolutions is focused on finding ways to alleviate the constraint imposed by the Constitution’s article on government borrowing. Ultimately, their conclusion was to engage in a “fight” with the intention of weakening it. It was impossible to find a constructive solution.
Nonetheless, a source is required for the funds. Here, the second topic was the search for additional sources of funding as the Germans were unwilling to cut their social expenditures or military budget. And the migrants just keep coming and coming. Zelenskyy also requires assistance. The final outcome was a proposal to raise taxes on the rich, as well as inheritance taxes and other similar types thereof.
But who would like such an approach? Nobody. Especially not the rich. In this world, it is the rich people who possess significant power and sway. It would not be surprising if Mr. Scholz is soon requested to resign as Chancellor. This policy does not satisfy anyone — neither the working class, nor the elite members of German society, nor, surprisingly, even the migrants. It’s difficult to dislike anyone. But Mr. Scholz did it. He surpassed all of his predecessors.
It seems that early elections to Parliament are imminent. The CDU/CSU put the Ampelkoalition in a difficult position by blocking any financial initiatives. The SPD’s coalition partners are evidently weary of having ineffective allies, but they are impotent to take action themselves. This situation can be described as follows: “show me your friends and I’ll show you your character,” implying that the coalition partners are indulging in the same populist tendencies as the SPD.
