Germany’s foreign policy has gained global attention these days because of its efforts in the context of the Libyan crisis. Although the conference in Berlin which was held on January 19 resulted in no actual success, at least some global and regional actors have expressed their willingness to end the ongoing crisis in Libya. While Germany has been visibly decisive in boosting a peace process or ceasefire in Libya, some days after the conference the renowned Semper Opera House in the German city of Dresden announced that this year it will award the Medal of St. George to Egypt’s president Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, who has ruled the country since the military coup in 2013 and with widespread violations of human rights.

The Semper Opera Ball, which is the largest classical entertainment event in German-speaking Europe, as well as one of the most important ball events in Europe, initially granted the medal to “recognize Sisi’s peace-making efforts in North Africa” and for his so-called “leadership as a statesman”. On Sunday, January 25, 2020, a German delegation handed over the Medal of St. George to Sisi, who is regarded by most Western media representatives and political circles as a dictator or at least an “autocratic leader”.

The German public harshly criticized the decision to award Sisi both on social media and in some mainstream media outlets. Furthermore, one of the renowned anchors of the upcoming ball, journalist Judith Rakers, cancelled her contract to host the event following the award.

But how was it possible to grant such an award to a dictator and to describe him as a person who looks for dialogue between all parties and a hope for Egyptians? The manager of the Opera House, Hans-Joachim Frey, initially stated that the ball was not a political event but a cultural one and that “although one is aware of Sisi and his acts”, he had described Sisi as a person standing for “stability in the region”. However, due to increasing pressure from the public and left-liberal circles, Frey, subsequently apologized and also declared that the Opera House “distance themselves from this awarding” which was “a mistake”.

The Saxony state government, though indirectly, continued to support the idea of awarding Sisi by referring to the management of the Semper Opera Ball without any consequences or sharp comments. The government’s spokesperson clearly stated that “Al-Sisi is not a democrat, there exists violations of the law (in Egypt), but this man is doing an important stabilizing job in the region”. Furthermore, despite admitting that the award was a mistake, it was not withdrawn immediately.

Additional criticism also came from the German public broadcaster MDR, which still broadcasted the Semper Opera Ball on February 7, despite criticism against the management. MDR said that despite the understandable and clear criticism regarding the award ceremony, “the Semper Opera Ball remains an important piece of culture of Central Germany, which inspires many people…freedom of the press and freedom of speech are an indispensable asset for the broadcaster.”

Consequently, nothing changed at all, and “Egypt’s dictator received a red carpet”, as Stephan Kühn, a Greens MP of Germany’s Federal Parliament, described the initial awarding of Sisi in a very critical tone in his open letter prior to the ball on February 7. In the end, the award was withdrawn only some days prior to the ball after the organizers faced obvious public pressure and harsh criticism. It seems that the organizers tried to save the remaining reputation of the Semper Opera Ball.

Actually, despite withdrawing the medal in a final moment, this is not the first time Sisi has been de facto honored in Germany. The German government’s position towards the Sisi regime is already well known and unfortunately has not changed in the years since Sisi’s bloody coup in 2013. This is despite the continuous, widespread and systematic crackdown on human rights, weak democratic mechanisms, the failure of the rule of law and the brutality of the military regime in Egypt. Germany and other nations in the EU have turned a blind eye to this and are not acting in compliance with their own Western values which espouse the importance of human rights. It even went so far that some years ago Germany’s former President Joachim Gauck openly welcomed and rolled out the red carpet for Sisi in Berlin.

Even though the Egyptian president’s brutal reputation is known among media circles and behind closed doors within Berlin’s political elites, he is still described as a partner in the “fight against terrorism”, and, of course, as one of the biggest purchasers of specific German products, namely weapons. Therefore, it does not surprise anyone that Germany’s arms exports to Egypt and to the United Arab Emirates, both who support the Libyan warlord Khalifa Haftar, significantly increased in the first half of 2019, despite both countries’ involvement in the Yemen conflict. Furthermore, Egypt is now the second biggest customer in the German weapons industry with 880 million US dollars in purchases.

Now the ball is over but the questions remain as to the Medal’s future, which has been tarnished by past conferral on other autocratic figures. Abolishing this “Medal for Nothing” might be a reasonable option.

But the more crucial question is why do some circles welcome or even award anti-democratic leaders instead of putting pressure on them? The recent Semper Opera Ball case made it clear that promoting German (or Western) culture and values in conflict-ridden regions does not seem sincere. Such generic expressions hide the real, namely economic and political motives. In the case of Hans-Joachim Frey it might be also related to the likely goal of exporting the ball to the newly opened opera house in Egypt’s capital, as a local commentator and German daily pointed out.

Nevertheless, it is quite a good signal that despite the silence at the federal governmental level, many members of Germany’s political parties criticized the award decision. The media and public opinion did not welcome the honoring of such a political figure who systematically violates human rights. However, there remains a lack of action and pressure that needs to emerge on domestics and international levels whenever such a case emerges.

Given Germany’s current efforts in the Libyan crisis, honoring Sisi will not really undermine the country’s overall reputation as well as the federal government’s credibility. No doubt, realist and pragmatic moves in international politics are considered from a rather different perspective. However, while Germany, its media and public opinion distinguish their country’s stance on the Libyan crisis from those countries which support the Libyan warlord, then, one should expect a more cautious approach towards authoritarian figures, even if it is only limited to a cultural event, as in the case of the Semper Opera Ball.

The SPD’s party conference took place in Berlin where the delegates confirmed the new leadership of Saskia Esken and Norbert Walter-Borjans, and five new vice chairpersons among other executive figures. The SPD also approved a draft of social reforms which may be used to negotiate with the CDU/CSU coalition partners in the upcoming weeks.

Among the new vice chairpersons was 30-year-old Kevin Kühnert, the leader of the Young Socialists (Jusos), the SPD’s youth organization. Some voices have argued that no other youth politician has been as powerful as Kühnert.

During the party conference, some significant decisions were also made. Namely, the SPD eventually, and surprisingly for some hasty commentators, decided to continue to support Merkel’s current grand coalition government with the majority of the SPD delegates voting against a motion to quit the party. Saskia Esken stressed that she was and still is “sceptical about the future of this grand coalition. But with this resolution, we give the coalition a realistic chance of continuing – no more, no less.”

However, it is likely that the new leaders will be inclined to renegotiate the terms under which they will continue to lend their support to Merkel’s government. The SPD’s new co-leaders are in favour of tougher climate protection measures, much more investment in Germany’s infrastructure and a rise in the so-called minimum wage. But these issues will not be raised as an ultimatum, since the party seeks to remain in the coalition.

Following the party conference, however, some polls stated that the votes of the SPD are still decreasing, while others stressed a limited increase. For instance, according to the Emnid surveys, the SPD increased 1 point and achieved 16 percent while the Greens, stood at 20 percent (CDU: 28, AfD: 13, FDP: 9, Left Party: 8). According to another polling institution (Forsa), the SPD decreased its votes to 11 percent subsequent to the election of the new co-leaders, and therefore further deteriorated its popularity among already averse voters.

In addition to the obvious lack of a hopeful mood among German voters regarding the new SPD leadership, it is likely that the party will try to insist on a more left-leaning tax and fiscal approach in the coalition government. Though, it is striking that leading CDU and CSU figures have also started to urge the Social Democrats not to blackmail the coalition partner, as the CDU’s chairperson and defence minister, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer recently stated. According to Kramp-Karrenbauer, it is not acceptable to make preconditions such as “if these requirements are not met, then we go.”

Moreover, a leading CDU politician, Armin Laschet, criticized the SPD decisions to invest an additional 450 billion Euros in the upcoming years, stating that it had nothing to do with Germany’s current problems. Laschet also explained that there was already a huge budget, but the problems in Germany were not due to a lacking budget but obstacles in the fields of planning and approval procedures. According to Laschet, what was needed was the acceleration of these processes in order to develop required infrastructure.

Given the current conditions, it seems that in the upcoming weeks, particularly after the Christmas break, a tense talk on the continuation of the coalition might be very likely, despite current pro-coalition positions by the SPD leadership. The main problem though is the centre-left’s general lack of future perspectives. Even though the party was recently able to cement its ambitions to return to actual social-democratic policies it is unlikely that these policies can be implemented by the new co-leaders, who do not cause any kind of euphoria among the masses.

The rising popularity of the far-right in general, and, more importantly from the SPD’s perspective, the increasing support of the ecological Greens Party among centre-left circles, is increasingly threatening the 150 years old SPD. Thus, their goal of extending the party’s current votes  up to 30 percent of the electorate during the next federal elections is unconvincing given the new party program. Whether the new party program will be the only component to remerge as a successful centrist party, or whether other important factors need to be considered will be the most pressing task facing the SPD, the answers to which the SPD would need to soon find and immediately implement.

This past Saturday, the junior partner of the coalition government, the Social Democrats (SPD) announced the party’s election of its new co-leaders Norbert Walter-Borjans and Saskia Esken. It was a surprise that these two won, as the current Vice Chancellor and Finance Minister Olaf Scholz and his partner, Klara Geywitz, were expected to be elected by the party’s members. Nevertheless, the SPD base decided that Walter-Borjans and Esken will lead the party. The pair previously pushed for renegotiation of the coalition between the SPD and Chancellor Merkel’s CDU. It must kept in mind that over the past 10 years, there has been a CDU/CSU-SPD coalition government, which according to some circles is harming the country’s traditional political balance.

The results have been evaluated partly as a shock for the Berlin political establishment and elites while some media outlets used a more negative tone. Media representatives commented on the results with headlines like: “the SPD is abolishing itself”, “adieu, social democrats”, “the end of the grand coalition” and other similar negative statements and predictions. This is actually based on the fact that the new leaders previously stated that they will insist on renegotiating the current coalition agreement at the SPD party convention this upcoming Friday. Delegates will have to decide on the future of the remaining two years of the coalition.

How can the current conditions and the general perspective within the framework of German politics be assessed and evaluated?

First of all, the results should be taken cautiously into consideration without positive or negative exaggerations. Even though some supportive voices of the grand coalition describe the SPD’s vote as a negative outcome, it is no doubt a fact that this represents the SPD’s legitimate will – and is not limited to the votes of certain delegates. Some criticize the fact that a small number of SPD members, who took part in the elections (217,000), will determine the future of the country’s federal government. However, this kind of comparison is not fair or even acceptable because every party has its own legitimate means to determine who will lead and make decisions.

As a comparison, it shouldn’t be forgotten that in the past year, the Liberals (FDP), which on several occasions acted as the junior partner of the CDU-led coalition government, were the key actors in deciding the country’s future government for four years – despite having a low number of votes in comparison to other rival parties. Thus, in such situations, which are actually influenced by the country’s parliamentary tradition, the question arises, who decides where the line of legitimacy is to be drawn, and which point of view is the most legitimate one?

The second point regarding the new SPD duo and the future of the coalition government has to be addressed from the point of view of the party’s legitimate self-evaluation. It is no secret that the SPD’s popularity among voters has decreased more and more while it has participated in grand coalition governments. The building of coalition governments has not contributed to the SPD’s popularity but has had the opposite effect. Therefore, some voices in the party have called for a return to fundamental social-democrat positions and to reject positions that continuously resemble those of the CDU/CSU. Whether it is true that the SPD is increasingly resembling the CDU or vice versa is another interesting issue, which, however, goes beyond the limits of this piece. Nevertheless, the image of two main German centrist parties permanently echoing the same policy lines has disturbed both voters on the centre-left and centre-right.

If delegates ultimately come to a decision that ends the grand coalition government at Friday’s SPD convention, then Merkel will search for a new but unlikely coalition (with the Greens or/and FDP), or she will make efforts to govern the country under a minority government – an unprecedented situation in post-1945 Germany, and a situation which Chancellor Merkel does not favour and has ruled out several times. If both potential options also fail, new elections will be held subsequent to a pseudo-confidence vote which will intentionally trigger an early election. However, it is a risky move due to the obvious threat by the far-right AfD which may have the potential to increase even more of its votes and thus unfortunately become the country’s second largest party.

For this reason, the Social Democrats have to think carefully about where they currently stand and what kind of effect their upcoming decisions may have on the entire country’s future. In contrast to the other duo (Scholz and Geywitz), the new co-leaders Walter-Borjans and Esken seem very unpredictable, which, most likely will change once they are confronted with the reality federal politics. As one has witnessed recently, both politicians are currently in favour of not immediately ending the coalition at the party convention, despite heavy pressure from left-wing members of the party to conduct an election on the future of the coalition.

Over the past years the reputation and popularity of the SPD has gradually decreased, but whether this will fundamentally change by switching to the opposition is ultimately a risky gamble. As one of the previous SPD chairpersons and one of Germany’s most famous politicians, Franz Müntefering, recently stated, at the end of the day the voters will show whether they accept the decision to switch to the opposition, a decision Müntefering believes the people will not welcome.

As a final word, it is a very situation case that a high-profile political figure such as Olaf Scholz, who was once the Vice Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, was not able to be elected as a co-leader by his own party. This is an issue or problem that parliamentary systems appear to be occasionally facing. The same uncertainty also applies to prime ministers/chancellors and various types of coalition combinations which may occur subsequent to elections if the people’s will is not represented in the subsequently established coalitions.

The 32^nd federal party convention of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) will be held in East Germany’s city of Leipzig this upcoming Friday and Saturday (22-23 November). During this convention, a new leader will not be elected but the future projections of the party will be addressed and determined. Given the fact that the Social Democrats (SPD), the junior partner of the current grand coalition government since March 2018, are also heading into the final phase of their leadership search at the end of this month, the CDU’s party convention might be of general relevance and importance too.

In order to clarify the party’s future plans and goals during the convention, CDU party chairperson and the federal minister of defence Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer called on her opponents to openly state their criticisms thus paving the way for possible controversial debates during the convention. It is a move that Kramp-Karrenbauer most likely hopes will present her as a strong leader who is able to cope with harsh criticism from her party’s ranks.

Kramp-Karrenbauer’s more recent decisions have been the subject of criticism by other party members, such as her surprising call for an internationally controlled safe zone in Northern Syria. Party members have also called for a new negotiation of the current coalition with the Social Democrats. However, in a recently published interview, Kramp-Karrenbauer once again stated that there were no concerns about the existing coalition agreement with the CSU and SPD and thus rejected new negotiations on it.

Furthermore, the youth organization of the party called for a new process to determine the party’s future chancellor candidate which would involve the participation of all CDU members. This recommendation was interpreted as a challenge against AKK personally. But the youth organization is not the only group seeking a new process, five other CDU associations on the state and local levels are also in agreement. However, it is expected that these recommendations will be rejected at the convention, despite the youth organization’s suggestions being taken into serious consideration by the party members.

Kramp-Karrenbauer on the other hand, has constantly tried to portray a rather strong and self-confident image of herself while calling her party’s members to criticize and even discredit the CDU’s policies, and she does this by pointing to the positive achievements of the CDU’s coalition since 2005. However, more recently Kramp-Karrenbauer has become self-critical of her one year performance as chairperson and the party’s decreasing vote shares according to polls.

In addition to several criticisms against Kramp-Karrenbauer, it seems that she still trying to hold a stable position which her intra-party opponents –at least at the moment– do not dare to challenge openly. However, recent polls indicate that for CDU members Kramp-Karrenbauer is not the most popular figure as the next chancellor candidate, but Friedrich Merz. For the moment, however, Merz is not openly challenging Kramp-Karrenbauer, who he lost the leadership race to last December. During that leadership contest, Kramp-Karrenbauer received 517 of the 999 all valid votes while Merz only received 482 votes. Whether a rather different result might occur today is an interesting question which has not been not openly addressed. This is actually related to Merz’ most likely secure strategy.

Merz currently denies any kind of “showdown” at the convention against the CDU chairperson and also strengthened his official stance supporting her. However, even though Merz rejects any kind of a debate on a new chairperson of the CDU, he has said that he will continue his critical statements concerning specific issues.

The CDU currently elects the chancellor candidate within narrow party committees where Merz would have less chances to persuade the party’s delegates. But if all CDU members would be able to determine the next chancellor candidate then Merz would have more chances compared with Kramp-Karrenbauer. Although Merz officially does not favour such an option, at least for the moment, his supporters have tried to push for this method. Therefore, it seems that Merz will eventually welcome some new processes for the election of the party’s future chancellor candidate.

On this upcoming Friday and Saturday, the CDU is unlikely to challenge its current chairperson. The party’s leading figures will most likely address other topics, among them Turkey’s EU process, which will be also problematized once again, and most likely in a rather unfortunate way due to Turkey’s recent legitimate operation in Northern Syria. But the leadership question of the CDU will most likely continue to be on the party’s table at least until the next parliamentary elections in 2021. Until then, it seems a very clever move by Merz not to risk any chances to challenge the current chairperson Kramp-Karrenbauer who he would most likely lose against, a loss that might result in the end of his political career. Due to this, Merz prefers to officially support Kramp-Karrenbauer while simultaneously continuing to appear as an alternative in any future leadership crisis, something which might occur in the next months.

While Merz is most likely aiming to solidify his own position as a long-lasting alternative, Kramp-Karrenbauer must currently persuade her party members of her future performance. In addition, the SPD’s ongoing leadership search and their final decision in December whether to continue the coalition with the CDU is also an important topic that concerns the entire coalition.

For a long time, Germany’s political system has been regarded as stable without any need for change. However, recently some voices have begun calls for reform. Among them is Germany’s Federal Minister for Economic Affairs and Energy, Peter Altmaier, a close ally of Chancellor Angela Merkel. He recently called for a fundamental reform of Germany’s political procedures, which should be launched even this year. In a German newspaper, Altmaier wrote that “it seems as if the traditional political system of our country has been in a kind of permanent crisis” pointing to the recent state elections in Thuringia, where the Left Party and the far-right AfD received more than 50 percent of the votes.

Altmaier argued, that “it’s no longer about any new chairman, chancellor candidate or minister, it’s not about coalition compromises, it’s about fundamental issues of trust and acceptance”. According to Altmaier, “politics would be responsible, when the proportion of voters who no longer voted for a party represented in the German government had doubled”. Altmaier thus states that all parties – particularly the big parties – should be ready for fundamental political changes that will involve citizens into the decision-making process.

However, his concrete proposals are currently limited to reducing the number of members of the German parliament (Bundestag). Although the German constitution requires a minimum number of 598 MPs, there are currently 709 MPs in the Bundestag. The disparity in the number of seats can be explained by Germany’s electoral system which awards seats on the basis of votes received for individual constituencies and a party list. Procedures that aim to balance the outcomes between these two categories create so called overhang seats (Überhangmandate) in which further seats are added to party’s total allocation. More recently, this system has been accused of unfairly favoring the CDU.

According to Altmaier, however, the number should gradually be reduced to an “appropriate number” and the number of cabinet ministers should also be limited to fifteen. In addition, the high number of secretaries of state (currently 35), and government employees should also be reduced by one third in the next government’s tenure. Finally, Altmaier also suggests that the tenure in the federal legislature should be increased from four to five years, and that federal and state elections should coincide; that is to say, Altmaier does not agree that there should be a permanent mood of election campaigning in the country due to state and federal elections taking place during different times, and which also has an impact on the federal government’s agenda.

Until now, Altmaier’s calls have not led to any actual serious debate though some opposition politicians from the Free Democratic Party (FDP) and Greens have criticized Altmaier and his CDU for being responsible for the current conditions. They blame Altmaier and his government for increasing the number of secretaries of state. On the other hand, the FDP blasted Altmaier for not talking with his own party about the matter and instead talking to the media.

A further criticism came from the AfD, who argued that the fact that secretaries of state as members of the executive are also simultaneously MPs of the legislative body undermines the separation of powers. However, it is not clear what kind of a solution Germany’s parliamentary system should bring regarding the AfD’s criticism. Furthermore, besides prime ministers or chancellors, nearly all cabinet members are also members of the parliament, and although this may not be the best way of separating powers, it is actually quite typical across parliaments.

Furthermore, a few days later and independently from Altmaier’s remarks, the leader of the FDP, currently in the federal opposition, also called also for a substantial change to current regulations. Christian Lindner proposed a two-term limit on the tenure of the German Chancellor to 5+5 years. Some senior voices opposed this idea stressing that German citizens decide every four years who can be the Chancellor, and, that Germany is not a presidential democracy where term limits are meaningful. However, others supported Lindner’s –call.

The question of who should decide what arises. In Germany, the Chancellor is elected by the Bundestag, not by the citizens. In a presidential democracy, the citizens directly elect the president. Thus, it is also asked why term limitations should be wrong in Germany while being right in a presidential democracy?

Well, as one notices, there are currently some occasions for debating Germany’s political system which has become even more interesting due to the decreasing importance of centrist parties over the last couple of years. In such conditions, a country with a robust political system or system of government generally will proves itself against several challenges. Given Altmaier’s and Lindner’s proposals, it seems that the long-lasting tenure of Chancellor Angela Merkel has highlighted some difficulties regarding Germany’s post-1945 parliamentary democracy, even though there are not that many voices both in political and media circles that have raised these issues.

Besides Altmaier’s somewhat superficial proposals, it’s with no doubt a meaningful idea to consolidate federal and (16) state elections, which currently causes a de facto permanent election environment. This most likely constrains already fragile coalition governments at the federal level, particularly recently. A fresh debate concerning new opportunities or even proposals about the political system would not be that bad for Germany. However, it should be kept in mind that making some fundamental changes to the system will not eliminate problems caused by the rise of the extreme right and left. For this, other a changes in political content as well as structural adjustments are needed.

The Social Democrats of Germany are still searching for dual-leadership from which they hope to escape from the party’s current lack of perspective and prospects. Given the results of the Thuringia state elections, the once strong centrist party of Germany is increasingly heading towards becoming a marginal one, which will most likely have serious difficulties in achieving the five percent voter threshold at the state level, and perhaps also at the federal level. As I previously addressed, Germany’s Social Democrat Party (SPD) has had a fundamental problem of maintaining its chairpersons. The party witnessed several chairpersons who were not able to receive the necessary support both from the party’s base and leading figures in the party’s senior circles. Even despite this, since 2013 the SPD has interestingly insisted on continuing to be the junior partner of Chancellor Merkel’s grand coalition governments.

In the last 24 months, the party had an overrated chairperson, Martin Schulz, who became SPD chairperson with 100 percent of the party’s votes, but resigned subsequent to the party’s federal election losses in September 2017. Then, Schulz’ successor Andrea Nahles, became the first female chairperson of the party in its more than 150 year history. However, due to several failures and miscalculations regarding the state elections, during which the SPD faced and still faces a decreasing and catastrophic voting trend, Nahles also resigned as chairperson.

The party then decided to elect its chairperson through a vote of all of its 420 thousand members. Currently, the party is being led by an interim leadership-trio. For the first time, several co-candidates declared their candidacy. Approximately 53.3 percent of the SPD members voted in the election, in which twelve co-candidates ran. However, no candidate was able to achieve an absolute majority in the first round. Consequently, a second round of voting will be scheduled between 19 and 29 November. Following this date, the results of the winning duo will be declared at the SPD party convention in early December. The interesting point is that on this convention day the SPD will also decide their future as part of the grand coalition as well.

The current Finance Minister and Vice Chancellor Olaf Scholz and his running mate, Klara Geywitz, received most of the votes (22.68%) in the first round, followed by Norbert Walter-Borjans and Saskia Esken (21.04%). Resulting in both of these duos achieving the right to run for the party’s new co-leadership in the second round.

Polls indicate that 37 percent of members want to see Walter-Borjans and Saskia Esken as the party’s new co-leaders, while only 25 percent support Scholz and Geywitz. However, 38 percent of those polled do not support any of the co-candidates. On the other hand, leading political figures such as the SPD’s current foreign minister Heiko Maas, or the former chairperson Martin Schulz, have recently declared their support for the Scholz-Geywitz duo. Similarly, media outlets also suggest that Germany’s current Finance Minister Scholz is the favorite to lead the SPD together with Geywitz.

In the next weeks, SPD members will ultimately have a new chairperson on whom party members will set their hopes. However, in reality choosing new leadership will not guarantee that the existing obstacles within the party, and dismal predictions at the ballot will find any resolutions. But the fact that Maas and Schulz, prominent figures of the SPD, have shown support for Scholz and Geywitz, indicates the possibility of a continuation of a political line which may not be not so attractive from the point of view of voters seeking more promising change.

It is also very debatable whether the current method of electing a new chairperson of the SPD is the best one. It does not seem very convincing that a new top-leader and a potential candidate for chancellor will emerge with this kind of extended and unexciting election process.

Finally, it is a fact that the German Finance Minister Olaf Scholz only narrowly received most of the votes during the first round, which then triggered the second round. This indicates that all of the SPD’s candidates have a similar support rate, and further suggests the lack of a new and exciting mood within the party. In reality, any potential successful chairperson of a major centrist party will have to deliver much more than what Social Democrat circles are currently offering. It is clear that the current mood and choice of candidates signal that there will not be any extraordinary changes for the SPD in general, which hardly seems an appropriate development to stem the tide of voter dissatisfaction and a growing right-wing populist trend.

Last Monday, Germany’s Defense Minister and Chairperson of the Christian Democrats (CDU), Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer (AKK), surprisingly raised a proposal for an internationally controlled safe zone in northern Syria. AKK who is currently Chancellor Merkel’s preferred successor, stated that Germany “cannot just stand by and watch and not do anything” about Syria, while outlining her safe zone suggestion, one that which would be internationally controlled and involve Turkey and Russia.

Following her statements, the question arose as to whether she had shared this idea with her coalition partners, and above all, with the actual office responsible for foreign issues, namely, Germany’s Federal Foreign Office and its Social Democrat (SPD) foreign minister, Heiko Maas.

However, it became clear that neither the SPD nor the junior coalition partner, the Christian Social Union (CSU) and its leader Markus Söder, were informed about AKK’s ambitious proposal. Consequently, a dispute occurred behind closed doors between the coalition partners, and the proposal as well as the possible deployment of German troops to northern Syria was severely contested.

The foreign minister’s initial comments also revealed the uncomfortable mood among the coalition members. Maas stated publicly that there were some unanswered questions and that Germany had received skepticism from its EU allies. He added that there was no current discussion among partners to create such an international safe zone, and criticized the time and style in which the proposal was made.

Despite similar irritation and silent criticism by other SPD members, it seems that CDU officials instead supported the defense minister in a quasi-obligatory way, while opposition parties criticized AKK’s proposal. For instance, the Left Party called the proposal “ridiculous”, while the Greens stated that the proposal raised more questions than answers. Interestingly, the former SPD chairman and foreign minister, Sigmar Gabriel, welcomed AKK’s proposal on its content.

Neither the SPD nor the junior coalition partner, the Christian Social Union (CSU) were informed about AKK’s ambitious proposal.

In the following days, though, AKK accused Turkey of annexing parts of northern Syria which consequently caused a backlash even from the German public. Thus, some opposition members harshly criticized the defense minister for spreading “false information” while others described her as “incompetent on such issues”. AKK’s usage of the term “annexation” showed her lack of knowledge regarding military issues. It is generally accepted that there is no intention of a permanent integration of northern Syria into Turkey, which makes AKK’s assertion even more unacceptable.

One day following her public proposal, AKK did not receive the hoped for support from other NATO defense ministers. Furthermore, this recent weekend, Foreign Minister Maas made a surprise visit to Ankara, where he indirectly criticized his colleague’s safe zone proposal. When he was asked about the unclear plan, Maas answered “we were told it was not realistic. Therefore, we prioritized issues that are more important for us at the moment.”

Given the current circumstances; how should we comment on these recent events? It is quite interesting to observe that AKK is preferring to use language which stresses that the situation in Syria is massively compromising the security interests of Germany and Europe. She also criticized both actors for acting too much like “onlookers” and argued that only “a political initiative from Germany for a European advance through NATO makes sense.” But what may be AKK’s main purpose and interest in proposing such an unrealistic step, one which even the German Foreign Minister had to dismiss during his recent visit in Ankara?

Actually, it is no doubt a risky step that aimed to increase her political importance and public popularity, which has been gradually decreasing over the past couple of months. In addition, the recent blow in the Thuringia state elections has also been related to AKK’s performance as the CDU chairperson.

Therefore, as the potential future German chancellor, AKK most likely made a move to achieve a success story on an international platform. This, however, did not receive that much support and even deteriorated the intra-coalition relations, as Maas had stressed during his short-planned visit to Ankara, in which Maas made it clear that Germany’s foreign policy was not determined by the CDU leader and defense minister, but by his ministry. However, other CDU politicians and even opposition figures preferred to criticize Maas’ undiplomatic words that targeted (and even offended) their cabinet colleague.

At the end of the day, the move by the CDU leader will most likely not contribute positively towards her ambitions of becoming Germany’s next chancellor in 2021. Although her previous rival for chancellor, Friedrich Merz is not currently attacking her personally, he has focused attention instead on Chancellor Merkel as the main person responsible of the electoral defeat in Thuringia and other failings of the party. Importantly, Merz recently stressed that the current grand coalition could not continue until 2021.

While these were not direct criticisms of AKK, it can be surmised that such statements will ultimately affect the position of AKK herself, and the future of the coalition partnership as a whole. One which has suffered heavily due to the recent unplanned safe zone move by AKK and the undiplomatic reactions by the foreign minister abroad.

The state elections in Germany’s Saxony and Brandenburg states were held this past Sunday. As was previously expected, the far-right AfD heavily increased its votes, tripling it in Saxony and doubling it in Brandenburg.

The Christian Democrats (CDU) emerged as the final winner of the elections in Saxony with 32 percent of the votes, but suffered losses of around 7 points compared with 2014. While the AfD became the second strongest party in Saxony by receiving more than 27.5 percent of the votes. This means that the AfD made an increase of 17 points compared with 2014.

But one has to be careful when analyzing the results. A look back at the Saxony results from the September 2017 federal election will show that the AfD had also received 27 percent of the votes while the CDU had achieved only 26.9 percent at that time.

It cannot be said that the current election results are an actual success for centrist parties, especially the Social Democrats (SPD) which continued its trend of voter losses. However, the Saxon parliament results have been interpreted as a partial improvement by some optimistic voices, when compared with the September 2017 federal election results in Saxony. According to which the CDU even increased its votes from 26,9 to 32 percent.

On the other hand, when looking at the results across both states an unpleasant picture emerges. Namely, the AfD received the highest number of votes with a combined total of 892.959 votes, while the CDU came second with 892.483 votes. The SPD came third with only 498.618 votes in total. Thus, is it reasonable to talk about an actual victory of the CDU based on the facts?

The election in Brandenburg also revealed that the SPD (by achieving 26.2 percent of votes) is still a strong centrist party, at least in traditionally left-wing dominated federal states. Although the party has continued to lose votes at both the federal and state level – as was the case in Saxony where it received only 7.7 percent of the votes.

However, the gap between the SPD and the AfD in Brandenburg has narrowed. The AfD gained 23.5 percent of the votes in Brandenburg, separating the two parties by only 2.7 per cent. This becomes more significant if one notices that the conservative CDU achieved just 15.6 percent of the votes in Brandenburg – that is to say the AfD has now become second party of choice.

In a concerning outcome, one fourth of all the voters across both states voted in favor of a far-right or extremist party. This leads to the possible danger that the far-right will continue to be normalized within Germany’s political landscape. How far this trend will continue is still a main concern among Germany’s Christian democrats, as the main or closest de facto competitor of the far-rightists.

Besides the continuing risks of the far-right becoming mainstream and the increasing strength of the far-right within the political establishment, the focus now is on how the coalition governments will be shaped in the upcoming days. As one should remember, all major parties rejected a coalition with the AfD, but continuing with pre-existing coalitions in both states will not be enough to form a government. Each coalition will need to find an additional partner.

As predicted in a report published prior to the elections, it is likely that in Saxony the CDU will form a coalition together with the SPD and the Greens. In Brandenburg, a SPD-Left Party-Greens coalition might be formed as is currently case in the state of Berlin.

German media and politicians have also been focusing on the fact that surprisingly, the CDU did not lose even more votes to the AfD. The reason why this did not occur can be answered by pointing to the visible efforts of Saxony’s incumbent Minister President Michael Kretschmer (CDU). Kretschmer distanced himself from the federal CDU and also criticized CDU politicians such as Hans-Georg Maaßen, who often expressed stances similar to the AfD.

It seems most likely that some center-right voters were persuaded by Kretschmer’s dedicated personal stance. Whether an imitation of AfD rhetoric by a CDU politician would have resulted in the same outcome seems unlikely. It would likely be worse because voters are often biased towards the parties which are first to articulate a political message or movement, which in the sense of populist and far-right rhetoric is definitely epitomized by the AfD.

Regarding Brandenburg, it is argued that despite the fact that the SPD is still the strongest party, it is much more difficult to establish a stable coalition government consisting of three parties. The losses of the Left Party make it impossible to continue an SPD-Left Party coalition in Brandenburg.  This will most likely lead to a three-way coalition as it the case in Berlin. In the end, the elections are a quasi-success for the AfD in that in the long-term it destabilizes the previous political equilibrium in which centrist parties would dominate.

All in all, it is argued by Western media and politicians that a “nightmare” has not come true – for now. However, the next state elections will be held towards the end of October in Thuringia where the AfD is also strongly motivated. The bad news is when Thuringia’s election day arrives, the focus will not simply be on the CDU or SPD coming first at the ballot. This was recently the case last Sunday, and unfortunately distracted from the grim reality of both party’s losses in each state. In the short-term, the political elites from Germany’s centrist parties and those from the federal but fragile “grand coalition” government have been saved. But this must not mislead anyone.

As two German federal states Saxony and Brandenburg head to state elections on 1^st September, German political parties have increased their campaigns and statements.

With no doubt, most of the attention over the past few weeks has focused on the Saxony election campaign and the CDU’s activities both at the federal and state level, in particular the highly public inter-party conflict between senior CDU members. CDU’s federal chairperson, Annegret Kramp-Karenbauer, and CDU Minister President of Saxony, Michael Kretschmer, both had controversial disputes with the former chief of Germany’s federal domestic intelligence and fellow CDU member, Hans-Georg Maaßen. As a representative of the so-called “union of values” group, a right leaning faction within the CDU, Maaßen was supporting the CDU in their election campaign in Saxony, a state the CDU is losing ground to the right-wing AfD. He also attended some campaign events until he decided to stop supporting the CDU’s Saxony election campaign due to criticism he received from Kretschmer.

In the previous weeks, though, it was Kramp-Karrenbauer who surprisingly criticized Maaßen, even stating that: “There are high hurdles for expelling someone from the party, and for good reason. But when it comes to Mr. Maaßen’s attitude, I don’t see anything that really connects him with CDU”. This was interpreted as a call for Maaßen’s exclusion from the party. These statements provoked anger among CDU politicians, particularly in Saxony. Later on, Kramp-Karrenbauer revised her statement by saying that she did not mean a party ban for Maaßen, and that “the CDU is a party with more than 400.000 members, that makes everyone have their own opinion, that makes us interesting.”

Saxony’s incumbent Minister President Kretschmer, criticized Maaßen due to his campaign activities, leading Maaßen to declare that he will not participate in any further election activities in Saxony. He also added that he will concentrate on the CDU’s activities and election campaign in Brandenburg. This is despite the fact that Maaßen does not have any official roles nor any future goal of being elected in that state. Maaßens’s mood was remarkable as he stated that “I wanted to help my party in Saxony but if the Minister President Kretschmer does not see this as necessary, I quit and wish the CDU Saxony good luck!”

CDU cannot afford additional huge losses in Saxony and Brandenburg, which might also undermine the future position of Kramp-Karrenbauer as CDU’s federal chairperson.

Furthermore, Maaßen recently invited Kramp-Karrenbauer to meet in order to explain his positions. However, this was  indirectly rejected due to her busy election campaign agenda in Saxony.

These recent incidents can be viewed from a negative and positive point of view. On the one hand, it is quite a good sign that leading CDU figures have started to openly criticize Maaßen due to his stances that contradict the CDU’s main lines. Although there are some new perspectives within the party, following the main CDU party line is an aim by the party’s leaders. This is despite right-wing oriented groupings in the party openly comparing themselves with rightists and actually admiring AfD’s perspectives. In such circumstances, it is a difficult decision to determine at what point a center party can tolerate dissenting voices and where to draw a clear line in order to ensure the party’s unity.

Unfortunately, it also shows how populist sentiment has struck center parties, even as the CDU. Considering these issues, it needs to be reminded that there has been a huge lack of criticism of stances held by Maaßen’s or others within the party’s right wing. Consequently, keeping silent and allowing Maaßen to speak for a long time during an election campaign in Eastern Germany, can regarded as a miscalculation from leaders in the CDU.

Thus, it becomes clear that in the aftermath of the upcoming state elections on Sunday, the CDU will most likely clarify the party’s future positions by solving its intra-party conflicts. For this the party cannot afford additional huge losses in both federal states, which might also undermine the future position of Kramp-Karrenbauer as CDU’s federal chairperson.

Between 22 April 2018 and June 2019, one of Germany’s most central political parties, the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD), was led by Andrea Nahles, who was the first female leader in the party’s history. However, in June of this year, she announced her resignation as chairperson. Following this decision, the party now faces, once again, a leadership problem and an election to fill the role of chairperson will be held this October. Until that date, the party is being led by an interim leadership-trio. SPD members can declare their candidacy until September 1st. Candidates have the right to run alone or alongside a co-candidate. Without going into detail of the election process, it is worth mentioning that if the candidate(s) are not able to achieve an absolute majority in the first round, the election can go on to a second round of voting. Ultimately, the final results will be declared during the SPD party convention in early December.

It can be said that until now the SPD is going through an interesting but desperate path. Unfortunately, until last week, there have been no exciting candidates who have declared their interest in being the next chairperson. This is despite party members being able to declare their candidacy since 1 July. The only striking candidate until now has been Olaf Scholz, the incumbent federal minister of finance and vice chancellor of Germany. Scholz stated that he is willing to be a candidate due to the lack of interest by other prominent SPD figures. He previously ruled out being a candidate by pointing to his time constraints as a current federal minister. As expected, Scholz finally declared a female running mate to co-head the SPD, namely, a rather unknown SPD-politician and MP in Brandenburg’s state parliament, Klara Geywitz.

Scholz is considered to be a person who would bring more stability to Merkel’s shaky grand coalition, and is seen as a rather persuasive figure from an economic perspective. The chances of other candidates as the new chairperson are unlikely. But these speculations and discussions before and after the election of the SPD chairperson may be misleading. One of the SPD’s former leaders, Martin Schulz, received 100 percent of the votes when he was elected as the party’s new chairman in early 2017. Despite this overwhelming initial success, he ended his career as one of the most unsuccessful SPD leaders in its history.

If the SPD votes continue to decrease in Germany, the Greens may replace the SPD in the near future.

The SPD is currently a junior member of Chancellor Angela Merkel’s federal government coalition. In the last years, the SPD has suffered several disappointing election results. In upcoming elections in three federal states in the east of Germany, similar disastrous election results are expected. Under such deteriorating conditions, some SPD members have increasingly called for quitting their party membership unless the current coalition with Merkel’s conservative CDU/CSU continues. Current polls show that SPD’s votes range between 12 and 14 percent at the federal level while in some states the percentage is even less. It is argued that the desperate search for a new party leader has also decreased the number of potential votes. Besides that, since 2018, the SPD lost 37,000 members of its party members, from 463,723 to 426,352 members.

The current process in the SPD does not promise a successful post-election projection. It is not a secret that the SPD cannot properly articulate their differences from other leading parties such as the center-right CDU, and the Greens. If the SPD votes continue to decrease, the Greens may replace the SPD in the near future. Furthermore, the fact that Germany does not have a political tradition where political figures are in the foreground brings some difficulties when finding a new leader for a party. Political parties are the main focus in German politics while individual political personalities are less decisive in the overall party structure. This is in contrast to neighboring France, where a party leader is the most prominent figure in politics. In Germany, this creates conditions in which charismatic leaders do not easily emerge from the party’s own ranks. Not only for the SPD but for Germany’s conservatives who also face problems determining and electing new leaders able to trigger excitement and hope among the citizens. All in all, while the election of a new leader or co-leaders in the SPD is significant it will not solely determine the party’s future course.

In the upcoming months, elections of three federal state parliaments in Germany will be held. Elections in the states of Brandenburg and Saxony are both scheduled for 1 September 2019, while the elections in Thuringia will be held on 27 October 2019. These elections not only have implications at the federal state level but on a national level.

The importance of these elections are based on two fundamental points. First, the party or parties that receive the majority of votes will subsequently establish government which will govern the federal state for the next five years. Secondly, voters in each federal state also indirectly determine who will have a seat at the Bundesrat of Germany, the legislative body representing Germany’s sixteen states at the national level.

The new government of a state appoints members to the Bundesrat that will represent their state. The emergence of a new majority in the Bundesrat, which may oppose the federal government, might cause future challenges for the continuation of the current federal coalition government consisting of the CDU/CSU and SPD. This is based on the fact that legislative decisions of the Bundestag, Germany’s federal parliament, must also require approval from the Bundesrat. A function akin to the role of an upper house of parliament such as the House of Lords in the UK or the US Senate. Therefore, where there are opposing political parties representing each body, the process of consent can be frustrated limiting the legislative capacity of a governing party. This was the case in 2005, when the SPD-Greens federal coalition government called for early federal elections after it lost some state elections.

Germany will face a turbulent autumn during which the continuation of the current federal government will be tested.

Despite these possible political implications, more alarming problems might be faced in the near future. The likelihood that for the first time in German history since the end of the second world war, a far-right party may become the strongest party in a state and even form part of a government. Even though most moderate voices do not believe in this possibility, polls indicate differently. For example, recent polls on Saxony note that the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, represented in the Saxon state parliament since 2014, is currently receiving the most votes in the poll with 23 percent. This means that a far-right group are the strongest party in the most eastern part of Germany. On the other hand, the current coalition government in Saxony consisting of the Christian Democrats (CDU) and the Social Democrats (SPD)  received  only a combined total of 33 percent of the votes (CDU: 22 percent, SPD: 11 percent). An amount which will not be enough for the continuation of the current coalition government. According to the same polls, other parties in Saxony such as the Left Party received 14 percent while the Greens 11 percent.

The only good news –at the moment– are statements of the Christian Democrats who have ruled out the possibility of establishing a potential new coalition or cooperation with the far-right AfD. This leads to the likelihood that a potential CDU-led coalition government might consist of one, two or even three other coalition parties after election day.

There are clear differences between projected votes on a state and federal level. According to similar recent federal polls for instance, the CDU/CSU received 27 percent of the votes, while the AfD received only 12 percent. In addition, Germany’s second strongest party, the Greens’ achieve an average of 25 percent of votes at the national level, while the SPD receives 13 percent.

Whether a very weak government coalition in Germany’s three federal states will be established or a far-right party will win the elections is a question of great importance.

The ongoing election campaigns in Brandenburg, Saxony and Thuringia will also be shaped by developments at the federal level. For instance, discussion about the SPD’s potential new chairperson(s) which will be determined in October, how the federal government will continue its agenda and whether the alienation of German voters away from center parties will continue with the ongoing manipulative moves by far-rightist AfD politicians.

As demonstrated for instance, in a recent study which found that AfD members systematically overinflated the actual numbers of foreigners who were accused of crimes in Germany. Other developments do not seem very promising. A former and controversial high-ranking bureaucrat, who has received harsh criticism from center parties for statements and positions have resembled those of AfD politicians is now rumored to be a future interior minister within the ranks of the CDU in Saxony.

Germany will face a turbulent autumn during which the continuation of the current federal government will be tested. Whether a very weak government coalition in Germany’s three federal states will be established or a far-right party will win the elections is a question of great importance. Unfortunately, the rise of right-wing parties is a significant development that may seriously affect the current constellation of German politics in the long-run.

Since 2005, Germany’s strongest conservative party, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party, has undergone a quite remarkable transformation process during the Merkel era. Entering politics in former East Germany, Angela Merkel was politically active subsequent to the reunification of both German republics in 1990. Under former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl (CDU), who is known for his conservative opinions, Merkel became a minister in the early 90s, the party’s chairperson in 2000, and ultimately Germany’s first female Chancellor in 2005. Merkel has gradually made efforts to transform, or carefully stated, “to open” the traditional CDU in the direction of a rather liberal and migration friendly perspective. Furthermore, Merkel introduced policies considered to be much more line with those from social-democratic  environmental circles. Such as the goal to shut down all nuclear plants in Germany by 2022, the suspension of compulsory military service in Germany, allowing dual citizenship, and legalizing “marriage for all” in Germany.

By this, the conservatives received wide support from former critical circles while also transforming the CDU’s traditional electoral base to a certain degree. On the other hand, new parties have been established as a reaction to the perceived lack of an actual conservative party. Furthermore, far-right and even racist parties have become more successful in this period, reducing the traditional votes of the CDU.

While taking these developments into consideration, some interesting statements made recently by two of Germany’s major political parties have to be stressed.

First, the federal government’s conservative coalition partner and the CDU’s sister party, the Christian Social Union (CSU). Markus Söder, the CSU’s chairperson and minister-president of Bavaria, Germany’s largest state, recently stated that climate action should become a binding task for the state. He called for enshrining this action in Germany’s Basic Law, i.e., Germany’s constitution. This call resembles long-standing demand made by Germany’s Green Party, which the CSU had opposed the past. Furthermore, under the leadership of Söder, the CSU  aims to adopt their own federal climate concept in September 2019, which will also focus on issues such as a climate budget and proposals to reform the so-called motor-vehicle-tax.

The second recent statement of significance came from the Green Party’s co-leader Robert Habeck, a politician whose increasing popularity, is also mirrored in the Green party’s increasing popularity among voters according to current polls. Interestingly and not typically, Habeck called for greater efforts in fields of  ​“domestic security”. According to the Green Party leader, if someone does not respect the liberal-democratic values, one has to face the full pressure of the police. Actually, not strange statement for a usual political party in a democracy, however, Habeck stated these words during a talk with the chairperson of the Union of Police (GdP) Oliver Malchow.

Of course, no democrat should be surprised that a politician stresses the legitimate importance of a country’s police and its legitimate forces. However, it seems a bit interesting that more recently, Söder and Habeck are speaking in a way that is more traditional for the opposing party.  This becomes even more interesting if one notices that Habeck also recently stated that he can quite imagine active participation of Germany with regard to the Hormuz crisis on the side of a European mission – a statement which once again resembles the CDU/CSU’s traditional stances in contrast to the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), whose current foreign minister Heiko Maas ruled out such a possibility right at the beginning of the crisis. In the same sense, the CDU’s chairperson and the country’s new defense minister –and potential future Chancellor– Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer preferred a rather conciliatory note regarding the Hormuz issue, by implying that a final decision had not been made.

Ultimately, it seems that Germany’s political parties are going through a period of transformation. Whether these ongoing developments might challenge the current political landscape will most likely be shaped in the upcoming years until the next federal election in 2021. Therefore, one should not be surprised if a new coalition constellation will be formed. At least some signs can currently be observed.

It’s estimated that the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party convention on 7-8 December will concretize the likely future of German politics in a general perspective. On the one hand, it’s expected that a newly elected party chairperson will either cooperate with the current German Chancellor Angela Merkel in the format of a de-facto dual-head of the government or, on the other hand, trigger a new power struggle, in which Merkel won’t be able to end her current government until 2021. Thus, despite current polls stating that most Germans are satisfied with Chancellor Merkel and that circa 56 percent want her to serve out her full term until 2021, the December party convention result will clarify the uncertainties.

Will the new chairperson of the CDU cooperate with Angela Merkel, or will it give birth to a new power struggle? 

There are three different candidates running for CDU chairmanship, who aim to be elected as the new leader of Germany’s -sill- strongest conservative and center-right party. While the current secretary-general of the CDU, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, is as a close ally of Chancellor Merkel and who is supported by Merkel as a successor, both two other candidates are known as personalities opposing Merkel’s certain policies, such as migration and identity. Even though Friedrich Merz, a former active CDU-politician until 2009, does not accept that he has been reduced by media outlets to a so-called “anti-Merkel” image, the general political mood is perceived in this direction.

In addition, the current Federal Health Minister, Jens Spahn, who is also well-known for his sympathy regarding Austria’s populist and rightist young Chancellor, Sebastian Kurz, has also continuing hope to be successful during the party convention. But interestingly, despite some recent polls that indicate Kramp-Karrenbauer and Merz as the favorites, Spahn seems to have discovered how he might consolidate both CDU voters in general and the CDU delegates whose votes the candidates will need on 7-8 December.

Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, Friedrich Merz, and Jens Spahn are three candidates in the CDU race for presidency. Will the CDU remain on a pro-Merkel stance, or will it become more populist than ever? 

In this sense, it was not an unexpected move when Spahn recently addressed a very important topic for the German conservative and even rightist circles, namely, Turkey. Spahn stated that the accession talks between the EU and Turkey have to be ended due to the fact that “Everyone can see it, Turkey in its present state will never become a member of the EU. It would be honest to end the accession negotiations.”

My guess is that in the next days and in particular on the convention day, all three candidates will most likely address issues such as I) Turkey in general, II) Turks living Germany, III) Muslims in Germany, IV) dual citizenship of Turks living in Germany and V) Merkel’s refugee-friendly policies. In addition to the migration issue, emphasis may be placed on the Turkish community, Turkey, and Turkey’s EU path in general. Unfortunately, the declaration of similar –populist– positions have been seen witnessed several times in the past, and one should also keep in mind that not only conservatives in Germany but also certain leftist and social-democratic parties have thoughtlessly made use of accusing Turkey in order to consolidate their party constituent.

While the German media has begun to lightly discuss the distinctive features of the three candidates, one can expect for this to be the main agenda of Germany in the upcoming days. By this, the future goals in the case of becoming a potential CDU chairperson or even the next German chancellor must be elaborated in detail.

Both leftist and conservative parties in Germany have used Turkey in order to consolidate their party constituent. This is likely to happen during the race for CDU presidency. 

Due to this, some questions may be answered by the candidates in the coming weeks in order to exactly capture what their political position is, for instance, regarding relations with the United States. Do all three candidates agree with Chancellor Merkel in her backing of French President Macron’s initiative to establish a European army–even against the potential rejection by the U.S.–? What is the position of particularly Mr. Merz and Mr. Spahn with regard to these kinds of issues? We already know that Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer is quite close to Merkel, so the positions of Merz and Spahn would be more interesting to know.

Thus, similar additional concrete topics are also of great importance. For instance, what are the positions of these three Christian Democrats with regard to Muslims in Germany, German Muslims or Islam in Germany etc? Does Mr. Merz, who is currently known and active as a very business-friendly personality, still insist on his previously rightist position with regard to a so-called “German Leitkultur,” of which he was also the initiator? Furthermore, how do the candidates describe their main differences with regard to former policies of Chancellor Merkel, who was and still is being criticized for allegedly taking leftist positions. There are also several other issues, such as certain domestic and economic promises, which have to be addressed in a concrete way. Time will show whether we will have a fruitful debate on this issue until convention day, or whether populist topics will blockade our perceptions.

Germany is accepted as a successful case of a functioning parliamentary system of government. According to this, the main executive organ of the country’s system of government is dominated by a chancellor and his/her government, which is responsible to the parliamentary majority (Bundestag).

Germany is also a country that has lived through many years of coalition, with either conservative-led or social-democratic-led governments with an additional junior coalition partner. “Grand coalitions” have also been established in the past, in 2005, and this year in March 2018, when Germany’s two largest parties, the CDU/CSU and the SPD came together.

My main emphasis in this piece is that Chancellor Merkel’s recent decision to leave her party’s leadership will affect the country’s ever more complicating parliamentary structure in the long run.

Merkel became her party’s chairperson in 2000 right after her era as the party’s secretary general, during which she challenged the former German Chancellor and her mentor, Helmut Kohl (CDU). In 2005, Merkel defeated the social-democratic Chancellor, Gerhard Schröder while Schröder himself underestimated Merkel during that federal election – consequently it was the end of Schröder’s active political career.

Since then, Merkel has been ruling the country as Chancellor and has simultaneously transformed the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) into a more centrist, European-oriented, and a modern one. In the last 18 years as chair and 13 years as Chancellor, there have been many changes that may be addressed in the upcoming months, and years, following Merkel’s depart from the CDU in early December.

Even though Merkel always stressed the importance of combining the office of the Chancellor with the party’s leadership as a necessary act, she announced her decision to step down from being chair of the CDU. In addition, she added that she will not be a candidate (for the fifth time) during the federal elections in 2021.

I do not want to address in depth the apparent reasons as to why Merkel made such a decision to leave  the party leadership. As is addressed by several authors (I>;II), the decision is mostly based on the party cadres’ continuing pressure against Merkel and her both refugee-friendly policies and the high losses during the recent elections in Bavaria and Hesse. Furthermore, the disappearance of actual conservative politics in Germany and the CDU’s increasing resemblance with left-liberal parties caused an increase of far-right parties, which are ultimately seen as an “alternative” to the conservative and center-right parties such as the CDU/CSU.

However, in my opinion, the main interesting point in the recent developments is the party’s instruments that put pressure on the party leader and Chancellor Merkel. This mechanism is quite normal for a parliamentary system, which is the case in Germany. However, there has not been a broad discussion with regard to Germany’s system of government and the question regarding the election of the executive, there are some contemporary key points that need to be addressed.

Above all, during a time where presidents and certain prime ministers (or Chancellors as in Germany or Austria) are becoming more popular and becoming the main focus of the electorate, the question arises as to whether a German executive might be elected by popular vote as well. For instance, one might ask what would be the outcome if the executive organ would be directly elected by a popular vote, as in the United States, or a closer example, like in the case of France?

While Macron as the head of the executive has a direct connection to French citizens, Merkel has to struggle within her party and make several concessions to achieve a limited goal.

Similarly, Bünyamin Bezci rightly stressed that President Emmanuel Macron, who is also the key actor in France’s pro-European political perspective, has a broader field of executive action in contrast to Chancellor Merkel. While Macron as the head of the executive has a direct connection to French citizens through his popular election legitimacy, Merkel has to struggle within her party and try to make several and sometimes contradictory concessions in order to achieve a certain limited goal.

Furthermore, while according to polls most of Germany’s citizens still support Merkel as the country’s most popular political leader, the party structures are the main decision bodies. One of the striking points here is the fact that Merkel is elected by the German parliament while the French executive has a direct legitimacy based on the decision of its electorate. Thus, the image of a constitutionally strong and powerful Chancellor occurs, who is actually able to quasi-dominate the entire EU in general while she is, though, not able to stand against the own party’s complicated structures.

What would be the result in German politics if the head of the executive would be elected with a popular vote?

What would be the result in German politics if the head of the executive would be elected with a popular vote? Perhaps this question might be on Germany’s future political agenda. There are currently too many parties in the German party system, which might hinder the establishment of well-functioning coalition governments. Thus, alternative possibilities will be most likely considered.

It is time for change in German political system in an era in which “presidentialization and personalization of politics” is taking place globally.

In this sense, it might be interesting to mention that in the near past there have been some discussions in the context of the election of the federal president of Germany. While some voices and nearly 70 percent of the population supported political reform for popularly electing the president, some have opposed this idea due to difficulties and bad experiences in reference to Germany’s political history. But time is changing and Germany might need optimizing its own political system during an era when “presidentialization and personalization of politics” are globally and increasingly becoming obvious and common. We will try to continue and address similar questions and discussions in the upcoming weeks in a more theoretical point of view.