After the German elections - The balancing act of the future PM in an increasingly hostile world
The German elections are over. The coalition of socialists, liberals and greens lost the election, and thus their government leader Chancellor Olaf Scholz will likely be replaced by CDU leader Friedrich Merz, a politician turned banker turned politician again who said during the elections that there will be a turn away from an economy based on climate actions, just when climate actions remain important, certainly now that the USA pulled out of the Paris climate agreement and wants to drill more gas and oil to use.
This becomes reality: economy and growth before climate measures. Also in Germany, and as it is Europe's leading country, this will become policies throughout Europe. Yes, the more it becomes clear climate change will cost billions of euros, the less we do while we'll speak about more growth. Capitalism, its own doom as growth is its only way forward.
Still, there are now more urgent matters as Russia invaded a European country. And while more investments again in fossil fuels may harm the world, let us hope it may also contribute that those who start wars will be defeated by climate change.
Although democratic parties won the election, the rise of the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) is remarkable, especially in East Germany. This trend has been ongoing for years. The influence of South African Elon Musk’s campaign efforts in this outcome will likely be investigated.
The solution is not to simply accept that "nothing can be done" because of the nature of Eastern Germans. Instead, politicians should actively engage with East German communities outside of Berlin—not just during election periods. They need to listen to people's concerns, address them, and create high-quality jobs. When people struggle, they tend to vote against the status quo. Seeing West Germany in a better economic position, East Germans vote differently than their western counterparts. If West Germany were to face economic hardship—such as rising food prices due to climate change destroying crops and also President Trump's tariffs—it could follow a similar voting pattern as the East, especially if economic inequality continues to widen. Still, investments in Germany's economy may increase such as to improve its crumbling railway system but also military as Germany's parliament voted in favour of investments worth hundreds of billions of euros.
History shows that revolutions happen when inequality reaches extreme levels. However, as long as acts of terrorism—committed primarily by Muslim extremists, whether foreign/religious or not—continue to occur, as seen just before the elections, the shift toward the right may be unstoppable. Whether through the rise of the extreme right or the radicalization of mainstream parties to combat terrorism, the political landscape is likely to shift. Trump's rise in the U.S. was also fueled by the aftermath of 9/11. This shift to the right is likely not limited to Germany but may happen throughout Europe. As long as this shift will protect society from extremists, this is normal, but Trump's rise shows that innocent people such as LGBTQs are also targeted by those right-wing politicians, even when they hate the Taliban and ISIS who also targeted LGBTQs. Therefore, the future Chancellor will have to be strict against (potential) terrorists without overreacting towards a whole group of people; not always an easy task.
---
Israel
The future German Chancellor no longer aligns with the policies of his predecessor regarding Israel. He appears to side with U.S. President Donald Trump, supporting Israel’s actions in Gaza, including the displacement of Palestinians and the destruction of their communities. These policies have persisted for decades, with Israel now blocking even more Palestinians from returning to the West Bank, and even actively killing aid workers. Over 50,000 Palestinians died, and this likely will further increase as bombings of and refusal to allow humanitarian aid in the Gaza Strip continues.
Germany’s unwavering support for Israel is largely rooted in its historical guilt over the Holocaust during which it killed six million Jews, and many others who are less recognised. As a result, other people are now suffering in an attempt to atone for past atrocities against Jews. In line with this stance, Friedrich Merz has invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to visit Germany—even as the International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued an arrest warrant against him. In this, he seems to align with Hungarian PM who welcomed PM Netanyahu in Budapest after he was invited.
This creates a legal and moral dilemma: If the future Chancellor truly upholds the ICC’s authority, than PM Netanyahu’s visit would require his arrest, which is politically unthinkable. However, ignoring the ICC’s warrant would undermine Germany’s commitment to international law. Does the Chancellor have the power to order German judges to disregard the ICC? Can Germany’s legal system simply overlook a warrant issued by an international court? In that case, will Germany accept that the ICC cannot order to arrest Russia's President Putin? Thus, the ICC does not need to exist if it is ignored by everyone.
Mr Merz has already stated that he will find a way to allow Netanyahu to visit without risk of arrest; a way out may be to follow Hungary's lead to leave the ICC. Meanwhile, Israel continues to expand its actions against the original inhabitants of the West Bank. Given Germany’s own history of forced displacement and genocide, it is troubling that its leadership appears comfortable inviting PM Netanyahu under these circumstances.
Critics argue that Western countries selectively use the ICC against non-white leaders, even though some former Yugoslavian leaders have been prosecuted. But can history continue to serve as an excuse for allowing current atrocities? We have a duty to ensure all people can live in dignity, rather than closing our eyes to present injustices in an attempt to atone for past sins. Otherwise, we risk becoming complicit in new ones.
PM Netanyahu may ultimately find himself unable to visit Germany—much like Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet, who was arrested in Spain despite believing he could travel freely for medical treatment.
In conclusion on the issue of Israel, the future German Chancellor and USA President Trump appear closely aligned. But will this alliance last? Trump is not known for offering support without expecting something in return. He has already expressed interest in developing the Gaza Strip. What will be the cost of his involvement? Could it be linked to plans for rebuilding the Temple in Jerusalem? At least Germany may not demand compensation for defending Israel as the USA does to rebuild Gaza, or may I be wrong? If only Germany had not done its evil, or given half of its territory to Jews, they didn't need to flee to the territory of other people.
---
Ukraine
Friedrich Merz remains a strong supporter of Ukraine. However, there is a striking contradiction in how the world views territorial disputes. While Jews have spent centuries striving for an exclusive homeland in Israel from which European rulers removed them about 2000 years ago—justifying the displacement of Palestinians—Russia’s invasion of neighbouring Ukraine is, or more precisely, was met with rightful global outrage. Ukraine only became independent recently, yet it was once part of Russia under the USSR.
For Russian President Vladimir Putin, Ukraine’s independence and the loss of Soviet influence over Eastern Europe are not distant historical events; they happened within his lifetime. Many countries would not accept this such as Belgium where people continue to claim staying together is best and then complain it takes long to form a Belgian government. Also the Spanish government and jurisdiction do not allow that the Basque Country and Catalonia become independent. Similar with UK's Scotland and Northern Ireland. To name only a few countries.
Put this further into perspective where Russia, which sacrificed millions of lives in WWII, saw its influence dramatically diminished with the collapse of the USSR while at that time, Germany was able to reunify after its division as punishment because it started WWII that resulted in the loss of millions of lives. Further, Germany seemed to benefit more from WWII than countries that fought against it as I will discuss further below under Europe. This is why Putin labels pro-Western Ukrainians as "Nazi's"—to him, opposing Russia is equivalent to opposing those who once fought Hitler. This also explains Trump's but also many Brexiters' dislike for Germany.
Yet, Russia's own actions have alienated many who might have remained loyal. After WWII, people in the USSR and in Eastern Europe lived under dictatorship of which Stalin's was the worst. Further, Putin’s persecution of political opponents, assassinations abroad that included the use of radioactivity, and his aggressive expansionism with support of dictators have made Russia synonymous with authoritarianism. His invasion of Ukraine has reinforced the perception that Russia cannot be trusted.
In conclusion on Ukraine, it will not be easy to find a solution as Russia may not accept Germany's involvement in the liberation of Ukraine as that will likely be seen as an occupation by Germany and other European countries that collaborated with Nazi Germany. And thus President Putin may interpret this as if Germany won WWII.
---
Europe
The future German Chancellor plans to play a more active role in Europe than PM Scholz. Indeed, isolationism hinders progress, and underinvestment in infrastructure can weaken economies. Austerity measures that prioritize budget balance over public investment—such as too little investments in transport by rail results in more car traffic and waste of time—can have devastating consequences, such as gain of extreme right as discussed higher. An example is the UK where decades long austerity results in more poverty and failing cities while the ultra rich are treated like royals because they are still considered as good for the economy.
Therefore, what will this involvement in Europe be? Will it be to force other European countries to balance their budgets, such as Germany's approach to Greece after the financial crisis of 2009 that nearly collapsed Greece's economy? After World War II, the U.S. implemented the Marshall Plan to rebuild Germany's war-torn economy and prevent the kind of resentment that fuelled Hitler’s rise after World War I. However, in more recent times, Germany has taken a different approach. Rather than supporting struggling European nations, it imposed strict financial controls, worsening economic hardship in countries like Greece that went nearly bankrupt when it was forced to save its financial sector from bankruptcy during the financial crisis of 2009.
Merz, a former banker, is expected to push for stricter financial policies, maybe at the expense of public investment in Europe, although in Germany he will invest more as discussed higher. Will this lead to further underfunded infrastructure and fewer green investments, thus declining economies as new technologies are the way forward? The U.S. provides a cautionary example, where poor infrastructure and municipal bankruptcies have led to economic stagnation in certain regions such as Detroit, once an important city.
Historically, Germany seems to have benefited more from Europe’s post-war economic order than some of the nations that actually won the war. While countries like the UK and Russia suffered heavy losses, Germany rebuilt and thrived. This paradox has fuelled resentment, which has played out in events like Brexit, where many Britons felt they were never truly accepted in the European project, although PM Churchill wanted a united Europe while it was French President de Gaulle who blocked the UK's membership as he hated his allies for whatever reason.
Now, Germany seeks to reclaim its leadership role in the EU. But will this leadership be one of cooperation or financial dominance? If the focus is solely on tightening budgets in other countries, it could create further economic disparities, leading to more political instability across Europe.
---
Conclusion
We live in a time when the victors of World War II—the U.S., the UK, and Russia—harbor lingering resentment toward Germany, and by extension, towards Europe where many countries sided with Germany. Meanwhile, after WWII, France's de Gaulle seemed more aligned with Germany than with its wartime allies.
Can the new German Chancellor mend these tensions? Or will he reinforce the belief, particularly in the U.S., that Germany remains a self-serving power?
Germany must recognize that it cannot continue to be the wealthiest nation in the West while the countries that sacrificed the most in World War II still face economic struggles. Otherwise, those nations may turn to extremist leaders, just as Germany did in the past.
History is far from over. For some, World War I and II remain fresh wounds and still want to punish Germany, and even Europe. Ironically, while many of those people today condemn Hitler’s ideology, they would follow someone like him if he emerged now—someone anti-left, anti-LGBTQ, racist, opposed to free media that question the proposed policies, intolerant of dissent, and eager to invade other countries while questions science and even education.
There’s a reason why some believe Elon Musk made a Nazi salute in front of Trump supporters while he told Germans to vote for an extreme right party although he said it is no longer Nazi. President Trump himself has expressed interest in invading Panama and Greenland, plundering Ukraine for its minerals, and redeveloping Gaza—contrary to Israel’s plans to have a Jewish country.
We can ignore these realities, but they shape the world we live in today. And for years we can read them in certain posts, the reason why it is difficult to understand why they support Russia as they recognised it as Gog.
It will be difficult for Germany: be ashamed about its evil towards Jews during WWII while to tolerate Jews do the same to others. And defend Ukraine. And help EU countries reduce their deficits without causing anger.
Note: After writing my article, I used ChatGPT to improve the readability. Then I reread and made further changes to what became this final text.
Comments