
After a torrid 100 days, Germany's Friedrich Merz is mocked as a ‘dead man walking'. He must fight back
It was a symbolic act of defiance, and because it was a secret ballot, it wasn't clear how many of the 18 dissenters came from Merz's Christian Democrats (CDU) or from their new coalition partners, the Social Democrats (SPD). But it cast a shadow over the new administration from its inception: this is the government that nobody wanted – not least its protagonists.
This is the verdict of most of the media and political class, the so-called Berlin bubble. Barely a day passes when Merz isn't mocked as a dead man walking. He is trying to create a form of mainstream conservatism that is at once modernising – dealing with Germany's lamentable embrace of digitisation, tackling bureaucracy, rebuilding infrastructure – and more culturally conservative. He is simultaneously accused of conceding too much to the left and of being in bed with the far right. He is denounced for being both vindictively punitive and emptily performative to migrants. This relentless drumbeat of negativity is the German equivalent of the dirge of 'broken Britain'.
Merz's difficulties do not arise from a single source. They partly emanate from the way he is portrayed: the starched conservative, thin-skinned and wealthy (an attribute regarded as suspect in Germany). Some of this is unfair, some of it is not. He has handled himself with far more restraint and aplomb than originally predicted. Not that he has received much credit for it.
The second problem is structural. To avoid political hegemony, every government must be a coalition. It must share power between parties but also between the federal centre in Berlin and the 16 regions. During the first 75 years of the federal republic, compromise was regarded as virtuous. Now it is seen as a mark of weakness.
Which brings us to the present day. Trumpism has come to town, and Germany's political culture is being infected by the same populist impulses as everywhere else. New media outlets are blurring the lines between fact and fiction, destroying careers, and leading mainstream politicians to behave in new ways. Parliament has become more unruly, and in a country that has long been synonymous with deliberative politics, MPs and ministers take instantly to social media with instant judgments on breaking news.
The first battle of the new hyperpolarised era was played out less than a month ago, just as parliament was going into recess. The issue was the proposed nomination to the constitutional court of Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf, a judge who holds more liberal views on abortion than is permitted under Germany's restrictive legislation. She was demonised by the press and the political right, leading some spooked CDU MPs to disappear on holiday early, to deprive her of the necessary majority. Senior government officials pulled the vote at the last minute, rather than face an embarrassing defeat. Her decision to withdraw her candidacy last week led to much fury in the SPD and soul-searching in Merz's team. Even some more traditionalist MPs appeared to rue the fact that they had been swayed by pressure from the far right, and that the coalition had been undermined.
This confected scandal forms part of a wider strategy by the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) to split, weaken and eventually destroy the CDU, thereby becoming the largest party by the next election in 2029. Its members are open about their desire to make it impossible for Merz's coalition to govern. To get anything through, Merz must agree it with the SPD. This leaves him vulnerable to the rightwing drumbeat that he is kowtowing to the 'woke left'. This unnerves those on the right of the CDU, some of whom are urging Merz to abandon the so-called firewall that prohibits cooperation with the AfD. Any such break with this rule would give the German far right a potential route back to power for the first time since the end of the second world war.
Meanwhile, the AfD's share of the vote, according to Germany's generally reliable pollsters, heads inexorably upwards. The party of the far right is on about 24%, three points above its already-impressive and alarming election result in March, and only two points below that of the CDU.
The prospect of the AfD becoming Germany's largest party is a dark scenario, but it is not inevitable. Two factors may yet work for the government. The first is the AfD's tendency for infighting and overall incompetence. The other is the personal durability of the chief protagonists, Merz and his SPD deputy chancellor and finance minister, Lars Klingbeil.
Two terms the coalition uses in much of its communications are: die politische Mitte (the centre ground) and handlungsfähig (capable of getting on with it). They don't set the pulse racing, but that is deliberate. Merz's approach is not dissimilar to that of Keir Starmer in the face of the threat of Reform UK: soldier on and demonstrate to voters that the day-to-day grind still matters and hope that it produces rewards.
Merz's ministers point to a long list of planned action and legislation, which includes huge investment in critical infrastructure and security (the defence ministry now has a department called 'expansion'), tightening migration and speeding up procurement. A scrap with their SPD partners is likely over plans to cut welfare, particularly the minimum income guarantee, but some form of compromise is expected in the autumn. Both parties will fight hard over the detail, if only to reassure their bases that they are sticking to their principles.
It will be messy, sometimes dramatic, but the coalition may yet work. Merz and Klingbeil get on reasonably well – in contrast to the personal feuds that were a hallmark of Olaf Scholz's administration. They know their parties may be in the doldrums, but they also know they will suffer even more if this government fails to deliver. There is nothing like jeopardy to concentrate the mind, not just for 100 days, but for the next four years.
John Kampfner is the author of In Search of Berlin and Why the Germans Do It Better
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
15 minutes ago
- The Independent
If stopping the boats were simple, it would have happened by now
Given the unusually fine weather – coupled with the world's many conflicts, and regions of endemic poverty – it should not come as a great surprise that yet another small boats record has been broken. New Home Office figures show that, since Labour came to power after the general election, more than 50,000 migrants have arrived in the UK via the English Channel. A few weeks ago, the numbers of refugees and economic migrants arriving via the English Channel reached a record rate for the time of year – 25,000 by the end of July, and, thus, the fastest flow since 2018, when such movements were first monitored. The new headline figure is different, and even more 'political'. At this rate, 2025 will set a new record for a calendar year. The political reaction has been predictable. Labour says it is 'unacceptable', while the Tories accuse the government of having 'surrendered our borders'. A little over a year ago, it was the Conservative government admitting the flows were unacceptable, and the Labour opposition laying the charge that the Sunak government had surrendered our borders. Meanwhile, Nigel Farage and Reform UK continue to pretend that solving this complex and intractable problem is simply a matter of willpower and a willingness to break international law and start a naval conflict with France. To borrow a recently fashionable phrase, the Reformists are the least serious people in British politics since… well, they persuaded the nation that Brexit was a good idea. Of course, in some ways, taking the Guinness Book of Records approach to the immigration statistics is playing the old immigration numbers game in an even more unhelpful way. The numbers may be large by recent trends, but they are rarely placed in context. Even a figure of 50,000-plus would, for example, only represent about 4 to 5 per cent of the total of gross, entirely lawful immigration into the UK on work and study visas. Not all will be able to make a successful claim for asylum. If any commit a criminal offence, they are liable to be deported – and much more rapidly under the latest proposals from the home secretary, Yvette Cooper. Contrary to some lurid and confused headlines, asylum seekers are neither responsible for most sexual offences in Britain, nor the same as those predators of Pakistani heritage who inflicted their appalling crimes on young girls for most of the last two decades. They were not responsible for the Southport murders; and they are mostly quite anxious to go to work, even if it is illegal for them to do so. The economic case for migration also stands. Despite an uptick in unemployment, there is a labour shortage in many parts of the UK, and it is almost as bad as it has ever been since Brexit in agriculture and the hospitality, health, social care and leisure sectors. A policy of 'net zero' migration, as advocated by Reform UK, would cause chaos in care homes, on farms and elsewhere, and inflict grievous damage to the economy. Those who want to reduce regular, lawful, documented and visa-based migration, such as Mr Farage, need to come up with some better ideas about how the demographically challenged and ageing British nation can undergo the renaissance they so cynically promise. Ministers have a duty to take on the myths and legends of irregular migration. But they are also under an obligation to 'stop the boats', something all parties actually agree about: this trade in human misery is dangerous and, indeed, unacceptable. Politically, Labour may have given the impression before the last general election, analogous to the way it approached economic policy, that fixing the problem of irregular migration would be easier than it has turned out to be. That is not to decry its efforts. Sir Keir Starmer was perfectly sincere in his belief, based on past experience as director of public prosecutions, that the criminal gangs engaged in human trafficking are susceptible to the same methods as gangs involved in terrorism and drug peddling. He was also right to rebuild cooperation with European neighbours, as with the 'one in, one out' deal with France and changes in German law to make obtaining and running the boats more difficult. Yvette Cooper seems fully aware of the need to stop using so-called 'migrant hotels', and to clear the huge backlog of cases left behind by the Sunak administration – people supposedly destined for Rwanda who were never going to get there because the Rwanda scheme was so small. Without condoning the ugly violence and vicious Islamophobia that disfigures too many local demonstrations, it is plain that the public is impatient with the lack of tangible progress. It is unfortunately not yet clear that Labour is making the requisite moves to 'smash the gangs' and 'turn the page and restore order to the asylum system so that it operates swiftly, firmly, and fairly'. The best thing that Sir Keir and Ms Cooper can do in these circumstances is to level with the electorate and explain why this intractable challenge will have to take time, and that they will do whatever is necessary to get the numbers radically lower. If stopping the boats were as easy as some claim, it would have happened by now. Nonetheless, the government needs to provide more evidence of progress, if only to counter the propaganda and misinformation so widespread on social media. In short, the public would like to hear about record-low numbers of small boat arrivals.


The Independent
15 minutes ago
- The Independent
JD Vance expected to host Robert Jenrick during UK trip – but not Tory leader
JD Vance is expected to host shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick during his holiday in the UK – but not Tory leader Kemi Badenoch. Mr Jenrick has been invited to meet the US vice-president before a drinks event on Tuesday, it is understood. A Conservative spokesman said the party leader's team had spoken to Mr Vance's but that 'scheduling' had proved difficult. Both sides have played down the notion of a snub, the Telegraph reported. Former leadership contender Mr Jenrick has strayed well beyond his justice brief in recent months, building a prominent social media presence with campaigns on a range of issues, from the impact of immigration on housing to tackling fare-dodgers on the London Underground. He and the vice-president have voiced similar concerns about the erosion of freedom of speech, as well as opposition to equality, diversity and inclusion initiatives. It comes after Mr Vance joined David Lammy at Chevening, the Foreign Secretary's grace-and-favour country estate in Kent, last week. The vice-president, who has also been tipped for a future leadership bid, described the Labour Cabinet minister as his 'good friend' but said there were 'disagreements' between the US and the UK governments on how best to respond to the humanitarian crisis and war in Gaza. A Liberal Democrat source claimed Mrs Badenoch was 'losing out to her leadership rival' while 'she messes up her efforts to mimic Nigel Farage and drag the Conservative Party ever further to the right'. 'Bungling Badenoch strikes again – JD Vance has apparently joined the electorate in giving Kemi the cold shoulder,' they said.


Telegraph
16 minutes ago
- Telegraph
JK Rowling mocks Sturgeon for saying public spaces need to be safer for women
JK Rowling has mocked Nicola Sturgeon for using her memoir to warn about making public spaces safer for women. The Harry Potter author tweeted a picture of the relevant pages of the newly-released book, across which she had scrawled in capital letters: 'Are you f-----g kidding me?' In the highlighted section, Ms Sturgeon wrote about an unnamed male MSP she alleged had bullied her. She said he 'started calling me 'Gnasher', both to other people and occasionally to my face'. After finding out about the 'overtly sexual' rumour, she said she cried in the lavatories in the Scottish Parliament. Ms Sturgeon added: 'Today, a story of this type would stalk a woman round social media, day and night. We have such a long way to go to make the public sphere safe for women and girls. 'I just worry that by the time we get there, there will be too few women left in public life for it to matter.' She said she only realised it had been 'bullying of an overtly sexual nature' when she filled out a Holyrood survey in 2017, in the wake of the #MeToo scandal. Sharing her annotation of the page, Rowling said: 'Pages 108-9, in which our heroine opines on the need to make the 'public sphere' safe for women and girls.' Rowling has been one of the most outspoken critics of Ms Sturgeon's plan to allow biological males to self-identify as women and use female changing rooms and lavatories. The former SNP leader used her memoir to accuse Rowling of creating a toxic debate over trans rights and stoking 'vile' attacks which left her fearing for her physical safety. She referred to Rowling posting a selfie on X on Oct 6 2022 in a black T-shirt, whereby she was accused of being a 'destroyer of women's rights'. The former first minister claimed it was a turning point in which 'rational debate' on the trans issue became 'impossible' and 'any hope of finding common ground disappeared'. She also said that the abuse she received increased and 'made me feel less safe and more at risk of possible physical harm'. The row centres on Ms Sturgeon's controversial Gender Recognition Reform (GRR) Bill, which would have allowed Scots to change legal gender by simply signing a declaration. The legislation was passed at Holyrood but was vetoed by the UK Government over concerns it undermined women's safe spaces. However, it emerged that swathes of Scotland's public sector, including the prison estate, had adopted self-identification regardless. There was public uproar when trans rapist Isla Bryson was initially sent to a women's prison, in line with guidance at the time stating that criminals should be sent to the jail that matched their self-identified gender prior to conviction. Ms Sturgeon admitted this week that rapists should 'probably forfeit' the right to self-identify as women. However, she refused to apologise for the legislation. In a series of tweets on Tuesday, Rowling said she was reading the former first minister's memoirs with the intention of publishing a review of the book on her website. Rowling sarcastically referred to it as 'the memoir of Scotland's (checks notes) most persecuted, misunderstood, self-critical, open-to-debate, feminist-to-her-fingertips ex-First Minister'. She said she was annotating the book, which is titled Frankly, as she read it, adding that she may later auction 'my scribbled-on copy.' Annotating as I read to review. Might auction my scribbled-on copy, proceeds to go to @ForWomenScot. NB: nobody who's offended by swearing should bid. — J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) August 12, 2025 Rowling said the proceeds would be donated to For Women Scotland, the feminist group that won April's Supreme Court ruling that trans women are not legally women. However, she warned that 'nobody who's offended by swearing should bid'. Her intervention came after Ms Sturgeon said that she did not think Rowling would be willing to publicly debate her on the issue. 'I will debate with many people, but I don't think JK Rowling would be willing to do that. But who knows, maybe she would,' Ms Sturgeon said.