The Democristian Friedrich Merz, has conceded on Friday a parliamentary defeat of incalculable consequences for his government aspirations. The Bundestag has rejected the law to reduce the immigration of the candidate of the Democristian Union / Social Cristiana Union (CDU / CSU), despite having the votes of the Alternative Right Right party for Germany (AFD). The decision to accept AFD’s votes triggered a reference of criticism, including Merz’s co -religionist, former chancellor Angela Merkel, for having weakened the sanitary cord that prevents cooperating with the radicals.
The bet was risky for Merz, and it has gone wrong. Now the campaign can be complicated with the divided party, because the law would not have been in the minority of not being because 12 deputies of their group have been absent from the vote or have not cast it, instead of doing so in favor as the rest. And with its credibility touched, because its prestige was played by breaking a “taboo” to vote next to AFD and this has not even served to achieve the majority. At the same time, he has avoided the repetition of the awkward photo on Wednesday, when the Bundestag adopted, also with the votes of the extreme right, a non -binding motion to limit the right of asylum. This time there has been celebration, but on the other side of the hemicycle: on the left.
The result, 338 votes in favor and 349 against, fell as a surprise at the end of a infarction day in the Bundestag. Merz had, in principle, with a safe majority, by having the votes of his formation, CDU/CSU, AFD, Liberals and the Sahra Wagenknecht’s Left Left Party. In addition to the abstention of a group of Democristians, among their liberal allies 23 they abstained or voted against. This shows that the union between the right and the extreme against immigration – the majority that only two days ago materialized with the motion about the right to asylum – is fragile. And it is possible that the calls against the vote, from the Catholic and Evangelical churches they have had any effect.
Merz disregarded Merkel’s criticism, whom he considers responsible for the rise of AFD al and accepted again the votes of the extreme right, while promising never governing with her. The polls for the February 23 elections place the CDU/CSU as the first force, followed by AFD and the Social Democratic Party (SPD). This week’s electoral effect is to be seen. The conservative has tried to project the image of leader capable of responding to the concern of a part of the population for the attacks and crimes perpetrated by foreigners. But also of inconsistent leader, because in November he swore that he would not accept AFD votes, even if it was “by chance.” And it is exactly what it has ended up doing.
The debate and vote on the Immigration Law – Vinculant, unlike the motion, although somewhat softer than the first in the content – they arrived after a session full of surprises and turns in the script. He had to start at 10.30 in the morning, but was suspended for more than three hours in which the small democratic free party (FDP) was offered as a mediator. A negotiation to several bands began in the halls and halls of the Bundestag, a confusing theater in which rumors and false alerts circulated. It was, for liberals and democratians, to avoid repetition of Wednesday’s photo when the motion was approved: they adding a majority with an AFD that celebrated the result as “a success of democracy.”
Democristians and liberals argue that the content of the law, which contemplates restricting the entry of immigrants, limiting family regrouping and reinforcing police powers, was perfectly acceptable by the SPD and green. If they rejected the agreement, they said, the responsibility of the final result would fall on them. But social democrats and environmentalists resisted being pushed to subscribe a text that was not theirs and to save Merz. He wanted to avoid back and lose his face. He did not turn back and lost, although later, before the journalists, he congratulated himself, so he described as “victory of parliamentarism.”
The Democristian was right if he referred to the content and vibrant tone of the debate in the hemicycle, which allowed visions of immigration policy and the relationship with the extreme right. The head of the SPD group, Rolf Mützenich, addressed Merz to urged him to withdraw the proposal: “Turn around. It would be the best for our country. ” He added: “The vital artery of democracy has been damaged, but it is not yet sectioned.” After knowing the result, the Social Democratic Chancellor, Olaf Scholz, celebrated: “I feel relieved, and I am sure that many others. We must not allow us to be divided. “
In his speech, Merz defended that his law proposal is assumed by the SPD and the Verdes, who govern as a minority since they broke with the FDP. He reiterated that he has not sought the votes of the extreme right: if he receives them, it is in spite of his, and because the government parties refuse to collaborate in the response to the attacks perpetrated by foreigners. And he strongly denied that he will govern with AFD or that he will accept his votes to be a chancellor: “Do you really believe that we have your hand to a party that wants to annihilate?”
“What is at stake is where the conservatives are,” said Foreign Minister, environmentalist Annalena Baerbock. “If conservative means following the Viktor Orbán or Vladimir Putin manual,” he added in reference to the Hungarian prime minister and the Russian president, respectively. “Or if conservative means Ursula von der Leyen, Donald Tusk, Michel Friedman, Helmut Kohl and also Konrad Adenauer,” he said, mentioning the president of the European Commission, the Polish Prime Minister and two Democristic Chancers. Friedman, former leader of the Central Council of the Jews of Germany, announced this week that he left the CDU after four decades of militancy.
Baerbock did not quote Angela Merkel, who has condemned Merz’s decision as “an error”, his rival in Christian democracy for two decades, to accept AFD’s votes. But at the table of Foreign Minister Scholz, who attended the debate although he did not speak in the hemicycle, a good part of the day was a
