With the sudden end of coalition talks in Germany, Merkel looks weaker than ever before. Remember, how not too long ago, even her slim victory was hailed as evidence of Western democracies’ tenacity despite all odds? What does this fresh crisis the fourth-time chancellor finds herself in say about Western democracies then?
The political chaos which makes Nazi authoritarianism attractive
The sudden end of the talks on forming a coalition government in Germany is a huge blow to its global image as a stable, responsible power, and is yet another rude reminder that the age of political absolutism is here, writes Anna Sauerbrey in The New York Times.
“Germany’s parliamentary democracy is a system with compromise in its DNA — so when Germans awoke to the news Monday morning, they were shocked. Such a failure is a challenge to Germany’s new role in the world. And it is yet another example of the dangerous political absolutism sweeping the world’s democracies.”
“Germany’s fear of political instability goes deep. For many, the AfD’s entrance into the Bundestag brings to mind the dark shadow of the Weimar Republic, its disastrous collapse and all that followed. The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung has featured a series of German historians mining the parallels between the 1920s and ’30s and today: Back then, a divided political spectrum and a splintered left, with extremism on both sides, created a run of minority governments and a perception of political chaos, all of which made Nazi authoritarianism look like an attractive alternative.”
Time up for Merkel?
Gideon Richman argues in The Financial Times that the end of the talks may mark the end of Merkel in Germany, and that would ultimately mean a weaker Europe.
“If, as now seems distinctly possible, the end of the Merkel era is within sight, Europe will be in a new and dangerous situation,” Rachman writes.
“The EU-optimists in Brussels and Paris will hope that a new German leader might inject some dynamism into the European project, ditching the cautious, incremental approach that Ms Merkel has displayed over the euro.
“But, in fact, the opposite is more likely to happen. The current tenor of German politics suggests that a new chancellor in Berlin is far less likely than Ms Merkel to take bold risks for Europe. The spoilers in the current coalition negotiations are the Free Democrats, who are strongly opposed to visionary ideas for deeper European fiscal integration.”
“Ms Merkel’s Germany was the rock of political and economic stability on which the EU hoped to build. If even Germany no longer looks solid and predictable, the whole of the European project will be back in trouble.”
What about Macron now?
With Merkel more wobbly than ever, Germany, particularly France, is indeed staring into the abyss, write Melissa Eddy and Katrin Benhold in The New York Times.
“At a time when the European Union is facing a host of pressing problems, from Brexit negotiations with Britain, to the rise of right-wing populism, to separatism in Spain’s Catalonia region, the possibility of political instability in a normally reliable Germany sent tremors through the Continent.”
“Even if Ms. Merkel’s problems leave Mr. Macron as Europe’s de facto strongest leader — with weak domestic opposition in France, a strengthening economy, and a good record so far on driving through economic overhauls — the French president had been counting on Ms. Merkel as an ally in his push to make changes to the European Union.
Mr. Macron will be aware that his agenda for the bloc, which includes a common defence force, a strengthened euro, and a joint finance minister, stands no chance without German backing.”
Making America one again, and how
For all his rhetoric about American unity, Trump may just be a unifying force on Senate Foreign Relations Committee, if nothing else. But not in the direction he wants, writes Susan Glasser in Politico.
“In more than two decades of observing Capitol Hill, I can’t remember a comparable moment when the generally staid Foreign Relations panel has been so assertive toward the president, especially given that Congress and the White House are controlled by the same party. To do so, you’d probably have to reach all the way back to the Vietnam era, and the sceptical hearings about the war held by the late, legendary Chairman William Fulbright,” Glasser writes.
“Some scepticism is certainly in order here. Congress isn’t about to wrest control of nukes — or any other major levers of international power — away from the commander-in-chief anytime soon. Despite post-Vietnam efforts to rein in the imperial presidency, the executive branch retains nearly all the control over American foreign policy. And many members of Congress are just as happy to punt when it comes to taking responsibility for decisions of war and peace that might prove unpopular with voters…”
“But the bipartisan talk of constraining and at times openly contradicting the president is something genuinely different about Trump’s Washington, and it already extends to a wide range of issues on the foreign policy front — a contrast to the fractured politics of such domestic issues as health care and taxes, where consensus is as elusive as the election results would suggest.”
Is Mugabe showing signs of senility?
Until Sunday night, everyone in Zimbabwe was discussing how they would celebrate the beginning of a new era once Robert Mugabe resigns in a televised address. Then they watched in disbelief as the President delivered “a meandering speech that made clear the 93-year-old leader has no plans to leave power”, writes Kevin Seiff in the Washington Post.
“The speech prompted the same questions about Mugabe that Zimbabweans have asked for years: Was he showing signs of senility? Or was he displaying the same shrewd, stubborn ability to defy his critics that has kept him afloat for decades?” Seiff asks.
“It was ‘proof of his psychotic obsession with power’, said Fadzayi Mahere, a lawyer and politician. ‘We must never put ourselves in this place as a nation ever again’.”
“Now Mugabe’s critics are trying to sort out another way to unseat him. ZANU-PF leaders have control only over their ranks and cannot influence the composition of Zimbabwe’s government. Impeachment proceedings in parliament appear the most likely way forward, but they could take weeks and would leave the country with a power vacuum in the interim.
It is possible that the military will now move to oust Mugabe by force, but its commanders have appeared intent on giving the public impression that they are not conducting a coup — likely to preserve the veneer of legitimacy that would sustain their relationship with the international community.”
The Middle-East’s illicit affair
In what is a first admission of its kind, an Israeli minister has said that Israel respects wishes of Arab countries to keep ties with it secret, including Saudi Arabia, with whom, the Israeli Energy Minister Yuval Steinitz confirmed Israel indeed has secret ties.
“It’s the other side that is interested in keeping the ties quiet. With us, usually, there is no problem, but we respect the other side’s wish, when ties are developing, whether it’s with Saudi Arabia or with other Arab countries or other Muslim countries, and there is much more … (but) we keep it secret.”
“Both Saudi Arabia and Israel view arch-foe Iran as a main threat to the Middle East and increased tension between Tehran and Riyadh has fueled speculation that shared interests may push Saudi Arabia and Israel to work together.
Saudi Arabia maintains that any relations with Israel hinge on Israeli withdrawal from Arab lands captured in the 1967 Middle East war.”