No “Jamaica” for Germany – The Takeaways
The collapse on Sunday night of exploratory talks to form a so-called “Jamaica Coalition” in Germany came as a surprise for many observers. While the way forward is still unclear, some initial insights have emerged.
What happened?
On Sunday around midnight, after several self-imposed deadlines had passed, Christian Lindner (pictured right), leader of the pro-business Free Democratic Party (FDP), declared the withdrawal of his party from exploratory talks to form a “Jamaica Coalition” (dubbed this way because of the colours of the parties involved) with the centrist CDU and CSU and the left-wing Greens. This unlikely liaison had become the only option for Angela Merkel to form a government after the disastrous losses her party had incurred in the September election and after her previous coalition partner, the likewise decimated Social Democrats, refused to enter into another unpopular Grand Coalition. The inability of the largest party to form a government is unprecedented in Germany, and with the country entering uncharted territory, it is time to formulate a few preliminary takeaways.
Angela Merkel is a political zombie
For a decade, Angela Merkel has topped the Forbes list of the world’s most powerful women. Now, after the worst electoral showing of her party since 1949 and due to her inability to form a government, she can no longer be considered an anchor of stability or even “leader of the free world”. She may be willing to cling to power – as she has indeed indicated – but she increasingly looks like a political zombie: her greatest strength is the weakness of her party. Any other leader would have to fear a coup from within their party, but Merkel has eliminated internal competition to an extent that makes her appear relatively safe even in the face of self-inflicted electoral disaster. Thus, while she may be able to stay on top of her party and thereby the next government, national and international actors will know to exploit her diminished authority.
The disconnect between the mainstream media and reality persists
After Brexit and Trump took the media establishment off guard, there was a short period of soul-searching. The reporting in the aftermath of the German election reveals that a substantial disconnect persists between the mainstream media and reality. “Jamaica” was also a pet project of the media who conveniently ignored the fundamental differences between Greens on the left and FDP and CSU on the right. The higher goal of containing the right-wing AfD, it appeared to be the consensus, should be prioritised at almost all cost.
This led many to ignore simple realities: the party manifestos were effectively incompatible regarding key issues including immigration, energy, and tax policy. A coalition based on half-hearted compromises would therefore have amounted to political suicide for either FDP and CSU or Greens – or all three. Yet, the dominant narrative in the German media was that reaching an agreement was ultimately the only alternative, often motivated by the questionable supposition that an ideologically disparate Jamaica Coalition would be the best response to the rise of the AfD. Narrowly focused on this one objective, they again fundamentally misjudged the situation.
A chance to avoid political deadlock
In all likelihood, a Jamaica Coalition would have been one of deadlock and mutual blockade. Lindner’s assessment was spot-on: if after more than a month of exploratory talks, close to 250 points of contention remain in a preliminary, non-binding document, what are the chances that this coalition would have been able to tackle unforeseen issues over the next four years in an effective and efficient manner? Fundamental disagreements extend far beyond high-profile issues like immigration and likely would have made the day-to-day business of governing a tedious affair.
This realisation also puts into perspective concerns about the future of the EU. Fears about “a period of serious uncertainty for all Europe and the West”, as a New York Times editorial put it, are based on a false counterfactual. It is true that ambitious plans to reform the EU will be put on hold for a while. But there is no guarantee that substantial reforms would have gone through under a Jamaica Coalition. The FDP is strictly opposed to anything it considers a socialisation of debts and would likely not have been an enthusiastic supporter of Emmanuel Macron’s ideas. Potential re-elections in the spring offer at least the chance of a government that can speak with a unified voice on issues such as the EU and immigration policy.
If anyone will contain the far-right, it is the Liberal Democrats
Lastly, for anyone concerned about the rise of the AfD in Germany, the failure of a Jamaica Coalition to materialise should come as a relief. The party officials of FDP and AfD may be very different, their voters are not so much. The voters of both parties share similar concerns, and the steadfastness of the former in the failed negotiations will boost its credibility in the likely re-elections. This is crucial for the FDP which historically – and not always without justification – was perceived as a party of political turncoats. The regained credibility, together with the continuing stigmatization of the AfD, is likely to pay off electorally. Therefore, if anyone is going to contain the AfD in the next election, it will be the FDP. The reverse would have been true of a Jamaica Coalition which almost surely
have strengthened the AfD.
Source image: screenshot from a Youtube video of DW English (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6-UqKVLLOA)
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect any editorial policy.
About the Author
Matthias Haslberger is a DPhil student at the Department for Social Policy and Intervention, University of Oxford. His current research investigates how technological and institutional change jointly influence wage inequality. He is a member of Nuffield College and his research is funded by the Barnett House-Nuffield Scholarship.
Comments