An analysis by Ulrich Reitz - His election schedule is dubious - now Scholz is having doubts about his own stubbornness

An analysis by Ulrich Reitz - His election schedule is dubious - now Scholz is having doubts about his own stubbornness Article by FOCUS-online correspondent Ulrich Reitz • 1 day • 5 minutes reading time Germany has a government, say the Chancellor, his SPD and the Greens. That's true. But one that no longer has anything to govern. Can one, should one take responsibility for that? Scholz is beginning to have doubts about his own stubbornness. And suddenly the difference between "legal" and "legitimate" has become the decisive question. And it is like this: Yes, the federal government led by Chancellor Olaf Scholz is legal. auschen - complete package with installation Advertisement Yes, a government that no longer has its "own" majority in the Bundestag to have its draft laws made into laws is legal. Yes, the Chancellor is the only one who has the right to decide on the vote of confidence - it is called the "right of initiative". Yes, the Chancellor can try to find majorities on a case-by-case basis, from issue to issue – for aid to Ukraine, it could be different than for pension reform. All of this is legal. Scholz is clearly wavering But is it legitimate? The majority of voters say clearly: No. Far more than half of them have written off this federal government and want not only new elections, but new elections as soon as possible. Not even Scholz's interpretation that we have a government and are able to act and now the Union has a "duty" - still catches on with his own supporters. And more than that: it is not just the majority of citizens who no longer want to follow Scholz, the Chancellor. This also applies to a majority in parliament. In short: things are getting tighter and lonelier around the Chancellor. And at some point the SPD will also ask itself when things will tip over for them: When will the Chancellor start to do more harm to the party than good? Or is it already that time? Scholz himself is clearly wavering. After he and his SPD apodictically insisted on a date in January for the vote of confidence, the Chancellor changed his argument - and turned it into the opposite. Suddenly he no longer wants to be able to decide on his own. "It's best to do it together," he said on the sidelines of a Euro summit in Budapest. Merz wants vote of confidence next week There is now a new coalition in the Bundestag, a grand coalition of a completely different kind, for quick new elections and therefore for an immediate vote of confidence. Friedrich Merz is demanding it for Wednesday next week - then Scholz will make a government statement. The Union, the thrown-out FDP, the AfD and the BSW are demanding new elections. And the Greens? In the Bundestag on Friday they still supported the Chancellor's line - with some remarkably legalistic arguments they did not concern themselves with the question of legitimacy. Managing director Irene Mihalic said that the demand for new elections as quickly as possible was a "permanent vote of no confidence", and that this in turn attacked "democracy". The Greens "accept the vote of the voters". This too is legalistic, with Willy Brandt "formula stuff". Legal, but certainly not legitimate. Because the voters certainly did not elect a minority government made up of the SPD and the Greens, strictly speaking they did not even elect a traffic light coalition, because neither was on the ballot paper. Scholz has a tactical relationship with institutions The Greens, of all people, who for years were unable to talk often or loudly enough about grassroots democracy and respect for voters, are bending the existence of the rump coalition to the will of the voters without any power of their own. Mihalic said that the AfD is known to have a "tactical relationship with the institutions". That is at least brave. At the moment, the Chancellor, the SPD that supports him and the Greens in particular have a tactical relationship with the institutions. The Greens base their political views on their climate policy, which is treacherous and corresponds to the "argumentation" of the "last generation" that traffic can - must - be paralyzed in order to save the world from climate collapse. Mihalic claimed on behalf of the Greens that they had "fundamentally changed" Germany. Some of what the traffic light coalition had done was even "historic" - such as the "entry into the decarbonized age". All of this sounds as if the Greens knew that they had to stay at the helm for as long as possible in order to save what can be saved. Merz hopes that wind turbines can be "torn down" again Because the next government is likely to end the climate rigor of the traffic light coalition, which is mainly associated with laws from the office of the now Green Chancellor candidate Robert Habeck.