Press play to listen to this article
Voiced by artificial intelligence.
 |
By MATTHEW KARNITSCHNIG
with HANS VON DER BURCHARD
Send tips here | | Subscribe for free | View in your browser
SULTANS OF SPIN
Guess who’s coming for dinner? Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, of course. Who better to discuss the unfolding the disaster in the Middle East than the Turkish president, who recently told Israel “your end is nigh” and called the only liberal democracy in the region a “terror state.” Hamas, he has said, is “liberation force.”
Given the Turkish leader’s recent comments, the visit, planned months ago, couldn’t be more awkward for the Germans, as Germany editor James Angelos writes here.
Saving it up for Friday night: Erdoğan, who last visited Berlin in 2020, originally considered staying for Saturday’s face-off between the national teams of Turkey and Germany in Berlin’s Olympic Stadium, but in the end he opted for a flying visit during which he’ll meet President Franz-Walter Steinmeier before dining with Chancellor Olaf Scholz.
Dire straits in Berlin: Germany’s federal police ordered the capital high alert, dispatching nearly 3,000 police, sealing manholes and cordoning off much of the government quarter, measures usually reserved for the likes of a U.S. president.
And Recep doesn’t mind: If there’s one thing Erdoğan has proved over the years, it’s that he’s the honey badger of global politics. He has no qualms about insulting friends and foes alike, only to turn around and cut deals with them.
Goodnight, now it’s time to go home: In a press conference on Friday evening at the chancellery, Erdoğan stuck to his guns with familiar attacks on Israel, while avoiding his most incendiary rhetoric. Scholz defended the country and underscored what he said is Germany’s obligation towards its security, while trying to maintain diplomatic niceties. “Mr. President, it’s no secret that we have very different perspectives on the conflict,” Scholz said. “That’s why our conversations are important, especially in difficult moments, we need to talk to each other directly.”
CREATIVE ACCOUNTING
On the high seas and in court, we’re in God’s hands: Chancellor Scholz and his coalition partners would have done well to remember that pearl of Teutonic volkswisdom before basing their core legislative agenda on a dodgy accounting trick.
Alas, they didn’t and were slapped down this week by Germany’s constitutional court, which ruled that the government cannot repurpose money left over from a COVID emergency fund to finance the coalition’s climate agenda.
Indecent proposal: In retrospect, the plan, devised by Scholz himself, seems a bit reckless. That said, who among us wouldn’t tempted by a €60 billion pot of gold?
Debt brake blues: In most normal countries, the government would just raise the money by selling debt, which in Germany wouldn’t be a problem given its AAA debt profile.
But no one’s ever accused Germany of being normal, which is why such a step is big time verboten under the so-called “debt brake,” a balanced budget rule that places strict limits on deficit spending.
Why it matters: the €60 billion kitty, known as the climate transformation fund, served as the all-purpose cash machine for coalition priorities ranging from green initiatives to modernizing Deutsche Bahn’s aging rail network to luring American and Taiwanese chip makers with generous subsidies.
What now? No one really knows. The coalition doesn’t have the votes to relax the debt brake. The other obvious option — tax increases — is a no-go for the Free Democrats.
Doom and gloom: Robert Habeck, speaking in June, said a court ruling like this against the coalition “would hit Germany’s economic policy very hard — probably so hard that we wouldn’t survive.”
From ménage à trois to clusterfuck: With the three-way coalition’s legislative agenda now in tatters, there are serious doubts over its prospects for survival. I’ve unraveled the various scenarios here.
MORE TROUBLE LOOMING?
Merz the auditor: Center-right opposition leader Friedrich Merz of the Christian Democrats (CDU), which petitioned the court over the coalition’s accounting sleight of hand, said late Thursday he’s considering launching yet another lawsuit involving the government’s accounting methods. This time, Merz’s CDU is targeting the €200 billion “economic stabilization” fund the coalition set up to bring down energy bills for consumers and small businesses last year after Russia halted gas deliveries to Germany. That program also faced substantial criticism at the EU level.
Legal analysis: “I have commissioned a legal opinion to determine whether the decision of the constitutional court … applies also to the economic stabilization fund,” Merz told public broadcaster ZDF. “I expect to have an initial result by the end of next week or by the beginning of the following week, at the latest,” Merz said, adding that he would decide on that basis whether to launch another lawsuit.
This could get expensive: Merz’s announcement comes just as the government used its majority in parliament on Thursday evening to extend the energy price brake until the end of March. Yet the latest constitutional court ruling — plus the threat of potentially yet another lawsuit — raises questions over whether the energy aid can still be financed via the special fund, or whether the money would have to come from the regular budget, thereby adding to the government’s financial woes.
Special fund on hold: Otto Fricke, the budgetary spokesperson for the conservative Free Democrats (FDP), said Friday that the economic stabilization fund had been put on hold for now. “We are now examining how much can still be be drawn from the fund after the ruling,” he added.
RUSSLANDVERSTEHER GETS BUSTED
From Russia With Cash: The extraordinary naivety and misjudgment (and in many cases also self-delusion) that dominated Germany’s political and public discourse about Russia right until the eve of the Ukraine invasion has a lot to do with the country’s public broadcasters, who long gave Putin-friendly voices a prominent role in their prime-time program. Hence, it may have been a shock, but upon closer look not so much a surprise, when it turned out this week that one of the main “journalists” who peddled pro-Kremlin narratives was paid by Moscow.
Meet Hubert Seipel: The author of books such as “Putin’s power — Why Europe needs Russia” was promoted by public broadcaster ARD as Germany’s “ultimate Putin expert” and frequently invited to talk shows, where he defended the Russian President and his arguments, such as NATO’s eastward expansion allegedly being a threat to Moscow. Seipel was known for his close ties to Putin, with whom he landed several exclusive interviews that earned him various journalism awards.
Cash in Cyprus: As it now turns out, these close links involved more than just hunting with Putin in Siberia or staying overnight in the president’s private residence (events about which Seipel had spoken before): Leaked documents from a Cypriot financial services — published this week by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) and media partners — show that Seipel received €600,000 out of Russia as financial “support” for his latest Putin book (for which he was also regularly paid by his German publisher).
More money? Documents show that Seipel agreed to receive the secret payments from a shell company linked to Alexey Mordashov, a Russian oligarch who is seen as close to the Kremlin. The investigative journalists found that the Russian sponsorship appears to date back to 2013 (whereas the €600,000 payment was only agreed in 2018), meaning that Seipel may have received even more money from Moscow. Seipel claims that the payments had no influence on the content of his work.
Yet the real issue is bigger: Russia experts in academia — such as Franziska Davies from Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich and Jan Claas Behrends from the Europa-Universität Viadrina — had long criticized Seipel as lacking actual expertise on Russia and had argued he was mainly spreading Kremlin propaganda (for which he found open ears in the German public and open doors at ARD). German daily Welt came to a similar conclusion in 2014 when it criticized ARD for doing a Seipel interview with Putin in a soft tone, lacking critical questions: “ARD turns into Putin’s Kremlin TV,” Welt wrote.
This raises another question: “The real scandal is not these payments — that is the Russian modus operandi,” argues Behrends. “The scandal is that this propaganda was considered journalism by the public broadcasters. When will this be addressed?”
A FEW MORE TIDBITS
Anschluss corner: If you’ve as curious as we are about How Hitler’s homeland became Israel’s BFF in the EU, we’ve got you covered!
Babylon Berlin: Thanks for all of your nominations for our monthly (oops, did we originally say weekly?) Berlin’s best bars feature. Keep them coming!
Hate mail: As ever, you can reach me at [email protected] or @mkarnitschnig on the X.
SUBSCRIBE to the POLITICO newsletter family: Brussels Playbook | London Playbook | London Playbook PM | Playbook Paris | POLITICO Confidential | Sunday Crunch | EU Influence | London Influence | Digital Bridge | China Watcher | Berlin Bulletin | D.C. Playbook | D.C. Influence | All our POLITICO Pro policy morning newsletters
