Eventually the blow came from the inside. The vote of the Mertz bill on immigration was not postponed as the Liberal Leadership initially attempted for reasons, which he alone can know. Most of the assessment, however, is that their motivation was purely electoral, after seeing the reactions, which also caused to their own audiences to coexist with the alternative to Germany last Wednesday, with polls keeping them steadily below his limit. 5% required to enter the House. The same afternoon they voted against the postponement in a similar proposal submitted by Green and Social Democrats.

But Mertz was forced to a personal political defeat, as he was also 12 of his own MPs who were abstaining to avoid approved a plan that he himself had passionately defended, as it is self -evident. Perhaps Merkel’s intervention was something that everyone could ignore. The liberals, who paid the “back and forth” of their attitude, were also leaks. On the contrary “in line” all 75 of AfD. They belong to the winners of the day once again lately.

A rehearsal?

Was the price of German democracy saved? Friedrich Mertz’s package of measures, which was finally rejected with 349 against 338 in favor, would probably be cut in the upper parliament (Bundesrat). Many Prime Ministers, even Christian Democrats, have warned that they will not give their consent. Maybe Angela Merkel’s intervention may have played a role here.

Probably the head of the Christian Democratic Union himself suspected that this would happen. So he wanted to measure the reactions on the one hand and send a message that the next House intends to throw the “barrier” and convert the majority of laws to a regular basis, which may arise on a case -by -case basis and from the support of AfD, for laws for laws. that will “want the people”. He did not hesitate to take advantage of his attitude and the murderous attacks on Magdeburg and Asafenburg.

The obsession of ‘deception’

It is also an aspect of the CDU’s “abolition”. Mertz has accidentally made sure to emphasize several times in his speech in Parliament on Friday, what many European conservatives say, putting the dilemma of the “Democratic Arc”: We find other alternatives to the right to impose. ” But this cannot be a steady basis for dialogue for the middle space, in which he claims to believe and address Mertz. Its disobedience, his indifference to reactions also acts as a statement of rejection of the idea of ​​a subsequent “great coalition”. His defeat in this vote is not expected to discourage him. His return with a similar or even tougher measure after the elections should be taken for granted if he becomes a chancellor.

The dribbles and the substance

The marginal rejection does not change the essence of the case. In Germany, things are called (and probably deciding), which until recently were classified as politically unacceptable. This has – in addition to everything else – as a result of an unprecedented polarization, with the edge of course the immigration, and even in a phase that is not acute. If there is something positive about all this, it is certainly that hundreds of thousands of citizens who felt that the quintessence of the Republic was threatened and considered them to protect it, descending to the streets.

Message to Europe

The message broadcast by Berlin is also accepted by the EU. Many of what Mertz proposes are contrary to the “European acquis”. According to Schengen, permanent border controls have been illegal since 1995. A general prohibition on entry for people without documents or from a specific third country would also violate this code, as well as the asylum right in accordance with the EU Fundamental Rights Charter, The EU Directive on Asylum Procedures, the Geneva Convention on Refugees.

Pushback protection of international law – a lesson inherited from World War II would also be violated. The principle of proportionality guaranteed in EU conditions has also been forgotten and requires a separate individual examination of each case. There is also the obligation to respect children’s rights. All this is not just legal details. They have a very dense political core.

Europeans and Christians?

Christian Democracy in Western Europe has always had Europeanism as its flag, especially since it managed to remove some romantic ideas of leftists from the “federal vision”, such as Altiier Spinelli. The fact that a series of parties show a willingness to start at the national level of appealing established Community decisions is an intersection in EU history. It is also confirmed by the EPP’s stance on the European Parliament.

But there are not only romantics on the left. Some representatives of the humanitarian church, focusing on refugees, have come to wonder if the CDU/ CSU continues to honor the original “C” of its name, the traditional values ​​of Christianity, as they understand it. It’s not a theological search. But a very persistent political question. One of the many that arises in the face of German elections and will continue to exist after them.