Former Federal Ministers Sigmar Gabriel (SPD) and Thomas de Maizière (CDU) have sharply criticized current government practices. Speaking in the “Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung”, they accused the governing coalition of operational shortcomings and a lack of discipline.
Gabriel commented on the handling of political challenges, noting that everything is currently being directed towards Chancellor Friedrich Merz (CDU). He argues that a competent minister-president should normally intercept such issues or channel them back to the relevant ministries. He asserts that unrealistically phrased proposals typically fail at the state secretary level, but this does not seem to be happening in the current coalition. Consequently, matters proceed straight to the cabinet and eventually surface in Parliament, placing the burden of these issues squarely on the Chancellor.
De Maizière further cautioned against insufficient external discipline. He pointed out that many officials in the middle ranks believe their party gains strength by forcing its agenda within the coalition or by publicly portraying itself as having prevented the worst outcomes from the government. However, he countered that while this might appeal to party functionaries, the public only cares whether decisive action is being taken.
Gabriel also criticized Merz’s statement that no Chancellor before him had experienced similar hostility. Gabriel expressed his astonishment at the comment and wondered what Willy Brandt might have said when being dismissed by some as a traitor to the people.
Both politicians agreed that governing today is significantly harder than in the past. Gabriel stated that the international situation makes governing “incredibly difficult,” citing the fact that Donald Trump was not previously so extreme toward Europe and Germany, nor was Putin’s war against Ukraine as devastating. De Maizière concurred, adding that governing is far more challenging than it was ten or twenty years ago, noting that any statement is instantly amplified and debated in a culture of “hyper-outrage and scandal.”
