Refugee roulette

It sounded just like the good old days for once, back when German politics dealt with things that were primarily of interest to people living between the Alps and the North Sea and part of their daily lives. After its "summit meeting" on Sunday, the coalition – headed by Angela Merkel – of the conservative CDU and CSU parties with the Social Democrats (SPD) announced that it wanted to get the following topics out of the way by the autumn: inheritance tax reform; bigger, more flexible pensions; equal pay for women and men, or at least progress towards it; and a new family allowance.

And there are things the coalition has already succeeded in putting in place, such as the minimum wage. But what use is all of this if its three most important figures – the chancellor, the SPD leader, and the CSU leader – give the impression that they are constantly working against one another on refugee policy, the issue that looms above all others?

The subject of refugees was simply not addressed on Sundayduring a meeting. This helps keep the peace in the coalition, but it's still bad because voters want to know where things go from here.

Two arenas - CSU essentially in opposition

The situation is that one year ago Angela Merkel said we could do it, and from then on the CSU, led by Horst Seehofer, effectively left the coalition. Sure, there are still CSU ministers in Berlin – Mr Dobrindt, for example, and Mr Schmidt – but the CSU is now effectively in opposition.

Since then, the coalition has made two changes in the asylum law that tighten up rules on deportation, and it has benefitted from the fact that other countries have closed off escape routes to Europe. And the chancellor thought up a deal with Turkey.

So, the coalition has taken action. But facts are not the issue any more. The grand coalition exists in two arenas now: at the cabinet table, where it is governing tolerably well - and as part of the public debate. Fans of the chancellor say she mustn't back down under any circumstances. Many of these fans aren't even in the CDU; there are a lot of Social Democrats and Greens among them, as well as thousands of volunteers committed to helping refugees. "We can do it" should still apply, they say. Merkel's opponents want her to admit that she got it wrong. And there are many of these – in the CDU as well. Meanwhile, the CSU wants an upper limit on numbers. Whenever the squabbling parties encounter one other on television, on talk shows, no one would ever think they were governing together. And the Bavarian CSU is focused above all on its home state.

A sleeping devil

They are all extremely on edge, not because nothing or something or a little, at least, is being done, but because the government's refugee policy, this "We can do it", has awoken a little sleeping devil. Xenophobia and resentment have always been there, but now they've found an address, something people are more likely to vote for than the even more unappetizing squads of previous years. This is why the coalition parties are all looking at each other and saying, "It's your fault!"

Horst Seehofer muses in public over whether the CSU needs its own chancellor candidate, or whether he can attend the CDU party conference, or whether Mrs Merkel can attend his. It seems this isn't really viable at the moment. SPD leader Sigmar Gabriel says Mrs Merkel has only said we can do it; she hasn't actually done anything. Well, the SPD has been in power with her all this time. Mrs Merkel isn't saying anything much any more, but that never really was her style.

How about if the parties involved were to summarize what they've been doing on the refugee question, for a little more than a year now? Say what of this was good, and what may perhaps have gone too far; and what unites the three parties; in particular, what sets their brand of politics apart from the scare tactics of the AfD [the anti-immigration Alternative for Germany party – Ed.]. A few people might then get the feeling that these parties are in fact governing together, despite their disagreements. I know that this isn't going to happen. But it wouldn't be a bad idea, would it, at least in theory?

Have something to say? Add your comments below.