Former Finance Minister Theo Waigel clearly criticized the traffic light coalition in “Markus Lanz” and revealed what made him particularly angry about the afd.
From the age of 85, former Federal Finance Minister Theo Waigel commented on the pressing issues of the time on the ZDF talk show “Markus Lanz”. During his solo appearance, the honorary chairman of the CSU sharply criticized the Green Economics Minister Robert Habeck and the social Democratic Chancellor Olaf Scholz, but also revealed which SPD politician he would immediately join a grand coalition with.
Although Habeck had the ability to explain himself, he failed as economics minister. “The fact that we are currently at the bottom of all industrialized countries, that Germany is dragging down the average of the EU countries, has really never happened before,” explained Waigel, referring to the recession in Germany. An economics minister must be responsible for this. In addition to a lack of professional competence, the CSU veteran accused Habeck of having recruited top staff for the Ministry of Economics from “green cadres”.“They were all ideologues,” summed up the former cabinet member.
Waigel, who was Federal Finance Minister from 1989 to 1998, only found even clearer words for Chancellor Scholz.“There has never been so little political leadership in the Federal Republic of Germany,” said the CSU politician. After all, starting with Konrad Adenauer (CDU), the first chancellor, he saw all the Federal Republic heads of government “with a keen eye.” Unlike his social democratic predecessors Willy Brandt, Helmut Schmidt and Gerhard Schröder, Scholz does not approach things decisively, but rather tries to be for and against a cause simultaneously occurring.
Liberal former finance minister Christian Lindner fared slightly better than his former coalition partners. Waigel called it “impractical” that Scholz attacked him personally in his speech about the traffic lights being turned off. That was a “hit below the belt” and a “lack of style”. “You can also separate from each other properly,” complained the CSU politician.
The FDP, in turn, should not have made the mistake of entering into a coalition with the SPD and the Greens, both of which would have positioned themselves against the Liberals in economic and financial policy terms. “Lindner couldn’t be triumphant with that,” summarized Waigel.The FDP chairman should also have ended the coalition earlier and of his own free will rather of allowing himself to be thrown out. That was suboptimal.
Waigel even went into raptures about another of his successors as finance minister. “I could immediately form a grand coalition with Peer Steinbrück and we would agree 90 percent of the time. I like him and respect him,” said the CSU politician about the SPD man, who oversaw the German budget from 2005 to 2009. As one of the points that would connect him with Steinbrück, he cited the willingness to give the electorate pure wine and implement austerity measures.
What is needed is an overall financial policy concept that also includes a reduction in subsidies based on the lawnmower principle, suggested Waigel.There is no alternative to such measures, emphasized the Christian Socialist, knowing full well that they would be tough to implement and could pose risks to the stability of the political system.
“It’s not just an economic crisis,but also a democratic crisis,” admitted Waigel. The fact that populist forces like AfD and BSW are so successful, especially in east Germany, also has to do with structural problems and mass migration. “No country or population can make up for such bloodletting,” explained the CSU politician. “We are missing people today, even as Democrats, as top performers. In this respect, we are facing major problems,” Waigel continued.
“The east Germans could actually be proud,” explained the man who led the negotiations on the economic, social and monetary union of the two German states after reunification and ensured the financing of reunification. The East Germans created an upswing in the 1990s that was comparable to the economic miracle of the 1950s in the West. “We may have made a mistake back then. We didn’t explain to people enough what the GDR’s economy really was like. We wanted to protect people,” admitted Waigel.It was a possible indication that the former finance minister himself did not always communicate as clearly during his active time as he now demanded of incumbent politicians during his appearance at the Lanz.
What are Theo Waigel’s main criticisms of Minister Habeck’s economic strategies?
Interview between Time.news Editor and Theo Waigel on Current German Politics
Editor: Welcome, Mr. Waigel.It’s an honor to have you with us today.Yoru recent appearance on ”Markus lanz” stirred quite the conversation. From your viewpoint, what’s the current state of Germany’s economy under the leadership of Minister Habeck?
Theo Waigel: Thank you for having me. The situation is quite troubling. we are experiencing unprecedented challenges, especially with Germany now ranking at the bottom among industrialized nations.It’s a stark contrast to the past when we were at the forefront of economic stability.I believe Minister Habeck, while theoretically capable, has not demonstrated the necessary professionalism and strategic vision to reverse this tide.
Editor: You mentioned during the show that Habeck’s team is compromised by ideological appoints. Can you elaborate on this?
Theo Waigel: Certainly. My concern is that Habeck has surrounded himself with individuals from strictly “green” backgrounds. While commitment to green policies is essential, the expertise to navigate a complex economy is vital.In my assessment, those chosen lack the pragmatic approach necessary to foster growth and innovation, which has direct consequences for our economic recovery.
Editor: You also provided a sharp critique of Chancellor olaf Scholz, stating there’s a lack of political leadership. What specifically do you feel is driving this perception?
Theo Waigel: Scholz’s indecision is striking. Unlike previous chancellors like Adenauer, Brandt, Schmidt, and Schröder—who provided clear direction—scholz frequently enough seems to be walking a tightrope, trying to please everyone. This ambiguity stifles progress. Leadership requires courage and clarity, especially in times of crisis.
Editor: You’ve had considerable experience in German politics. When you compare Scholz to his predecessors, what critical differences stand out to you?
Theo Waigel: It is primarily about decisiveness. Historical leaders took bold stances and provided transformative policies. Scholz, on the other hand, seems hesitant, oscillating between conflicting viewpoints without committing to a singular vision. This is more than a stylistic issue; it leads to stagnation.
Editor: Considering your criticisms, are there any politicians from the SPD you believe could potentially lead a grand coalition effectively?
Theo Waigel: yes, I see potential in some SPD members. while I won’t name names at this moment, I believe there are individuals who exhibit the kind of decisiveness and strength that can rally the party and the country. Compromise is vital in politics, but we must also prioritize clear leadership.
Editor: You also mentioned Christian Lindner in your comments. How woudl you assess his performance relative to his coalition partners?
Theo Waigel: Lindner has navigated a difficult path. While he isn’t without faults,his approach has been more practical compared to some of his counterparts. However, personal attacks from Scholz undermine cooperative efforts, which I see as counterproductive for our collective duty to manage the nation’s affairs.
Editor: mr. Waigel, thank you for sharing your insights today. Your perspectives shed light on the current political landscape in Germany and the challenges we face moving forward.
Theo Waigel: Thank you for having me. I hope that through dialog, we can encourage a re-evaluation of policies that will support Germany’s return to a position of strength in the global economy.