The Trump-Germany rematch

A weekly newsletter on German politics, with news and analysis on the new government.
By MATTHEW KARNITSCHNIG

Send tips here | | Subscribe for free | View in your browser
 
Most western countries have a tried-and-true method for dealing with Donald Trump: Grin and bear it. 
Not Deutschland. So what if Germany is completely dependent on the U.S. for its security. Who cares if the U.S. is Germany’s largest export market by far? 
For ze Germans, none of that matters…
When you’re right! At least that appears to be the view of Germany’s Green-led foreign ministry, which took to X in the wake of Trump’s debate with Kamala Harris to set the record straight — at least in their own minds — about Trump’s comments on Germany’s energy sector. 
The fight began after Trump claimed that Germany’s shift away from fossil fuels had failed, and that the Germans “were back to building normal energy plants.” 
Climate change: Keep in mind, nothing gets a German Green’s goat like criticism of their country’s Energiewende, or energy transformation, which they regard as the greatest German contribution to the world since Adiletten with white socks. 
“Like it or not: Germany’s energy system is fully operational, with more than 50 percent renewables,” the ministry wrote, “And we are shutting down — not building — coal and nuclear plants. Coal will be off the grid by 2038 at the latest.”
Then came the kicker: “PS: We also don’t eat cats and dogs.”
As anyone who hasn’t been living off the grid for the past few days knows, that was a reference to Trump’s baseless claim during the debate that immigrants in Ohio had feasted on their neighbors’ pets. 
True to form: Thing is, Trump was almost right (about Germany, not the pets). While the Germans might not be building new fossil-fuel powered plants, it’s difficult to argue that the Energiewende hasn’t had a huge downside. What’s more, Germany’s loss of cheap Russian gas in the wake of Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine did force the country to rely more on coal, at least in the short term.
The big picture is that the shift to renewable sources of electricity has left the country with some of the highest energy prices in the world and contributed to the ongoing exodus of German industry to the U.S. and Asia. 
Even so, the foreign ministry could have made its defense of the Energiewende without adding the part about “cats and dogs.” Trump, the ministry may have heard, has been known to hold a grudge. When he was president, after all, he did threaten to withdraw 12,000 U.S. troops from Germany, calling the Germans “delinquent” when it comes to military spending. “We don’t want to be suckers anymore,” Trump said at the time.
Fast and furious: Needless to say, the response from MAGA world to the finance ministry post was not long in coming. Richard Grenell, who served as Trump’s ambassador to Germany and is a frontrunner for a top foreign policy post if Trump wins the November election, accused the Germans of “blatant election interference” that was worse than either Russia or Iran.  “We see this clearly and will react accordingly.”
Opposition enraged: The Christian Democrats, who aren’t exactly Trump fans, were also enraged over the diplomats’ undiplomatic move.  “Is it really necessary to damage our relationship to someone who may be the next president and his team?” Armin Laschet, the CDU’s former leader, asked on X. “The international situation is too serious for such games.” 
What’s the big deal? Given the outcry, it would have been easy for the ministry to just delete the post, apologize and move on. Yet no one has ever accused the Greens of taking the easy way out! 
Digging deeper: Responding to Trump’s “disinformation” with “facts and humor” was the “right answer,” Anna Lührmann, Germany’s Europe minister, wrote Thursday. “As democrats, we can no longer allow false statements to stand uncommented.” 
My bike! As it happens, we recently ran into Lührmann on a stage in Austria, where she caused something of a stir…
Where’s Olaf? The real question the episode raises: Where are the adults in the room? The Greens can loathe Trump all they want, but you don’t need to be a climate scientist to understand that provoking the most vengeful person ever to occupy the White House might not be a good idea for Berlin considering that he might be back there in a few months and has long harbored a pronounced antipathy towards Germany, notwithstanding his claim “to have German in my blood.” 
Big Bet: It’s as if the foreign ministry is wagering that Kamala Harris will win. Given how close the polls are, however, that’s a very risky wager.
Jens to the rescue: Retiring NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has agreed to take the reins of the crisis-ridden Munich Security Conference, the annual confab in the Bavarian capital that brings together leading western defense officials and military contractors peddling the latest wares, jokingly termed by regulars “Davos with guns.” (Hat tip to our sister newsletter, the German-language Berlin Playbook, for the scoop!)
Conflicts of interest: The high-profile conference, bankrolled in part by the German government, has been beset by scandal in its management ranks in recent years. The organization’s longtime chairman and current president, Wolfgang Ischinger, raised eyebrows for using his perch atop the MSC and the access it afforded him to global luminaries as a vehicle for his private business dealings.
When McKinsey comes to town: It subsequently emerged (read: POLITICO revealed) that the influence of defense contractors on the conference was far greater than anyone realized, to the degree that McKinsey, the global consulting firm, was effectively writing the event’s agenda and program. 
Auf Wiedersehen? Ischinger ultimately agreed to step away and take a new role as the president of the foundation that oversees the conference. Yet he and his successor, Christoph Heusgen, Angela Merkel’s longtime foreign policy guru, didn’t exactly see eye to eye. 
Alpha Germans: Heusgen made it clear from the get go that he wasn’t going to serve in Ischinger’s shadow. And for good reason. Though Ischinger was a veteran German ambassador, including to Washington, he never reached the pinnacle of Germany’s foreign policy apparatus like Heusgen, who served as Merkel’s national security adviser for more than a decade before crowning his career as Germany’s ambassador to the UN. 
Needless to say, the collaboration didn’t go well. Ischinger, who maintained considerable influence via his role at the MSC foundation, openly complained about Heusgen’s stewardship at dinner parties, according to several witnesses who spoke to POLITICO at the time. 
Oct. 7: The simmering tensions came to a boil in the wake of the Oct. 7 massacres in Israel and comments by Heusgen in a television interview that were widely perceived to be insensitive. Heusgen referred to the brutal killings as a “Hamas action” and said Israel should “not launch a ground invasion.” The comments enraged Israeli officials. 
Trouble was that Heusgen already had a reputation for taking a negative view of Israel, mainly due to his voting record as UN ambassador, when he often either abstained or voted against Israel on resolutions related to the Palestinians. In 2019, that record earned him a place on the U.S.-based Simon Wiesenthal Center annual list of the worst instances of antisemitism, an allegation he strongly rejected. 
The Jew-hating Sheikh: It didn’t help that the MSC had a bonafide antisemite on its board of trustees — Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim bin Jabr Al Thani, a member of Qatar’s ruling family and longime Ischinger cronie. The Sheikh, known as HBJ, bought his way onto the board with a generous donation. 
The MSC kicked him off following an inquiry by POLITICO about an interview the Sheikh had given in which he said: “Imagine oil [was sold] by some Jews…what would be the price of a barrel of oil? It would be the most expensive thing in the world. It would be more precious than anything, like medicine.”
We were (kinda) right! All in all, the tension with Israel amid the Gaza war was not a good look for either the MSC or Germany. As regular Bulletin readers may remember (though probably don’t), we predicted back in February that Heusgen’s days were numbered. We did not see Stoltenberg on the horizon, however. 
So why should we care? Truth be told, most people who go to Munich (or aspire to) have no idea who runs the conference. Yet in Germany, the position of chairman is an influential one because he (it has always been a he) is regarded as a coryphée on all matters related to foreign policy. 
Whether Stoltenberg, who is Norwegian, can play that role is another question. Yet given his unparalleled international stature, he will lend the conference’s organization a degree of gravitas it has lacked. 
The only question is: What does he do with Wolfgang?
SCHOLZ BREAKS BAD: We’ve already written about Olaf Scholz’s ever-sharper turn on migration. It seems his party’s dismal results in the European election and recent eastern state elections, and the AfD’s surge, have got him worried about his political future with just a year to go until the next federal election (if he can last that long).
Border controls: It seems now Scholz is really getting desperate. This week, Germany’s interior minister, Nancy Faeser, announced new checks on all German land borders. “We are strengthening our internal security through concrete action and we are continuing our tough course against irregular migration,” said Faeser. “Until we achieve strong protection of the EU’s external borders,” she added, “we need to strengthen controls at our national borders.”
So what if the border controls threaten to undermine one of the pillars of the European idea — freedom of movement over national borders. With a state election coming up in Brandenburg on Sept. 22, and the AfD leading in polls in that state while his coalition plumbs new depths nationally, Scholz is breaking even badder on migration in a bid to save his skin.
Poland not pleased: Several European leaders have voiced their displeasure, including Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who sharply criticized the German plans in Warsaw. If German leaders follow through on tighter controls, it would lead to the “de facto suspension of the Schengen agreement on a large scale,” he said.
Passive aggressive? Tusk also canceled his planned attendance at an event in Potsdam this week, where he was scheduled to meet Scholz, though the reason remained unclear. Though that may also have had something to do with recent German accusations that Poland sabotaged Germany’s investigation into the Nord Stream explosions.
CENTRAL ASIA: Speaking of migration, Scholz on Sunday heads to Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan for a two-day trip. Some German media have reported that Scholz seeks to sign a deal with the Uzbeks that would enable Germany to deport Afghans whose asylum claims have been rejected to the country, though other media reports have cast doubt that such a deal will be on the top of the agenda — at least on this trip.
That’s all for now. See you back here next week!
HATE MAIL: Send complaints (if you must), tips, checks and random thoughts to [email protected]. You’ll also find me on X @mkarnitschnig.
SUBSCRIBE to the POLITICO newsletter family: Brussels Playbook | London Playbook | London Playbook PM | Playbook Paris | EU Election Playbook | Berlin Playbook | Global Playbook | POLITICO Confidential | Sunday Crunch | EU Influence | London Influence | China Watcher | Berlin Bulletin | Living Cities | D.C. Playbook | D.C. Influence | All our POLITICO Pro policy morning newsletters