Catch-all Europe isn't that great thread

Everyone predicts this is the beginning of the end of Germany putting Europe before Germany, policy-wise.

Everywhere where? The Greens are the second or third party (almost tied second) int he two most recent elections and they are staunchly pro-EU. And Merkel’s party and its partner recent anti-EU anti-immigrant rethoric has lost them votes. They Socialist party, also in decline but still a major force is also pro-EU.

It might come to be (and parliamentary dynamics can be very tricky indeed), but the situation is much more complex than an anti-EU punishment vote. It could equally be read as the opposite.

I might be wrong, we’ll see.

Also, the perception here is that Germany seldomly puts itself after the EU, policy wise, even recently. The future of Germany and that of a strong EU is perhaps the most tied of any EU country. So you are positing an end to something that is pretty much in question it even exists :)

Isn’t it amazing how perception can be different depending on your angle? ;)
Many Germans - probably the majority - think that Germany puts much more into the EU than it gets out, and at the same time makes way too many compromises. Germany paid 11 billion EUR more than they received in in 2016. France 9.2B, the UK 6.3B(***). Compared to that the number of high level offices taken by Germans is relatively low, and the fact that every country has equal votes in the EU government isn’t particularly popular here. I bet it’s safe to say a country like Slovakia likes this a lot though.

(***) Of course I have deliberately chosen a statistic in which France isn’t the biggest net payer. EUR/citizen would tell you that.

I would be happy with voting power tied to population. It’s certainly the fairest approach (that or GDP, but since it’s supposedly a democratic institution population makes sense). I understand why it was inviable to settle it like that at the start, but I would welcome an approach to modifying the rules (which I know is extremely unlikely due to vetoing power, another thing I dislike).

The AFD stabilising and entering pretty much every parliament is quite realistic. At some point the other parties will have to give them some rope and hope they hang themselves. As long as they don’t self destruct and don’t have at least state government responsibility (as a junior partner) they are in a very comfortable situation because they can simply say “We are right, just watch the news.”
Fighting the AFD will be hard. My impression is it’s common understanding in middle class and working class now that Germany has a serious problem with organized crime (in the wider sense) and at the same time it has let a couple of hundred thousand refugees too many into the country, only a minority of them really in danger, while the Merkel government has refused to create an imigration law to regain control of the issue. The AFD sees (and sells) both problems as connected, and the things you see in the news every day make it hard to disprove this. There are areas in the cities you shouldn’t enter at night, and whole districts are controled by clans with many hundreds of members.
Merkel and all state governments haven’t only fumbled the ball on this, they’ve rammed a knife in it too.

The leaders of the established parties are all solid enough, meaning one doesn’t have to like them, but at least one can be sure the borders will stay as they are now and people won’t suddenly disappear.

Agreed. It would be fine but it will never happen because the smaller countries will veto it. From their perspective of course with good reasons.
What they should do is split the EU in 2 parts and them have them cooperate closely. This would be an opportunity for a reform. While they’re at it they could also pay off a few countries they should have never let in.

Yep, I’m pro 2-speeds EU. There has been enough backpedaling by the smaller (UK notwithstanding) countries already. Reform is needed, but towards closer integration, not towards dismantling the political dimension of the Union.

There’s still a lot of qualified majority voting, though it’s different than before Lisbon, and of course the parliament is weighted by population.

Perspectives are always different from country to country. I think most other people think that Germany have done very well for themselves out of EU, though not in any massively unfair way.

I have to say that watching Merkel leave the scene (as she surely will, within a short time) is something that fills me with a lot of worry. Europe and the democratic world is currently going through its greatest crisis since the 1930s. Resolving all the issues that beset us is going to require the best leaders that the Democratic world can muster. Love her or hate her (and there are certainly things worth criticizing), Merkel is a leader - one that was adept at navigating the troublesome politics of Europe. It’s hard to see, in the current crop of heads of state in Europe, anyone with the authority or ability to fill those shoes.

How Angela Merkel Foiled a Backroom Coup in One Late Display of Clout

By taking herself out of the running to lead the ruling party, the German chancellor dragged its succession process into the light for the first time in decades

https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-angela-merkel-foiled-a-backroom-coup-in-one-late-display-of-clout-1541356656

I thought there was an even bigger (true or false?) perception that German and EU interests were synonymous, to the detriment of other EU members.

External to Germany, that thought is out there. Inside Germany, not so much (immigration Policy, for one).

For local politicians, the EU has a kind of virtue in that you can blame it for anything. Similar to the way US state governments blame the Federal government for everything. So, it’s an effective and useful relationship, whereby smaller / weaker countries get German central banking and economic clout, but still get to blame the Germans (and to a lesser extent, France) for anything the public doesn’t like. The only problem is when the local politicians take it too far and trigger consequences they don’t actually want, e.g. Brexit. As far as whether German interests are synonymous with EU interests, it is generally true that avoiding large-scale wars in Europe serves everyone’s interests.

Well, specifically on Immigration policy, Merkel has wanted to be the most forthright champion of Freedom of Movement. An EU tenet. This put her at odds with her own party and swaths of the German electorate, and opened her to charges of putting Europe before Germany. And that has hurt her, domestically. Now mortally.

I can’t help but thinking that Europeans have a nice thing going, and they want to ruin it all due to too high of expectations. Are Russians meddling the EU zeitgeist as well as the US?

It has definitely hurt her, but she’s not wrong. Without freedom of movement, the EU is just a trade bloc. For EU member citizens, the freedom of movement is the raison d’etre.

That is all open for debate. I am specifically speaking of why many Germans think Merkel has put Europe before Germany (the narrower issue).

Debate is what we’re doing. And I know what you meant. Those Germans are wrong. Credit to Merkel for doing the right thing even if it ultimately costs her their support. That’s what we want elected representatives to do. At least it’s what I want them to do.

My point was merely that I am not advocating one opinion or another on that issue. I am explaining to someone who asked, why Germans would think Merkel was putting EU first. Without letting my (or anyone else’s) stance on the issue cloud that explanation.

For example, regarding Merkel’s protege who she hopes is her successor:

Allies of Mr. Merz said his biggest challenge will come from Ms. Kramp-Karrenbauer. The chancellor’s protégée, nicknamed “mini-Merkel” by the German press, has yet to outline her priorities. In private conversations, she has said voters’ anxieties about immigration should be taken seriously, signaling a possible shift from Ms. Merkel’s stance.

Yes, I see that.