Stance on Bush Policy Could Swing Election in Germany

The German chancellor, Gerhard Schröder, and his conservative rival, Edmund Stoiber, locked in a dead heat before the voting on Sept. 22, clashed sharply tonight over questions of unemployment and Iraq in their second and final televised debate.

The two candidates, both wearing bright red striped neckties, dropped their tentativeness of two weeks ago to exchange barbs, interrupt one another and quarrel aggressively about their records, plans and even their upbringings.

Iraq and its impact on German-American relations were the new elements in this debate for an electorate already well informed about Mr. Schröder's failure to keep his pledge to bring down the number of unemployed, now over 4 million, to 3.5 million in his first term.

The stagnant economy and high joblessness remain the No. 1 issue in the opinion polls for Germans, who tend to cast their votes for parties and platforms, not so much for personalities.

But Mr. Schröder's flat refusal to support German participation or funding in any war against Iraq, supported by the United Nations or not, has proved popular with Germans, and he scored points with his clear position tonight. "I'm against a military intervention — clearly, without conditions," he said.

Mr. Schröder's opposition to any war in Iraq and his management of Germany's flood crisis have pulled his Social Democrats effectively even with Mr. Stoiber's conservatives. The election is likely to turn on what the 15 percent or so who are still undecided choose to do, how the liberal Free Democrats, Mr. Stoiber's likely coalition partner, fare, and whether the former Communists, the Democratic Socialists, make the cutoff to get parliamentary seats. Germans cast two votes, for a local candidate and for a party — not for chancellor. The chancellor, as in any parliamentary system, is the leader of the party that forms the government.

The debate tonight is unlikely to change many minds, said Torsten Schneider-Haase of the Emnid polling group. "Tonight, both men performed to expectations," he said. "But the voters have already factored the personalities into the price, so this debate won't make too much difference."

But polls show that between 66 percent and 75 percent of Germans oppose a war in Iraq. "While the economy is still the most important issue," Mr. Schneider-Haase said, "Iraq is important, and tonight on Iraq Schröder was much better."

Mr. Schröder's position has angered Washington and caused a public spat between two close allies, worrying diplomats.

But Mr. Stoiber's more nuanced position — Saddam Hussein is a nasty dictator, Germany should wait to see what the United Nations Security Council decides, then talk to its European allies, try to support Washington but oppose a war if possible, and certainly not support a unilateral American war — may simply be too complicated to come over well in a televised duel like this one.

At one point Mr. Schröder, having repeated his refusal to allow any German military support for a war in Iraq, turned to Mr. Stoiber and said: "Say yes or no. That's the question."

Mr. Stoiber again talked of his opposition to war, and his support for the introduction of weapons inspectors to Iraq without preconditions as a way of avoiding war, and he criticized Mr. Schröder for harming the German-American alliance by not calling President Bush and discussing the issue privately. "I don't want a unilateral national decision on this," Mr. Stoiber said, stressing Germany's ties with the European Union, NATO and Washington. "No one should go it alone, neither here nor in America."

Mr. Schröder answered: "Friendship doesn't mean that you say yes and amen to everything."

Mr. Stoiber was aggressive tonight, but often became lost in details, and Mr. Schröder seemed tired. But the chancellor was more his telegenic self, using quips and sharp retorts to score points.

"I blame Schröder for simplifying the debate on Iraq too quickly and populistically," said Stefan Kornelius, editorial page editor of the Süddeutsche Zeitung. "Stoiber tried to walk a middle line, but his argument is too complicated. Which is why George Bush, if he sounds too much on the warpath this week at the United Nations, can win Schröder the election."

Mr. Stoiber did well on the economy, Mr. Kornelius said. "But his real weakness is that he can't shut up. He gets lost in the details."

Uwe Jun, a political scientist at the University of Potsdam, said Mr. Schröder was more aggressive but not as statesmanlike in this second debate. "I don't like to say this, but there is a bit of anti-American attitudes within part of the population, and most people don't agree with Bush, who seems a bit aggressive," Mr. Jun said. "Stoiber makes no points with this issue."

According to instant polls done by Infratest Dimap for ARD television, 50 percent found Mr. Schröder, 58, "more convincing" and 28 percent preferred Mr. Stoiber. 60.

On foreign policy, the poll found 57 percent thinking Mr. Schröder was more convincing, to 28 percent for Mr. Stoiber. But on questions of employment, Mr. Stoiber was found more convincing by 46 percent, compared to 30 percent for Mr. Schröder.

But the first debate, in which Mr. Stoiber did better than expected, did little to move the opinion polls, which have left this race too close to call.

Mr. Schröder's firm "hands off" Iraq, as he put it in an interview last week with The New York Times, has opened up a fierce squabble with Washington, Germany's closest ally, which has made some Germans uncomfortable.

American officials believe that Mr. Schröder is toying with the German-American alliance for votes, although Mr. Schröder denies it, and did so again tonight.

The American ambassador here, Daniel R. Coats, has taken the unusual step of public criticism of an ally in the midst of an election campaign, saying that Mr. Schröder's position on Iraq risked "isolating Germany from the main course of thinking in the European Union, and said that Germany's failure to support Washington has led to "a certain doubt about the closeness of the relationship."

Schroder is making a desperate attempt to rally the left, which naturally wins great sympathy at the NY Times, always hostile to US efforts to defend itself. Schroder will probably lose anyway. As for German sentiment, there is considerable German - Iraq trade. Germany supplies Iraq with much of what it needs for chemical weapons, and it was a German company that constructed Saddam's "fuhrerbunker" beneath Baghdad. Saddam's Baath Party was modeled on the German National Socialist Workers Party ("Nazi" party for short), and Schroder is the leader of today's German socialist party, which though not given over to such brutality as were the Nazis, nevertheless is an idolator of state power.

"I'm against a military intervention — clearly, without conditions," he said.

Real deep thinker.

If Schroeder wins, it would be wise for Saddam to invade Germany. Gerhard’s already announced their eagerness to surrender.

I don't think our military planners were drawing up any plans which include the Germans, anyway. I can hardly believe this is an important issue to German voters. German troops aren't needed or wanted.

In the event it really is important, Bush's speech on Thursday at the UN is likely to be persuasive, and at least some portion of the German electorate will come around.

Schroeder is going to lose this election.

You're right. The NY Times also announced the Daniel Ortega (Communist Leader of the Sandinistas) had a "very good chance" of being elected the President of Honduras last year....he lost in a landslide.

Just listen to their "far-right wing extremist Nazi" characterizations of Haider and Le Pen to know they hate conservatism and anti-socialism whenever; whereever.

Under Howell Raines, the NY Times has become the new Communist Party propaganda sheet infected with the delusions of Gus Hall and the arrogance of Hollywood.

Exactly, that's why I posted this. Who else would be interested in writing about this garbage besides the Times? Amazing how they can brainwash with their unique spin. You're corect, allow Europe... to survive without America.

Let's see if we can connect the dots...

1938-1945: Germans kill 6 million Jews

Now: Germans support Saddam Hussain who is targeting missles equipped with poisen gas again Isreal

Why bother invading Germany, there are already so many Iraqis there...

Indeed. I was going to comment on the 'unemployment' issue anyway, so...

In the political context, the word 'Unemployment' brings to the mind of the German citizen the subject of welfare. Now, who do you suppose working Germans see on welfare? All those immigrants from the Middle East.

This might be too much of a live wire for center-right politicians like Stoiber to touch, but it's there under the surface anyway.

I hope so, but I doubt it.

The war has become a big issue in that election, and it has, to an extent, drowned out the economic issues that would have sunk Schroeder big time.

The same dynamic, though, will play in Bush's favor in the November elections. Germany could make things miserable for us, particularly if they push the EU to oppose the war we HAVE to fight with Iraq.

I can't imagine that Germany would forbid use of our airbases in their country for logistical resupply for an Iraqi war effort, so their support or lack of it is no more important than China's. Perhaps less, since China has a veto at the UN Security Council.

Still, I hate to see it affect the elections, which were definitely favoring the conservatives. The left is always shocked by any conservative victory, and I'm hopeful that the German left and the NY Times are shocked once more.

Schroeder will likely win the election...but with no policy on jobs...like the last four years...all of these social idiots will be whining in two years about lack of employment. Schroeder may likely take the step of denying use of bases in Germany, which he has the right. We will simply tell the GI's to pack up a bag and we deploy to neighboring France and conduct operations out of there (yes, it appears the French will side with us). Several scenarios could then arise. Barvaria, which is the Free-State of Bavaria, could go to court and declare that the US has the right to operate out of Bavaria. Several test cases of state authoritiy have recently gone to the states instead of the national government, and Bavaria is strongly pro-American. Schroeder could declare that NATO is not justified anymore and simply demand that NATO bases close within two years, thus inviting financial suicide and massive unempoyment in central Germany (over $1 billion of American money flows into central Germany...it does make a difference). And finally, the Brits could walk in and invite the US to relocate all bases to the UK and take in a ton of money. It would bring shame to Germany and take the EU prestiage down a step or two. In any case, Schroeder has taken the entire mess to a point that will hurt him and the next four years.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.