Of course, you could yawn at it and then put it aside. Extension of runtimes for nuclear power plants? Markus Söder demands that? Friedrich Merz demands it? And what about FDP faction leader Christian Dürr? Sounds like old hat that nobody needs anymore. At least that’s the impression it has on anyone who remembers how difficult it was for many in the Union and in the FDP when Angela Merkel, Guido Westerwelle and Horst Seehofer decided to phase out nuclear power in spring 2011, after pushing through an extension of the term in autumn 2010 had. Of course, the abrupt end hurt many, especially the Conservatives. The wounds never healed properly. And yet the current debate sounds as if it is primarily about pain from the past.
On the other hand, by autumn at the latest, Europe and Germany will face an energy policy emergency that could be unprecedented in the history of the republic and the continent. Not one of the above says that. They are vocabulary of crisis, emergency and apocalypse that come from the federal government. Rhetorically somewhat softer by the chancellor; by Vice Chancellor and Energy Minister Robert Habeck, but all the more clearly. On Monday he explained that if things turned out as feared, private households would also have to do their part to share the burden in the fall. Habeck doesn’t do it to get spectacular headlines. The Green politician warns people to prepare them for difficult times. This is not a political game, he is as serious as it could be.
Pragmatic realism is Habeck’s greatest trump card
He proved that politically early on. Also and especially in your own actions. His journey to Qatar, to get gas from of all places, was anything but a pleasure; and his decision to turn more coal into electricity in times of need provoked anger, especially among the Greens and the Fridays for Future movement, that he would have liked to have spared himself. So far, of course, it hasn’t done him any harm. On the contrary, the pragmatic realism he exemplified in office has become his greatest asset. Not a speech bubble producer, but someone who weighs up the most difficult things, wrestles with everything and then decides. That is the reason why it is popular with many people.
And this is where the nuclear debate comes in. It is precisely here that the Union and the Liberals want to challenge his pragmatism. With the supposedly simple question of why he is threatening the climate with new coal-fired electricity in this crisis, but is not willing to let the climate-neutral nuclear power plants continue to run for a few months. That sounds plausible to anyone who isn’t looking very closely. Especially when the heat (and with it the climate crisis) hits this summer and an energy shortage triggers the most severe upheavals in the fall. The minister doesn’t even want to “jump over his shadow” for a few months?
Union and FDP know where the pain point of the Greens they are touching. And they suspect that in a perhaps bitterly hot autumn they could still trigger many anti-Habeck emotions. But they also know one thing and ignore it as much as possible: that the necessary security checks are missing and cannot be made up for in a few months. The remaining three nuclear power plants would have to run without a safety check from the first day of the extension. The fact that Habeck rejects this does not speak against him, but against all those who just ignore it.