context
The AfD and other voices accuse Health Minister Lauterbach of scaremongering and warmongering. He had said that he wanted to prepare the health system by law for a “military alliance event”. How is this to be classified?
Federal Health Minister Karl Lauterbach has called for “German hospitals to prepare for a higher number of war injured, victims of war and terror,” says AfD politician Alexander von Wrese in a video that was distributed on TikTok and Instagram, among others. “In the current context, this can be read as preparation for an escalation of a military conflict between Europe and Germany against Russia.”
The right-wing populist blogger and activist David Berger writes on X that Lauterbach calls for “the health system to be converted to war.” After the “Taurus” leaks, there is no longer any doubt: “For the traffic light and the Union, World War III has long been a done deal.”
Lauterbach wants to close the legal loophole
In one Interview with the Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung (NOZ) Lauterbach had previously said:
The pandemic has shown that our healthcare system is not sufficiently prepared for scenarios that we long considered unthinkable. That’s why we already agreed in the coalition agreement to better equip the structures for major crises. Unfortunately, after the criminal Russian attack on Ukraine, this challenge has become more important. And that is why we have a loophole in the law that we are addressing in order to be prepared for a disaster or even a military alliance – as unlikely as it is.
The temporal connection appears to be a coincidence
Particularly explosive, as it is portrayed: The interview was published just one day later after Russia announced that a conversation between high-ranking Bundeswehr officers about “Taurus” cruise missiles had been intercepted.
The Federal Ministry of Health reports that the temporal connection is a coincidence. “The interview was conducted well before the leaks,” writes the press office in response to a request from ARD fact finder. “The time of publication was also determined in advance by the NOZ. The minister answered the journalist’s questions truthfully. We are currently working flat out on the Health Security Act.”
The press office also points out that this is not a new project that was initiated because of Russia’s war against Ukraine: “The Health Security Act is not a new invention, but is already in place Coalition agreement named like that. It says on page 65: ‘With a health security law, we ensure in particular the efficient and decentralized stockpiling of pharmaceuticals and medical devices as well as regular emergency drills for personnel in the event of health crises.'” The coalition agreement was passed on December 7, 2021 – i.e. before the attack Russia on Ukraine on February 24, 2022.
However, implementation has now become more urgent, according to the Ministry of Health: “As the minister says, the proposed law has now gained additional importance. In this respect, the AfD’s claim is factually false – apart from the fact that the AfD implicitly blames the perpetrator and victim wrong. Russia is the aggressor in this conflict. The alliance situation that the minister is talking about occurs when a NATO country is attacked.”
Lauterbach decried as panic minister
What about the accusation of scaremongering? Minister Lauterbach himself said in the interview: “It would be silly to say that we are not preparing for a military conflict and then it won’t come. According to the logic, you wouldn’t need a Bundeswehr. Doing nothing is not an option.” According to the SPD politician, “in the event of an alliance, Germany could become a hub for the care of injured and injured people from other countries.”
According to communications expert Hendrik Wieduwilt, Lauterbach is partly to blame for the allegations. “Lauterbach has been decried as a panic minister since Corona. Whether rightly or not is irrelevant for communication: that is his reputation anyway. In this respect, he would have to be particularly careful,” says Wieduwilt. However, Lauterbach should not allow himself to be banned from speaking: “At the same time, there is a strong interest among right-wing extremists and Russian propaganda in weakening the government and stoking fears. These people always find a reason for this. But you should not therefore give them sovereignty in the discourse and now remain silent on important measures.”
In principle, one cannot talk about such a law until the first draft is ready. “After all, technical discussions take place long beforehand, which can also lead to reporting and criticism. The timing is very unfortunate, but I don’t see that Lauterbach’s people had any influence on it. You shouldn’t try to stop an interview that has already been recorded, because it’s too unpleasant leaks,” says Wieduwilt.
Lauterbach lacks a sense of his own impact – or he doesn’t care about it, Wieduwilt continues. In this specific case, Lauterbach’s formulation sounds “more active and more researching than it should. He could have said, for example: ‘Peace is not only in our hands, we must therefore be ready’, then it would have sounded different. A rhetorical step towards frightened citizens .”
“Health system must crisis-resilient be”
In principle, Lauterbach’s proposed legislation is correct, says health economist Susanne Busch, professor of health economics and policy at the Hamburg University of Applied Sciences (HAW): “Our health system must be crisis-resilient. This includes such plans.”
One should think in advance “that our nursing staff, our medical, medical and therapeutic staff will never again have to work under conditions as was the case at the beginning of 2020 and 2021.”
In this respect, it has nothing to do with scaremongering, “but simply with clever foresight in non-crisis times, considering what you will do in the worst case scenario. Then there will be no operational hectic, no unclear responsibilities, no uncertainties about action and no distribution discussions when a crisis occurs should occur”.
Holding costs play a major role in reform
In order to prepare the health system for a crisis, financial security is needed, says Andreas Beivers, professor of economics and dean of health economics at the Fresenius University of Applied Sciences in Munich. “Reserve costs play a major role in the reform. It is therefore right that Lauterbach is already thinking about these. I hope he has already clarified whether he has the financial resources for this.”
“We already have the problem that we cannot adequately staff many stations and departments during regular operations,” says Beivers. “And then the question arises, can we realistically manage to create the reserves that we would need in the event of a crisis with the economic and human resources currently available to us? Reserves are expensive.”