To Stand Up To Putin (And Trump), Germany’s Next Leader Must Spend Much More On Defense

-Analysis-

BERLIN — The man who polls say will be Germany’s next leader, Friedrich Merz, is refreshingly clear when it comes to the threat posed by Russia. You could see it again in the TV debate last Sunday evening: “No, Mrs. Weidel, we are not neutral,” said the center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU/CSU) candidate for chancellor. It was a direct response after Alice Weidel, the far-right AfD (Alternative for Germany) leader, refused to utter a word of criticism of the Russian invasion. “We are on the side of Ukraine, and together with Ukraine, we are defending the political order we have here.”

This clarity from the mouth of the man who is likely to become the next German chancellor is good and important, even more so after the upheavals of the past few days. Neither Germany nor Europe know what U.S. President Donald Trump’s government intends to do with Ukraine and Russia — and whether they can still rely on the support of the United States. Europe’s governments only know, and have known for a long time, that they need to take much greater care of their own security and defense.

In the German parliamentary election campaign, this topic only played a minor role alongside the issues of migration and the economy. Yet after the far-reaching security conference in Munich, and at the very latest on Feb. 24, the day after the election, the question of how and with what Germany is prepared to support Ukraine in the future in this new situation has become acute.

Now that U.S. Vice President JD Vance has raised serious doubts about the security promises of the United States and NATO, the question of Germany’s own security is more urgent than ever: How can the army be put in a position to defend Germany if the worst comes to the worst? Unfortunately, Merz, the likely next chancellor, is avoiding a clear answer to this question during the election campaign.

Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who delayed many things after proclaiming a turnaround and bears some of the responsibility for the current predicament, has at least made a concrete proposal. He wants to change the EU debt rules: Countries should be allowed to exclude defense spending from their debts for the 2% target. This would be a controversial but conceivable approach. It has already been proposed for Germany and the German debt brake by SPD Defense Minister Boris Pistorius.

Empty coffers

Merz, however, avoids the relevant questions. This is all the more irritating given that defense capability would be a priority for a government led by him, as he emphasises. The CDU leader does talk about the need to simplify the complicated processes with which the army procures new equipment, and say that European countries should coordinate more closely on the systems that are procured. This is all correct — but only of secondary importance.

It is crucial that Germany provide a lot of money to finally make the army fit for defense. The special fund that was set up in the weeks following the Russian invasion of Ukraine has almost been used up. The German military, which has handed over many of its stocks to Ukraine, is once again pretty bare.

Merz is already dodging the 2% question.

In order to achieve the goal promised to the NATO partners more than 10 years ago of investing 2% of economic output in security, it is conservatively estimated that an additional 40 to 50 billion euros will soon be needed every year — a fact that could quickly push a future coalition to its limits in times of tight budgets.

As the presumed next chancellor, it would be all the more important to leave no doubt about his own position on this matter. But Merz is already dodging the 2% question. Where will the billions come from?

His CDU party’s motto is to take a look at the cash flow first: We could save on the costs of irregular migration, on green subsidies and a few billion more on the universal basic income. But even if you share these priorities and add a little more tax revenue from hoped-for future growth, you are still a long way from the necessary sums.

2% is not enough

But even if the sum could somehow be found, the 2% target is not enough. Even with this additional 40 to 50 billion euros per year, none of the army’s biggest shortcomings would be quickly remedied. There is a shortage of so many things: soldiers, air defense systems, submarines, tanks — everything that is needed for defense in an emergency.

It is well known that procurement is a bottleneck in the military, which is why the necessary upgrades could not be realised within days or weeks anyway: Tanks ordered today will be delivered in 2030. This is the latest date at which the Federal Intelligence Service estimates that Russia will be in a position to launch an attack on NATO. So time is pressing.

The promises that Germany has made to its NATO partners, such as the provision of new brigades, cannot even come close to being fulfilled with 2%. It therefore needs to invest significantly more in its own security. Robert Habeck, the leading Green Party candidate, is closer to this than the likely future chancellor by estimating the necessary defense spending at 3.5% of economic output.

Experts see a need for 300 billion euros.

Merz, on the other hand, remains vague on both the future level of defense spending and its financing. The debt brake is sacred to many in his party. But as chancellor-to-be, Merz must offer more than the debt brake ultra Christian Lindner, who is unlikely to be part of a new federal government.

These are questions that a CDU/CSU candidate for chancellor should answer: Is an exemption of defense spending from the debt brake conceivable for him: Yes or no? And if not, would he be in favor of a new special fund to upgrade the army? Experts see a need for 300 billion euros. Habeck, for example, has indicated that he is in favor of both options. Merz is in favor of neither.

But the voters deserve clarity. Especially from the chancellor-to-be, especially in times when the security of Germany and Europe is at risk.