Germany’s Final Pre-Election Debate: Economic Turmoil, Migration, and Security Take Center Stage
Introduction
As Germany approaches its pivotal February 23, 2025, federal election, the final televised debate between Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) and opposition leader Friedrich Merz (CDU/CSU) crystallized the nation’s existential debates over economic stagnation, migration policy, and national security.
Held on February 20, 2025, this confrontation occurred against a backdrop of record AfD polling numbers (21%) and simmering tensions over U.S.
Vice President JD Vance’s controversial remarks about far-right political engagement.
Below is a comprehensive analysis of the debate’s critical themes, participant dynamics, and implications for Germany’s political future.
Participants and Political Context
The February 20 debate featured Olaf Scholz (SPD), Germany’s incumbent chancellor since 2021, and Friedrich Merz (CDU/CSU), leader of the center-right Union bloc.
This duel followed a series of multi-candidate debates involving representatives from the Greens (Robert Habeck), AfD (Alice Weidel), and smaller parties.
However, the final showdown narrowed to the two frontrunners, with Merz’s CDU/CSU leading polls at 29–30% and Scholz’s SPD trailing at 15%.
Key Debate Themes
Economic Policy: Growth Versus Austerity
Germany’s economy, mired in its third consecutive year of stagnation, dominated the discourse.
Scholz defended his government’s investments in renewable energy and infrastructure, proposing a “Made in Germany” bonus to incentivize domestic manufacturing.
He emphasized raising the minimum wage to €15/hour and preserving the debt brake flexibility to fund defense spending.
Merz countered with promises to slash corporate taxes to 25%, reduce bureaucracy, and prioritize private-sector growth, arguing that “static” fiscal conservatism would stifle innovation.
A sharp exchange erupted over energy policy.
Merz blamed the SPD-Greens coalition for Germany’s reliance on expensive LNG imports after phasing out nuclear power, while Scholz attributed energy price spikes to Putin’s weaponization of gas supplies.
Fact-checking revealed Merz’s claim of a “three-year recession” was hyperbolic but underscored real GDP contraction (-0.3% in 2023, -0.1% in 2024).
Migration and Security: Hardening Borders Versus Humanitarian Obligations
The knife attack in Aschaffenburg by a rejected Afghan asylum-seeker loomed large.
Merz demanded immediate border controls and detention centers for illegal entrants, vowing to abolish “tolerated status” permits.
Scholz countered with statistics showing a 24% increase in deportations but warned against violating EU asylum laws, stating, “We cannot compromise our values, even as we enforce our laws”.
Merz faced scrutiny over his willingness to accept AfD votes for migration bills, breaking the longstanding “firewall” against far-right collaboration.
Scholz accused him of normalizing authoritarianism, citing the CDU’s January 29 motion that passed with AfD support.
Merz deflected by emphasizing “national security,” claiming 500 “ticking time bomb” threats from radicalized migrants.
Defense and Ukraine: Taurus Missiles and NATO Unity
On Ukraine, Merz advocated sending Taurus cruise missiles, framing it as a deterrent against Putin’s expansionism. Scholz resisted, citing escalation risks and prioritizing EU unity.
Both candidates agreed on maintaining military support but diverged on NATO accession for Ukraine, with Merz dismissing it as unrealistic during active conflict.
The shadow of U.S. politics also intruded. Scholz criticized Trump’s “unpredictable” foreign policy, while Merz called for a “united European front” to counterbalance Washington’s transactional approach.
Vance’s endorsement of engaging far-right parties sparked bipartisan condemnation, with Merz declaring, “I won’t be lectured by an American VP”.
Taxation and Social Equity
Scholz proposed higher taxes on incomes above €3 million to fund social programs, contrasting with Merz’s across-the-board cuts. “If you earn millions, you can contribute more,” Scholz asserted, while Merz warned that tax hikes would drive capital flight.
The SPD’s €12 minimum wage hike (2022) became a flashpoint, with Merz accusing Scholz of reneging on promises to limit increases.
Post-Debate Polling and Strategic Implications
A Forsa flash poll awarded Merz a narrow victory (32% vs. Scholz’s 25%), citing his sharper messaging on migration and economic renewal.
However, 34% found Greens’ Robert Habeck more likable, reflecting voter ambivalence toward both major candidates.
The debate underscored three critical trends:
AfD’s Kingmaker Role: With 21% polling support, the AfD’s anti-migration rhetoric has dragged the CDU rightward, eroding the “firewall” and polarizing discourse.
SPD’s Defensive Posture: Scholz’s focus on technical governance failed to energize the base, leaving Merz to frame the election as a “change versus stagnation” referendum.
Transatlantic Strains: Vance’s interference and Trump’s shadow complicate Germany’s foreign policy autonomy, forcing candidates to balance U.S. ties with EU solidarity.
Conclusion: A Nation at a Crossroads
Germany’s final pre-election debate laid bare the fissures in its postwar consensus.
Merz’s CDU, buoyed by migration anxieties and economic frustration, offers a rightward pivot with deregulation and border hardening. Scholz’s SPD clings to centrist pragmatism, defending social welfare and internationalism but struggling to articulate renewal.
With the AfD poised for historic gains and U.S. alliances in flux, the February 23 vote may redefine Germany’s role in Europe—and the resilience of its democratic norms against populist tides. As Merz warned, “This election isn’t just about policies; it’s about whether Germany remains governable”.
