Merkel's "Common Goal" Hypocrisy Exposed: Deal With CSU Still Not Final


The deal between CDU and CSU is still not settled. There is another player. Meanwhile, Merkel's hypocrisy hit a new high

Happy Hypocrite Not

The subtitle to the feature image is quite telling.

Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany leaving a meeting of the Christian Democratic Union in Berlin early Monday. “We share a common goal in migration policy,” the party said in a statement. “We want to order, control and limit migration to Germany.

Say what?

When did this become Germany's goal? And what about refugee camps in Africa, with no African nation agreeing?

The New York Times reports Merkel, to Survive, Agrees to Border Camps for Migrants.

Chancellor Angela Merkel, who staked her legacy on welcoming hundreds of thousands of migrants into Germany, agreed on Monday to build border camps for asylum seekers and to tighten the border with Austria in a political deal to save her government.

Although the move to appease the conservatives exposed her growing political weakness, Ms. Merkel will limp on as chancellor. For how long is unclear. The nationalism and anti-migrant sentiment that has challenged multilateralism elsewhere in Europe is taking root — fast — in mainstream German politics.

“Her political capital is depleted,” said Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff, director of the Berlin office of the German Marshall Fund. “We are well into the final chapter of the Merkel era.”

Winner - AfD

Eurointelligence has some pertinent comments.

It is pointless to discuss who is the relative winner of this standoff. Both will lose because they have demonstrated that they cannot work together anymore. What it also shows is that attempts to solve the refugee problem, still the number one political issue in Germany, are secondary to the rivalries between CDU and CSU and inside the CSU. The beneficiary of this mess is the AfD. And there are state elections in Bavaria in October.

The deal buys a truce that will last until October. We agree with Berthold Kohler's assessment in FAZ when he writes that Seehofer shares a large portion of the blame but not all of it. The CSU will increasingly blame Merkel - especially if they do badly at the elections. And the rest of the country has learned that the only way the two parties papered over the crisis is through the Kafkaesque legal fiction which they agreed last night.

Done Deal? No So Fast

CDU and CSU may have agreed to this deal but what about SPD?

DW comments Angela Merkel's Last-Ditch Migrant Compromise Under Scrutiny.

Germany's conservatives have finally found common ground on migration policy, but skepticism is rife. The proposed measures have also raised concerns over the future of the open-border Schengen Area.

Now the ball is in the center-left court of the Social Democrats (SPD) — the other player in the grand coalition. Without a green light from the SPD, new measures can't be implemented. SPD party leader Andrea Nahles said there was "still a lot that needs to be discussed."

In forming the long-awaited new German government earlier this year, the SPD made its opposition to closed migrant centers at borders clear — a stance which was reiterated by several SPD delegates on Tuesday.

"Transit centers are in no way covered by the coalition agreement," Aziz Bozkurt, the SPD's expert on migration, told German newspaper Die Welt, adding that the camps were "above the SPD's pain threshold."

"The SPD issued a clear rejection of closed camps," Kevin Kühnert, head of the SPD's youth wing, Jusos, told the dpa news agency.

Repercussions? You Bet!

The repercussions of the planned border controls could be felt well beyond the borders of Bavaria. Now the future of open-border travel across the 26 member states of the Schengen Zone could be threatened by stricter controls on the Bavarian-Austrian border.

Responding to the German conservatives' deal, Vienna said it was prepared to take unspecified measures to "protect" Austria's southern borders with Italy and Slovenia if its neighbor turns back migrants.

Agreement? Really?

So, not only does the SPD have a say in this matter, so does Austria.

Merkel repeatedly makes deals that are not hers to make. In fact, this crisis stems from precisely that fact. "We can do this."

Well, no you can't, and didn't.

No Real Solution

Please consider Opinion: In bid for political survival, Angela Merkel takes refuge in Fortress Europe.

Let's not kid ourselves. After all, in which North African countries should the reception camps be built? The reactions so far have been predominantly hostile. And with which countries can you do business if you want to preserve human rights at the very minimum? And who will take care of refugees if they are prevented from moving on? The latest pictures from Algeria show what can happen. Thousands were literally sent to the desert, including children and pregnant women, where at almost 50 degrees Celsius (122 Fahrenheit) in the shade they died miserably, of thirst and starvation. Countries like Lebanon are already taking in more refugees than the whole of Europe put together. This is also part of the truth of a European policy of isolation.

Peak Merkel

On October 18, 2015, in response to the migration crisis Merkel brought upon herself, I wrote Swamped By Stupidity; Peak Merkel.

This was my comment at that time: "Angela Merkel, being the chameleon that she is, will soon change her colors for the simple reason she needs to. If she doesn't, it will certainly toll [the bell on] the end of her grand coalition".

SPD Hypocrisy Coming Up

The hypocrisy spotlight now shifts to the SPD.

It will be amusing to see what logic SPD uses to agree to send migrants back to Austria and to refugee camps in Africa when no African nation is in support of the idea.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock

Comments (3)
No. 1-3

The plan by EU was to create disembarkation platforms somewhere outside EU either in North Africa aka Libya or Tunisia OR non-EU eastern Europe aka Albania or Montenegro (all have said NO) where people saved in international waters would be taken (people saved in international waters have been brought to Europe mostly to Italy for years) and then from the disembarkation platforms economic migrants would be sent home and those deserving asylum would be taken somewhere (the text of the EU council agreement does not say specifically where but some interpreted they should be brought to EU but Austria's Kurz stated that he interprets it so that they should be taken to refugee camps somewhere). . There are many UNHCR refugee camps in Africa where people live in safety and the countries hosting these UNHCR refugee camps like Kenya demand that the refugees stay in the camp until they return home, UN provides free food or monthly free money to buy free food in these camps with camps having shops, schools, free tents and almost becoming mini-cities through the years because many people stay practically forever since UN keeps giving either free money or free food. UNHCR recently has been sending many Somalis back to Somalia from the UNHCR refugee camp in Kenya because Somalia is now mostly safe and Mogadishu has been secured by African Union troops for years but the somalis that have returned to Somalia have stated this was a mistake because it is hard to earn money for food and jobs are difficult to find and they have said in news articles that they should not have left the refugee in Kenya and returned to Somalia because one got free money there in the refugee camp and it was easier to live there. . Currently NGO ships are going from international waters to Libyan Search and Rescue area and near Libyan coast to pickup hundreds of migrants crammed into dinghies only able to go a small distance so basically everyone getting on these smugglers dinghies is threatening "save us and take us to Europe or we will drown" and smugglers in Libya are selling these dinghy rides with the promise that the NGO ships will be waiting and the NGO ships have been turning of their tracking transponders several times meaning that they have done that most likely to hide the fact that they go very near the Libyan coast to pickup the migrants from the sea. . The EU council agreement stated that NGO ships should stop disturbing the Libyan Coast Guard and let them save people from the Libyan Coast and from Libyan Search and Rescue area. Currently the NGO ships are fighting with the Libyan Coast guard who saves the migrants first from the sea but this should be stopped according to EU agreement. Libya has been given 4-5 good quality ships by EU and Italy to save people from the Sea and Italian Coast Guard and EU migration Agency Frontex have been in Libya training their Coast Guard and are providing millions in funding in addition to giving the ships and providing training. Salvini just promised that Italy will give Libya another 12 ships/boats and train more Libyan Coast Guard personnel so they can save everyone from the sea. . On top of this Italy has stated by Salvini that NGO ships are no longer welcome in Italy's ports and after Malta took that one NGO ship Lifeline in to Malta to avoid a humanitarian crisis with ship full of people at sea for 6 days after Italy refused it port entrance Maltese authorities noticed so many irregularities that they impounded the ship and also denied all NGO ships from using Malta as a port including stopping NGO ships in Maltese harbors from leaving. The irregularities by Lifeline so far: 1.refusing to follow orders from Italy's search and rescue center who told Lifeline to let Libyan coast guard to pick up migrants who were not in distress at the time, instead Lifeline quickly took people and traveled quickly towards Italy. 2. Having a pleasure boat registration from a yacht club in Netherlands that Netherlands stated is NOT valid and that Lifeline does not have a right to fly dutch flag that they have been doing. 3. Continually turning the tracking transponder on and off to hide the ships location (because they were going really close to Libya) 4. The captain of Lifeline having certification only to operate ships within 30 nautical miles of land so he is breaking his personal certification while crisscrossing Mediterranean crossing high traffic tanker and large cargo ship routes. Maltese authorities will also examine the ship fully including computers and communication equipment which the lawyers for the captain strongly opposed (if there is messages showing communication and collusion with the people smugglers the case turns even more serious). . Those closed centers also in the EU agreement were to be voluntary in placed in some EU country and to these should be taken people who are saved in EU waters aka already close to coming to Europe and in them should have been asylum processing and economic migrants were to be sent back and genuine refugees to be spread around EU but only voluntarily. So far no EU country has wanted this kind of center. . The current situation in Libya is such that people coming to Libya and then through smugglers and NGO ships to Europe are about 80-90% economic migrants. In 2017 over 80% people coming to Italy and seeking asylum in Italy were from the following countries that are SAFE: Nigeria, Gambia, Senegal, Pakistan, Bangladesh (yes people travel from Pakistan and Bangladesh to Libya to pay money to smuglers to get a dinghy ride and get picked up by NGO ships and get to Europe), Ghana, Ivory Coast, Guinea, etc. It is clear these people would NOT come to Libya if there was not the smuggler-NGO pipeline to Europe where smugglers put people on an overcrowded dinghy and take them 10-20 nautical miles off Libyan coast and then NGO ships take them to Europe. Then these people demand they should be given asylum because they came through Libya and Libya was so horrible (the parts controlled by UN approved Libyan government are safe by african standards, the parts controlled by islamists/extremists/militias are different matter). It is also estimated that 2-3 times as much people die in crossing Sahara to Libya as die in the Mediterranean so this flow has to be stopped. Previously some smugglers apparently told the people they sent out in boats that if a tanker or a cargo ship does not want to pick people up from the boat they are on that people should crash the boat or sink the boat to force them to take people on board and take them to Europe. In some drowning cases they have probably done this too long way from a tanker or cargo ship so they were not noticed and everyone drowned. . EU also agreed that countries should use all administrative and legistlative means to stop secondary movement and this means that if EU countries intend to fulfill this then they have to start putting asylum seekers in closed assigned areas, closed resiences and closed center until their asylum application has been decided (This is allowed by EU directives) and put failed asylum seekers into DETENTION until they can be repatriated or deported (EU directives allow DETENTION of all failed asylum seekers. . That's it for now. I will provide an update on the Merkel/Seehofer fight and Merkel's mistake after mistake after mistake tomorrow if I have time.


Where is support to Italy? That is the crux. They can put a spanner in the works Europe wide on a raft of voting issues.

Where's master of the EU universe Junker in this, or Tusk. Suddenly silent. Hypocrisy abounds. Whatever Germany decides goes. All others will be silent and tag along but woe betide a smaller nation make such unilateral moves.

The paymaster can do no wrong. Hypocrites indeed.


There is a need for a development and peace plan to help stabilise the source countries of the migrants. A massive Marshall Plan funded by the EU. Of course they can't do that for very many reasons.

Global Economics