A longer life for a nuclear power plant would supply ten million households. German gas fracking will guarantee independence for many years. For CDU leader Merz, this shows that all options must be discussed. He is also critical of the aid of traffic lights, but also points out the limits of what is possible.

A longer life for a nuclear power plant would supply ten million households. German gas fracking will guarantee independence for many years. For CDU leader Merz, this shows that all options must be discussed. He is also critical of the aid of traffic lights, but also points out the limits of what is possible.

ntv: Friedrich Merz, NATO wants to increase the number of troops in the rapid reaction force from 40,000 to 300,000. The turning point is clearly becoming concrete. Is the Bundeswehr ready for this?

Friedrich Merz: A few weeks ago, together with the coalition, we financially retooled the Bundeswehr by funding a special fund with a new debt of 100 billion euros to complement and improve the Bundeswehr in this way. I suspect that the military commissar is still right. We have to do this consistently. We also need to permanently increase the defense budget to meet these demands. The conditions are right, but the Bundeswehr also has to be capable, and we have to keep working on it.

So continue to deploy means: At present the Bundeswehr is only partially ready to defend itself?

We know that the Bundeswehr is not in very good shape. Many are responsible for this. We too, but not only. That’s why we made this joint effort. However, we pointed out early on that EUR 100 billion would not be enough to compensate for a deficit that had persisted for decades. In this case we are now talking about a very long term, funding and solid equipment for the Bundeswehr. And we also have to talk about this as part of the so-called mid-term financial planning, which then also has to go beyond this 100 billion period.

Germany is hosting the G7 summit in Elmau. The signal of unity came out of there. What role do you think Germany plays today on the international stage? Is the federal government doing everything right this time?

This summit is necessary and right, despite all the criticism leveled at it. We must now say, however, that these summits, launched by Helmut Schmidt in 1975, no longer represent a large part of the world’s economic output as they did then. Just to give you a number: in 1975 it was two thirds. Today it is still a third. That means the burden in the world has shifted. So it was right to invite several countries as guests. But I can imagine that there will also be a final communique with the guests. Unfortunately, that’s not the case and, sadly, that’s not the case with India either. India is a key country, and the Chancellor rightly said so when the Prime Minister was in Germany in early May. It may take a little more effort to include India, for example in the joint final communique at this G7 summit.

We will see India again at the latest at the G20 summit in Indonesia in the fall. The G20 also exists because the G7 can no longer represent the world. Russian President Vladimir Putin has announced that he intends to take part in this summit. The Chancellor has left open whether he will go there. He might leave. Will you do it? And what do you really want to say to Putin?

I can’t and don’t want to imagine that these formats – G7 or G20 – will now be the order of the day such that Putin will be seen there again. He was officially expelled from the G7 after the occupation of Crimea. It used to be G8. Letting the G20 take place now and Putin sitting there as one of the top 20 heads of state and government at the table – I think that’s inconceivable.

But there are also other representatives at the table at the G20 who are not exactly among the perfect democracies. Let’s think of China or Saudi Arabia. So we immediately have a small circle.

But there is a difference between not becoming a democracy and waging a war of aggressive aggression in Europe against a major democracy that violates international law. So again: I can’t imagine Putin sitting at the negotiating table.

So you would advocate excluding Russia? And if Putin comes to the G20 summit, shouldn’t Olaf Scholz go there?

There are signals from the host country that say: Russia yes, Putin no. Perhaps agreement can be reached on such a separability clause or on such a clever formulation. Again, I find it inconceivable that he is sitting there.

It’s not far from Putin’s pursuit of energy independence in Germany. Russia can stop gas flow at any time. In Germany, however, the federal government sticks to it: nuclear power plants must close on time by the end of the year, and gas fracking is not promoted in Germany either. Is it true, understandable course?

I would like to stick to my judgment: Given the deteriorating energy supply situation, we must not give up any options at this time. You can keep the nuclear power plant running. We all know that they make only a small contribution to the electricity supply in Germany. But there are at least ten million households to supply. Fracking in Germany is currently not permitted. But we will have gas in Germany on a scale that will allow us to be self-sufficient for many years. The question is whether you can do it socio-politically. You can’t do that to society. But we import fracking gas from America and Canada and even set up an LNG terminal for it. So the discussion is early and far from over. We have to discuss this. Again: In principle, we need all options to ensure our country’s energy supply.

The head of RWE, Markus Krebber, has little thought of leaving the power plant operating any longer.

I can totally understand that. He is in charge of his company’s business. The power plant is in shutdown mode, the employee has a new job. But the question is not whether we make the right business decisions, but politically we have to make the right economic decisions. And if there is a way to keep this power plant running, technically and legally, then it should at least be seriously considered. I’m going for it. After all, they reliably cover ten million households in Germany with energy supplies.

Inflation is also a big problem. The federal government is now talking about tax-free one-time payments. Do you think such a model is a good idea?

This clearly has to be agreed with the parties to the collective bargaining. I heard from both sides, from employers as well as from employee representatives, that they didn’t really like this idea. Mainly because this would result in significant losses to the tax budget as well as to the social security system. It’s just an idea. Is it really good, you have to look in the expression. But you will not be able to compensate for all the losses caused by inflation. Incidentally, it’s just a cure for the symptoms. It would be better to eliminate the cause. Central banks must act, they have waited too long, and countries must stop accumulating debt. Debt drives inflation, and that’s one reason.

There are already various assistance packages, such as tank discounts or 9 euro tickets. Is the country in a position to completely protect against all the consequences of inflation?

He couldn’t do it. Few members of the federal government, if not all, have so far acknowledged this. But if he tries to compensate for at least some of the losses, then he should not forget the group of individuals in our society. Like retirees or students, who will have the same right to be released.

Christian Wilp talking to Friedrich Merz