X Close

German Left is holding Friedrich Merz to ransom

New government, same as the old one. Credit: Getty

New government, same as the old one. Credit: Getty

13 March 2025 - 3:00pm

“The Left is gone,” declared Friedrich Merz just before the German election. Confident of victory for his centre-right CDU/CSU, the likely next chancellor predicted: “There will be no Left-wing majority and no more Left-wing politics in Germany.”

Most Germans did indeed vote for Right-wing parties, but Left-wing politics isn’t going anywhere. In fact, the Left-wing minority might derail the new government’s flagship policy before it even takes office.

In an effort to boost European defence capabilities and pull the German economy out of its downward spiral, the two parties most likely to form the new government want to spend big. They intend to borrow up to €1 trillion to get the German military fighting fit and to invest in the country’s crumbling infrastructure, and it will be debated in the German parliament today. But the Greens, whose support would be required to reach the necessary supermajority for such eye-watering borrowing, have vowed to block the spending package.

Germany is in a self-imposed fix. The parties of the deeply unpopular ruling coalition led by chancellor Olaf Scholz’s centre-left SPD alongside the Greens get to call the shots in the next government, despite having lost the election.

Merz needs Green help because, under Germany’s previous chancellor Angela Merkel, a so-called debt brake was written into the constitution that severely restricts borrowing. Any changes to it and any special budgets to run outside of regular expenditure must be approved by a two-thirds majority — and for that Merz will have to turn to the forces he’d declared dead merely weeks ago.

This dynamic is self-imposed, too. All political parties uphold a firewall against the anti-immigration Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), which came second with nearly 21% of the vote. That leaves the centre-right election winner with only parties to the Left to work with.

Even a regular majority is only possible with the most spectacular loser of the election: the SPD, which received its worst result since the 1800s. Being Merz’s only viable coalition partner has put the party in a position to strong-arm him in exchange for compromises on illegal immigration. Some of its politicians have even demanded that deportations are only used as a last resort, and that long-term residents in Germany get a vote regardless of whether they are citizens. The spending package itself looks more like SPD policy than Merz’s – he had promised fiscal prudence before the election.

The Greens have been ridiculed by Merz relentlessly, with the CDU leader at one point ranting against “Green and Leftist nutjobs”. Now they have little reason to wave through his reforms, arguing that the new government doesn’t “care about the future, climate protection and generational fairness”. Merz is under enormous pressure, then, to find out what they want and give it to them before the new parliament convenes on 25 March.

In the new Bundestag, the AfD will double its share of representatives, and the far-Left Die Linke will also get 10% of seats. Together, they will have over a third of deputies and therefore the opportunity to block supermajorities like the one Merz seeks. He would then have to convince the stridently anti-military Die Linke, as well as the SPD and the Greens, of his plans.

Merz was right: there is no majority for Left-wing politics in Germany. Just over a third of voters opted for the SPD, Greens and Die Linke combined. But with the firewall against the Right firmly in place, the conservatives will shift to the Left in exchange for power, repeating the cardinal error of the Merkel era rather than correcting it as they had promised voters.

Many Germans will feel that no matter how much they vote for change, every one of their governments looks like the last: divided, with an inbuilt centre-left drift that has long ceased to represent the will of the majority.


Katja Hoyer is a German-British historian and writer. Her latest book Weimar: Life on the Edge of Catastrophe will be released in May 2026.

hoyer_kat

China is threatening America in the AI race

Reports sugget Zhipu AI  has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

Reports sugget Zhipu AI has released a new model that can rival leading US systems. Credit: Getty

1 July 2026 - 10:18am

China is trying to catch up with America on artificial intelligence. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Zhipu AI — one of China’s six “AI tiger” LLMs — has released a new model that can rival leading US systems, including Anthropic’s Mythos, in cybersecurity tasks such as pinpointing security bugs. While this marks a milestone in China’s drive to catch up with Western AI capabilities, strong performance on a single benchmark does not mean it has taken the lead. Chinese models still lag behind their Western counterparts in broader capabilities, such as autonomous operation. Skepticism is therefore warranted before resorting to hysterical conclusions, but complacency about the geopolitical implications of China’s AI advances would be an even greater mistake.

On the infrastructure side, Chinese AI is still constrained by access to advanced chips, with American labs way ahead in computing capacity as well as investment. Analysis from earlier this year suggests that Chinese models are likely to be at least a few months behind those in the US. But they are still continuing to make progress, or that the geopolitical importance of AI will be decided only by whose LLM has ventured deeper into the technological frontier. The practical applications of AI, countries’ to capture foreign markets, and the application of AI into the real economy will matter just as much.

Here, China may hold an advantage. As with its dominance across many critical supply chains, Beijing may not need to produce the most advanced AI systems — only those that are affordable and widely deployable. In doing so, it could consolidate global influence by supplying functional, low-cost AI at scale.

Beijing seems to be pursuing exactly that path, developing an AI “open-source” strategy that offers affordable, widely available AI models for companies and individuals to use and modify as they wish. The production of the DeepSeek AI model, which matched the performance of Silicon Valley tools such as ChatGPT at a fraction of the cost for users, created goodwill among Chinese models with developers.

The four most popular models on OpenRouter, an AI hardware platform for developers, are now all Chinese. The goal for China is not only to win the frontier-model race, but to make its systems the default layer of AI adoption across industries and global markets. For most economies, the choice is increasingly between an affordable tool they can deploy now and a more robust one that may be out of reach.

And while the countries adopting Chinese models may be exposed to political pressure and cyber threats from Beijing, safer and more capable alternatives matter little if they are unaffordable. American AI companies are already under pressure to monetize products whose operating costs are rising. If Chinese open-source models become the cheap default for startups, universities, governments and businesses across the developing world, then America’s AI lead will be eroded from below.

Perhaps more concerning for America in the long run is how AI can give Chinese manufacturing even more strength, through the ongoing integration of AI as a general-purpose technology. China’s new Five-Year Plan mentioned AI more than 50 times and includes an “AI+” action plan aimed at spreading AI across the economy.

Beijing has been pioneering automation of its critical infrastructure for years, with promising recent results in increasing warplane production capacity. In that regard, China’s open-model strategy and manufacturing dominance will reinforce each other. Cheap, adaptable models accelerate deployment across the real economy while those deployments generate real-world data and use cases that can feed back into further model improvement.

The United States should not dismiss the importance of its lead in the AI race. That lead worries Beijing, not least because a more automated Chinese economy would also become more vulnerable to AI-generated cyber threats. But nor should Washington assume that China cannot catch up with American capabilities over time.

This AI competition represents part of a broader struggle over tech supply chains and geopolitical influence. Decisions over whether to adopt US or Chinese models could produce a more fragmented global reality, with different regions relying on different cloud providers, chips and security structures. The result will likely be a global economy which is divided into competing spheres, rather than one which produces a single winner.


Miquel Vila is a political and geopolitical risk consultant focusing on industrial strategy, critical infrastructure and global supply chains.

miquelvilam