+ After German Elections – Headaches Possible + Tripartite Security Pact – Australia, UK & US –Raises Tensions

Germany approaches federal elections on September 26 and chances are quite high that parliament could very well expand to more than 900 members. How is this possible? Only China’s National People’s Congress is larger and this could very well lead to major problems.

Why is the strength Bundestag not fixed?

When Germans cast their votes, there are two aspects. In the first part, they choose their local member of parliament – the direct mandate. In the second part, they choose a political party and its list of candidates. This is meant to combine the principle of majority rule and proportional representation.

The percentage of the second vote results is supposed to determine the number of seats a party is entitled to. However, if a party wins so many direct mandates that this exceeds the percentage of seats that it is eligible for, it is allowed to keep them. These are called “overhang” seats. To ensure that the other political parties are not disadvantaged, they also are awarded more seats to produce the relative proportion of parties in the Bundestag as reflected in the election results [2nd part]. Currently, Germany has 299 electoral districts with as many direct mandates [1st part of the vote]. 299 seats will also be distributed by proportional representation [2nd part]. In theory, the Bundestag should have 598 seats altogether [1st & 2nd parts of the vote].

As an illustration, let us say that a certain party “A” wins 30 percent of the vote [2nd part]. It would be entitled to 90 seats. It also wins 120 direct seats, i.e. 30 seats in excess of its percentage share, and it is allowed to retain these. Its total strength is, therefore, 210 seats. In our hypothetical example, let say party “B” wins 20 percent of the vote by proportional representation and garners 60 seats [2nd part].

It also wins 20 direct mandates [1st part]. However, to make up for its shortfall in its overall percentage, it will be granted an additional 4 seats. Its total strength is, therefore, 84 seats.

In our fictitious example, the Bundestag has as many as 34 “overhang” or excess seats! Currently the Bundestag has a huge/enlarged 709 seats [instead of the normal + / -- 598]. This makes it the second-largest legislative body in the world. This number could escalate to well over 900 after the coming federal elections!

The dilemma this poses is greater than the problem of adjusting the seating arrangements in the chamber. How can compromises be made and how can backbenchers be heard, in a parliament so unwieldy?

Besides the issue of the increasing impossibility of ensuring healthy and concise debate, there is also the question of the cost of paying the salaries of so many lawmakers.

of

the

In the last week of campaigning for the next Bundestag, the CDUcandidate, Armin Laschet remains optimistic in spite of the fact that the SPD already feels triumphant and his own party is not terribly supportive. Undoubtedly, he finds himself in a disagreeable situation. The opinion polls and the media predict an historical disappointing result for the conservatives. Already now both friend and foe are discussing the causes and the consequences ( SZ/ SueddeutscheZeitung, Sep.19). Can it be that the pundits are so off track?

SPD

CDU/CSU

Greens

AfD

FDP

Left Party

25-27 percent

21-22 percent

16-17 percent

11-12 percent

11-12 percent

6-7 percent

If the election results actually reflect these predictions, then the SPD and the Greens can form a tripartite coalition either with the FDP [52 percent] or possibly the Left Party [47 percent], with preference given to the former [“Traffic Light Coalition” – RedYellow-Green].

As with the previous two TV debates among the leading candidates for chancellor from the main political parties – SPD, CDU/CSU & Greens – in the third and final encounter last Saturday, SPD-candidate Olaf Scholz again came out on top. 42 percent of the viewers/ respondents saw him as the victor and most persuasive/convincing, followed by Laschet at 27 percent and Ms. AnnalenaBaerbock at 25 percent (SZ, Sep. 19).

Scholz has promised the German electorate that if he becomes chancellor, the lowest hourly wage will be pegged at 12 Euros [ about US 14 Dollars [ 2 Dollars more than what Biden has promised the Americans!]. He has also guaranteed that pensions will remain stable. These assurances could have a significant impact on the outcome of the coming elections on Sunday, 26 September.

The deal will see the US and UK give Australia the technology to build nuclear-powered submarines for the first time. The US is sharing its submarine technology only after 60 years, having previously only shared it with the UK (BBC, Sept. 17). It means that Australia will be able to build nuclear-powered submarines that are faster and harder to detect than conventionally powered fleets. They can remain submerged for months and shoot missiles longer distances.

Australia maintains it has no intention of putting nuclear weapons on them. But who can guarantee that? In any case, there is a clear and present danger of nuclear proliferation and, of course, an escalation of the arms race in the region.

The AUKUS alliance is probably the most significant security arrangement between the three nations since World War II. Although the submarines are the main part of the deal, cyber capabilities, artificial intelligence and underwater technologies will also be shared.

From the national security perspectives of the United States, UK and Australia, the threeway Anglo-Saxon alliance came with compelling political and geo-strategic rationales for its constituent members (CNN/Sep. 17).

Biden is now organizing the entire US foreign policy around countering what he sees as China’s aggressive assertion of naval power in the Pacific region, and especially in the South China Sea. A new fleet of nuclearpowered submarines that need not surface as often as diesel ones – could shape the maritime balance of power in the entire region. When Biden and other Western leaders talk about ‘a free and open Indo-Pacific region’ – they are implicating China, without mentioning it by name! Post-Brexit Britain is trying to look beyond Europe, project global power and ingratiate itself to the US – a re-kindling of the notion of “Britannia Rules the Waves” and a re-flowering of the special relationship with the U.S. Australia feels that it is having a very hard time these last few years with China’s economic and diplomatic pressure. With the triple alliance, it can now breathe more freely.

The more so, since Biden was already getting chummy with Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison during his three-way intercontinental video news conference announcing the new strategic AUKUS [Australia-UKUS] alliance. “Thank you, Boris. And I want to thank that fellow Down Under. Thank you very much, pal. Appreciate it, Mr Prime Minister,” Biden said.

Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said the alliance risked “severely damaging regional peace...and intensifying the arms race.” He critiqued “the obsolete Cold War...mentality” and warned the three countries were “hurting their own interests”.

Chinese state media carried similar editorials denouncing the pact, and one in The Global Times newspaper said Australia had now “turned itself into an adversary of China”.

Last Saturday, France’s foreign minister Jean-Yves Le Drian denounced what he called the “duplicity, disdain and lies” surrounding the sudden rupture of France’s lucrative contract to construct submarines for Australia in favour of a U.S. deal declared that a crisis was at hand among the Western allies. A day after France recalled its ambassadors to the U.S. and Australia, he also lambasted what he suggested was a backroom deal that betrayed France (AP/ Associated Press, Sep. 19).

This was the first time ever that France had recalled its ambassador from the United States, its oldest ally going back to the Revolutionary Wars.

What infuriated above all was that there had been no advance consultations. The French had already signed a contract in 2016 for a dozen conventional diesel-electric submarines and the work to construct them was already underway. The deal with the French majority state-owned Naval Group was worth at least US Dollar $ 66 billion and had been hailed in France as the “contract of the century”!

Diplomatic niceties were thrown out of the window with Le Drian saying allies “don’t treat each other with such brutality, such unpredictability, a major partner like France...So there really is a crisis...There are reasons for us to question the strength of our alliance.”

French ambassador to Australia, Jean-Pierre Thebault also did not mince his words before flying home to France: “This has been a huge mistake, very, very bad handling of the partnership (AP). What French officials have called a complex, multi-layered contract was about more than submarines. It was the underpinning for France’s vision of the critical Indo-Pacific region, where France has a presence (not forgetting its dependencies in French Polynesia/Pacific Ocean) and China is looking to bolster its influence.

Total Subs of

Regional Powers Nuclear-Powered Other NuclearBallistic Missiles powered

Subs attack Subs

USA 14 54

Russia 11 18

China

UK

France

India 4 4 1

World/Great/ 7 4

6

6

As regards the British participation in this menage a trois, French foreign minister Le Drian was quite dismissive, saying France did not need to recall its ambassador from the UK because “we know their permanent opportunism, so there is no need to bring our ambassador to explain it to us.” It also “viewed Britain as a bit player in the geopolitical drama” (NYT/Mark Landler, Sep. 20). In fact, France considered the UK as a bit of a fifth wheel, adding weight to the adage: ‘two’s company, three’s a crowd’. Nonetheless, the stab in the back awakened the image of “perfidious Albion”, with undertones of diplomatic sleights, duplicity, treachery, infidelity that it implied.

U.S. Status in the Asia Pacific & the World

When all is said and done [and written!], the inescapable and uncomfortable fact remains that US President Joe Biden’s foreign policy expertise has taken a major blow and his attempts to put his stamp on global affairs is faltering (CNN/ Stephen Collinson & Caitlin Hu, Sep. 20).

France was willing and able to play a strategic role in the Asia Pacific. By rebuffing the potential key country in Europe [ after Merkel’s departure], and adopting brutal realpolitik tactics, Biden has endangered his key foreign policy goal of building a strategic regional antiChina front. It is, therefore, premature to speak of a so-called Biden Doctrine. Biden also severely embarrassed President Emmanuel Macron, who is up for re-election next year.

The U.S. now has the reputation of being an unreliable alliance partner. AUKUS has just come into being and it is still a long way off from being fully functional. In the meantime, life goes on and Biden has a critical stretch ahead.

How will he appear convincing at his debut at the UN General Assembly if he argues that he is invigorating US alliances?

How will he manoeuvre at the G 20 summit in Italy next month and the UN climate conference in Scotland in the coming weeks?

What happens to the Indo-Pacific Strategy and the Quadrilateral Initiative remains to be seen. As regards India’s role, it has become clear that because of Shri Shri Swamiji Narendra Modi Ji’s own doings and the antics of his Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), India has become the weakest link in the chain that the Quad is attempting to build around China.