Whoever wants can find something good in even the greatest evil.

It is a question of perspective whether benefits will still be discernible even in the event of a disaster.

Of course, there was nothing good about this corona crisis, which has so far killed almost 93,000 people in Germany - not to mention the many social injuries that are difficult or impossible to quantify.

But in its ruthlessness, the pandemic has made it clear where this country stands in terms of crisis management.

And what follows from this for a new federal government.

Kim Bjorn Becker

Editor in politics.

  • Follow I follow

Seldom has a federal election been under the impression of a crisis that encompasses so many areas of coexistence as this year.

Therefore, this federal election is also a decision on how well or badly the outgoing coalition has managed the pandemic since the virus was first detected in Germany at the beginning of last year.

The voting decision is likely to be closely linked to the question of what kind of crisis management people would like for the next few weeks and months.

And which ones they reject.

How the balance sheet turns out is a question of perspective. If the perspective extends beyond the borders of the continent, the picture looks pretty good at first. Hardly anywhere in the world are the chances of getting through the pandemic better than in the west. In many regions of the world, access to vaccines is worse and the number of available hospital beds is lower than in Europe. Even before the Corona crisis, Germany was spending more than eleven percent of its gross domestic product on health, more than almost any other country.

The health system is also very expensive for that, no question about it. And it is certainly not always good enough, especially in rural regions the shortage becomes clear. But in the crisis, the expensive and numerous intensive care beds in particular proved to be a stroke of luck. Corona has highlighted the importance of those resources that were previously gladly dismissed as superfluous cost factors. A new federal government of whatever color will have to be measured by whether it can withstand the call for the ever-advancing economization of medicine. When doctors and hospitals, laboratories and pharmacies are already working to capacity on a day-to-day basis, they lack the necessary clout in the event of a crisis.

But Corona poses more than just the system question.

It is also about how the government treats the civil liberties.

It was correct that these were restricted several times and each time for a limited period.

Even in a pandemic, the principle applies that the freedom of one ends where the freedom of another is restricted.

Younger people in particular had to back off for months so that the older ones were not endangered.

Now the federal and state governments are doing too little to make it work the other way around.

There is currently no vaccine for children under the age of twelve, so there is no protection against the pathogen.

At the same time, too few adults are vaccinated against corona.

To put it mildly, this is unfortunate.

Doctors, nurses, teachers and educators can be expected to receive the vaccination

A general compulsory vaccination, according to the general consensus, goes too far, and encroachment on self-determination would be difficult to justify legally and morally. But there is nothing to be said against obliging those working people to vaccinate who have made it their task to take on special responsibility for the weaker. It can be expected of doctors, nurses, teachers and educators that vaccination against the coronavirus is one of the prerequisites for professional practice. After all, patients, people in need of care and children often cannot choose who will look after them.

In the best case scenario, the new federal government is characterized by crisis management that is not only more forward-looking than that of the incumbent coalition, but also more resolute. For two summers in a row, those responsible failed to prepare the country for the Corona autumn. Most recently, important regulations on booster vaccinations came late and were initially incomplete.

But the scope of any federal government is limited. Stressful coordination processes with the federal states have repeatedly led to political decisions being delayed and watered down - and in the end hardly any citizen knew what actually applies. The pandemic has shown that the federal structure can be a hindrance in times of crisis. Of course, a new Bundestag alone cannot change that. In order to reorganize the competences between the federal government and the states, an amendment to the Basic Law is required - and for this a two-thirds majority not only in the Bundestag, but also in the state chamber.