A large majority in the Bundestag shares one conviction: It makes sense to be vaccinated against the corona virus, and for the foreseeable future only a very high vaccination rate will get us out of the pandemic.

Outside of the AfD, only a few MPs dispute that compulsory vaccination can also be appropriate to prevent the collapse of the health system without restricting other fundamental rights.

Nevertheless, a majority for general vaccination is a long way off.

It has to do with virological uncertainties, legal considerations and ethical dilemmas, but mostly with power politics.

Olaf Scholz was not yet Chancellor when he committed his government to a passive role in November: "The traffic light" would not present a draft law on compulsory vaccination, but there should be cross-party motions from Parliament.

In doing so, Scholz wanted to spare his coalition an ordeal at the beginning, because doubters in the FDP made the prospects of a red-green-yellow majority uncertain.

Merz wanted to teach Scholz a lesson

The Union was also divided.

Prime Ministers from their ranks such as Markus Söder or Volker Bouffier had spoken out in favor of comprehensive vaccination early on and are still doing so.

On the other hand, Scholz had given the election losers a through ball.

A new government without a majority on a key issue?

At the latest when Friedrich Merz took over the leadership of the party, opposition tactics gained the upper hand.

The Union did not want to miss the opportunity to present Scholz.

In order to pull Scholz out of his weakness in leadership, Merz had to prove that you can bring your own shop on line even with difficult decisions.

Before he was elected leader of the parliamentary group this Tuesday, they agreed on a compromise on Friday.

But it doesn't show courage or energy.

The Union now shies away from the term “obligatory vaccination”.

The word "vaccination mechanism" is intended to placate skeptics.

The actual decision should be postponed by the Bundestag.

First of all, a vaccination register and other prerequisites should be created so that the "mechanism" can be triggered at some point, i.e. a vaccination can be imposed.

The CDU MP Thomas Heilmann said that a "final decision" would now be "like shooting in the fog".

In fact, no one knows which virus variant will be hitting us next fall.

But there is experience: the "old" vaccines have so far offered good protection against serious illness, even with new variants.

And that is much more than self-protection: the fewer people who are sick, the more carefree society can live with the virus.

Nobody wants to spoil the summer

In addition, there is a political experience, if not legality: the more relaxed everyday life is, the more difficult it is to implement preventive measures.

Compulsory vaccination is the best example.

Experts had been predicting for months what prompted leading German politicians to suddenly call for vaccination last November.

But nobody wanted to spoil the summer for the Germans, especially not in the federal election campaign.

There is also an election campaign this year: four state parliaments are elected in March, May and October.

If the Bundestag wanted to wait until the level of suffering is so high that the citizens are calling for action, then it will be too late.

In this respect, it is not Merz and the Union that show a clear edge, but those traffic light deputies who now want to decide that every adult must be vaccinated by October.

But there is also something timid about this application, because the MPs are avoiding the establishment of a vaccination register.

They say it would be too complex in a hurry because of data protection.

But the attempt to leave it to the health insurance companies to address citizens and actually control compulsory vaccination opens the door to constant confusion and jeopardizes enforcement.

Is the German state, whose government talks so much about transformation, really unable to set up a secure database within months?

Perhaps the Federal Chancellor can at least wrestle a word of authority on this.

The fact that only postponing the decision would be suitable "to pacify the social debate", as CDU MP Tino Sorge believes, fails to recognize the longing for clarity in the country.

For two years, restrictions on fundamental rights were rushed through the Bundestag or imposed by decree for good reasons.

The traffic light wanted to change that.

By exaggerating the mandatory vaccination decision to a "conscientious decision", Scholz has only achieved one thing: that the hope of many Germans has experienced a deep crash.