Angela Merkel had said this a few months before becoming the German Chancellor. In an interview with Financial Times journalists Bertrand Benoit and Andrew Gowers in July 2005, he explained his approach to politics in one sentence: “A good compromise is one where everyone contributes.He further said that in politics one should avoid becoming dependent on a single interest group, because dependency makes genuine compromise impossible. At the time, she was a candidate trying to convince voters that she could lead a country with a chaotic, multi-party coalition rather than a clean parliamentary majority. Sixteen years later, when he stepped down as chancellor in 2021, this line held up remarkably well given how he had actually governed through four terms, three different coalition partners, and a few coalition partners. The most controversial debate in modern German politics.
A line from Angela Merkel before becoming Chancellor
Germany’s political system rarely gives one party full control of parliament, which meant Merkel spent her entire chancellorship building and managing coalitions. His Christian Democrats governed twice with the Social Democrats and once with the Free Democrats, during four terms. All those arrangements required constant negotiation with parties who disagreed with them on real, concrete issues.The Financial Times interview came as Merkel was campaigning to lead the country for the first time. In fact, she was explaining the operating principle by which she wanted to rule. What makes this quote worth revisiting is how closely his sixteen years in power actually correspond to it.
Meaning and interpretation of Angela Merkel’s quotes
Merkel’s definition of compromise is narrower than is generally understood by the term. Many people think of compromise as simply meeting in the middle, where both parties give up something and no one is completely satisfied. Merkel is describing something more specific: An agreement is only considered good if each party involved actually put something into it, not just gave something up.This difference changes how an interaction should be evaluated. A deal where one side makes all the compromises and the other only accepts the outcome is not a good deal according to Merkel’s standard, even if it technically eliminates the disagreement. Creating a real deal requires the contributions of everyone at the table, not just concessions from one side.This places responsibility on every party in the negotiation, not just the party who is generally seen as more powerful or more stubborn. A weak party that refuses to contribute anything is as much an obstacle to a good agreement as a strong party that refuses to concede ground. Merkel’s definition does not place blame on the basis of power. It assigns this based on whether each party actually contributed something to the outcome.
Sixteen years of coalition government put this idea into practice
Merkel’s coalition governments offered some clear tests of this idea. His 2005 to 2009 coalition with the Social Democrats, an alliance between Germany’s two largest and historically opposed parties, forced the two parties to actually make policy together rather than just make trade concessions. The same pattern was repeated in her subsequent coalitions, including decisions on the 2015 refugee crisis, where Merkel’s open-door stance required buy-in from coalition partners who did not fully share her views.She was not always successful in keeping these arrangements together. Her last coalition, formed in 2018, remained strained for years due to disagreements within her own bloc and its Social Democrat partners. Nevertheless, the basic mechanism he described in 2005, which required contributions rather than accepting unilateral concessions, remained his default approach to almost every major decision of his Chancellorship.The Eurozone debt crisis offered another test. Merkel also had to negotiate with German voters wary of giving economic aid to other countries, and with European partners who felt German conditions were too harsh. Neither side got what it wanted. Both sides had to move forward. In his own words, this is what ultimately made the agreements practical rather than simply imposed.
How to Apply Angela Merkel’s Quotes in Daily Life
Most people communicate more often than they realize, whether it’s sharing responsibilities with a partner, agreeing on a plan with coworkers, or resolving a disagreement with a friend. Merkel’s standard provides a simple test to apply in any of these situations: Did everyone actually contribute something to the outcome, or did one side simply agree to end the discussion quickly?An agreement in which one person is left to make all the adjustments may resurface later as resentment, even if resolved in the moment. Asking what each person is contributing, rather than just asking what each person is giving up, creates agreements that are truly valid.Think about two coworkers who are dividing up a project, where one person keeps absorbing extra tasks to avoid conflict. That arrangement may seem peaceful for some time. It rarely stays that way. Merkel’s version of the agreement would ask an obvious question before the arrangement is finalized: What is the other person actually doing, other than agreeing to end the disagreement.
Other famous quotes from Angela Merkel
- “Freedom does not mean being free from something, but being free to do something.”
- “When it comes to human dignity, we cannot compromise.”
- “It is much better to talk to each other than to talk about each other.”
- “The question is not whether we are able to change, but whether we are changing fast enough.”