Friedrich Merz, leader of Germany’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU), was elected Federal Chancellor on his second attempt in the Bundestag following a failed initial vote that revealed unexpected fractures within the newly formed grand coalition of Christian Democrats and Social Democrats.
Despite holding a clear majority, the coalition failed to secure the necessary votes during the first ballot, marking an unprecedented development in the history of the Federal Republic. Observers were quick to recall the 1949 vote that brought Konrad Adenauer to office by a single vote — including his own. However, unlike that historic moment, Merz fell just short of the threshold required to assume office, prompting an urgent response from both coalition and opposition lawmakers.
Under the Bundestag’s standing procedures, a second vote was not initially scheduled until several days later, potentially leaving Germany without a confirmed government. With no assurance that Merz would fare better in a subsequent round — and with a third vote requiring only a simple majority, thus posing reputational risks — legislators moved swiftly to amend procedural rules. As a result, a second vote was permitted to take place within hours, allowing Merz to secure the chancellorship and take the oath of office.
The episode, however, has left a visible mark. For the first time in Germany’s post-war history, a chancellor candidate supported by a formal majority failed in an initial vote, raising questions about internal party unity and coalition cohesion. Within the CDU itself, longstanding tensions remain over Merz’s leadership. A figure who had been politically marginalised during the Merkel era, Merz returned to frontline politics amid unresolved divisions dating back more than a decade.
These fractures may explain some of the dissenting votes from within the CDU/CSU bloc. But discontent was also evident among Social Democratic Party (SPD) MPs. Some reportedly viewed Merz’s past willingness to cooperate, albeit indirectly, with the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) as a breach of the political consensus that has traditionally isolated extremist parties from legislative influence. This sentiment was especially pronounced following a vote in which the CDU was seen to benefit from AfD support, thereby weakening a longstanding informal barrier between mainstream parties and the far right.
The precise identity and number of MPs who withheld support remains unknown and may never be fully clarified. What is clear, however, is that Merz enters office with visible vulnerabilities. The manner of his election has exposed a lack of complete support from within his own ranks and from his coalition partners, casting doubt over the stability of the new government at the very outset of its term.
The political context facing Merz is notably complex. Internationally, there is mounting pressure on Germany to assume a more assertive leadership role in European defence policy, especially in light of the strategic uncertainty surrounding the United States under President Donald Trump. With growing concerns over Washington’s long-term commitment to NATO, Berlin is expected to play a leading role — alongside Paris and London — in shaping Europe’s security architecture in response to ongoing Russian aggression against Ukraine.
Germany’s defence industrial base remains underdeveloped, despite increased investment pledges. Merz will be expected to drive reforms and expansion in the sector to meet both national and European security requirements. Continued support for Ukraine — politically, militarily, and financially — will also test the new government’s resolve, particularly given Trump’s failure to extract any meaningful concessions from President Vladimir Putin or secure even a temporary ceasefire in the ongoing conflict.
Domestically, Merz faces additional pressure from the rise of the AfD, which continues to exploit socio-economic concerns, especially in eastern federal states. The party’s growing popularity has been bolstered by transatlantic links to Trump-aligned elements in the United States, who openly advocate for a transformation of European politics along nationalist-populist lines.
In this context, Merz’s leadership style is likely to lean towards caution rather than bold reform. Despite his rhetoric, the narrow margin of his eventual election may compel him to act pragmatically in both domestic and foreign policy. His capacity to steer a fragmented political landscape while addressing Germany’s dual role as an EU economic engine and a prospective European security pillar remains uncertain.
The events surrounding Merz’s election underscore the fragility of consensus politics in contemporary Germany. They also highlight the broader strategic vacuum that is opening in Europe as traditional alliances shift and external threats multiply. Whether Merz can meet the moment will depend not only on parliamentary arithmetic, but on his ability to unify divergent factions and project coherence in both Berlin and Brussels.
As Germany assumes its new direction, the question remains: can a chancellor whose authority was immediately called into question rise to become the steady hand Europe requires?
