The nasty surprises never end. Vladimir Putin’s war is destroying the livelihoods of millions of people, increasing refugee movements, leading to drastic price increases for energy and other goods – and plunging many Germans into financial difficulties. Are they now threatened with a winter of freezing and gnashing of teeth?
What is new about the latest horror news is that it was the German government that created it. She is withdrawing a promise she made to citizens at the beginning of the gas crisis fabricated by Putin. In order to calm the people in the existential uncertainty, she had assured private consumers would have priority if gas became scarce.
If the inventories are not enough, the industry will lose out. Apartments would continue to be heated. And hospitals supplied anyway. This is what was agreed in the guidelines for emergencies.
That should no longer apply categorically. The previous prioritization was intended for exceptional situations lasting a few days, it is now said, not for a long-lasting supply crisis.
That is why the government is reassessing what the consequences would be if the sectors that are particularly dependent on gas had to reduce or even stop their production – consequences not only for the companies and jobs there, but for the general supply in everyday life, for example with food and beverages Drugs, chemical products, glass, ceramics, printed matter, textiles. And thus for all citizens.
Understandably, many initially react angrily and outraged. Can’t we even rely on government promises anymore? Social associations protest: This hits the weakest hardest again.
At the same time, a new thoughtfulness can be felt. The war shakes certainties that have been relied upon for many decades of peace. In the new reality, the usual rituals of distribution struggles are of no help, in which the interests of business and society, bosses and employees, children and pensioners are presented as sharply opposed and played off against one another.
You all, we all live in interdependence. The impositions can only be passed together.
The government faces a dilemma over gas allocation. But not only her. We all are. Warm homes with industry shut down is not the answer. Full operation in cold apartments, day care centers and old people’s homes just as little.
So it’s good that Robert Habeck made the move and not an economic liberal. The Green is not known as a lobbyist for industry interests. The often scolded traffic light communication worked.
One would like to wish that this continues in the public dialogue. And according to Habeck’s model, all those affected not only fight for their own interests and perspectives, but also show understanding for the justified concerns of others. Because they are your partner.
The cut caused by the war and its economic and social consequences are so deep that the government cannot promise either certain social groups or individual areas of everyday life that they will be guaranteed to be spared from cuts. In order to minimize the damage to the common good, she has to consider how everyone can contribute: as a community of solidarity.
