“Best man affair”: Why Habeck is still under pressure

Current hour in the Bundestag, questioning in the committee: In the Graichen affair, the pressure on Minister Habeck is growing – but he is sticking to the state secretary. How long? The affair is not over.

Around six minutes before the decisive committee meeting begins, they appear together with a straight face and a firm step: the Economics Minister and his State Secretary, Patrick Graichen – accompanied by two other State Secretaries.

The symbolism is intentional. It should show: Minister Robert Habeck is firmly at Graichen’s side.

From Habeck’s point of view, it would have been illogical to distance himself from his state secretary on that very day. Because this Wednesday is the day of the big battle in the Bundestag for the opposition parties in particular for the “best man affair”: first with a two-hour questioning of the two behind closed doors of the Economic Committee, which has joined forces with the Committee on Climate Protection and Energy for this purpose. And immediately afterwards in a current hour in the plenary session of the Bundestag, in which the opposition would again like to discuss publicly the “trust in climate protection personnel policy under Federal Minister Habeck”.

Not only the opposition wants clarification

Habeck wants to stick with the expert Graichen, who is considered a workhorse internally and who, among other things, helped draft the building energy law. He is said to have made the decision after careful consideration when the loss of credibility was on the table – Graichen had not disclosed to Habeck or the in-house compliance department in good time that, as a member of the selection committee, he had chosen his own best man as the only candidate for the chief post of the federal government belonging to the German Energy Agency (dena). Rather, he should have resigned from the commission because of it – a mistake he admits. A clear violation of compliance rules, Habeck emphasized in the committee and afterwards in front of the cameras.

Whether Graichen will actually remain in office is still open after the minister’s oath of loyalty. Because not only the opposition, but also the coalition partners SPD and FDP – including the chancellor – expect further clarification. How could something like this happen without there being a supervisory authority to notice?

That needs to be clarified, says the managing director of Transparency International, Anna-Maija Mertens ARD morning magazine: “For us it is not understandable that Mr. Graichen could be involved in this application process.”

Scramble at traffic lights

The traffic light internal wrangling is also clear in the question of whether the committee should meet in public or not. According to the SPD and FDP, it was agreed that it would not meet in public – the FDP hoped this would give them more insights. That also speaks volumes about the traffic light’s internal communication on the matter.

The Greens, meanwhile on course for maximum transparency, campaigned for publicity. Habeck even in the meeting itself again – without success.

On the sidelines of the committee meeting, as in parliament, FDP deputies in particular warned that it was a matter of averting damage to the credibility of politics as a whole: “No one can have any interest in trust in our politics being damaged,” says the FDP MP Olaf in der Beek in the Bundestag.

Can Graichen still be held?

Whether pure enlightenment will suffice for this remains an open question on this day. Can Graichen be kept political or is he permanently weakened by his misjudgment, by a lack of intuition in a sensitive area?

For the Greens, this actually means the worst case scenario: the key figure in the implementation of the central traffic light project of the heat transition in the key Green Ministry of Economics and Climate Protection permanently weakened? And that could also make the minister increasingly vulnerable.

Because the opposition parties are using the incident not only to accuse Habeck of “nepotism” but also, in connection with the Graichen siblings who work at the Öko-Institut, to accuse the ministry of having a green “in group” network that interacts far beyond its own house.

“Campaign against climate protection”?

The question naturally arises as to whether this criticism would be dropped at all if Habeck separated from Graichen. He still stands by Graichen, sees the compliance error politically.

However, he announces that the case will be examined by civil servants. Disciplinary proceedings may also be attached to this because of the appearance of a possible bias, the Administrative Procedures Act knows such a paragraph.

In the current hour, the Green parliamentary group leader Andreas Audretsch is fighting behind Habeck and sees the attacks of the opposition primarily as “campaigns against climate protection”. But the time of fossil CDU lobbyists in state offices is over, he rails combatively – and one can be happy about Habeck in this office: He “brought the country through the winter well”.

The Greens are clapping in the plenum, in the ranks of the FDP and SPD hardly any hands are raised at this moment. True loyalty looks different.