"
title="
Angela Merkel
Angela Merkel said this a few months before she became German chancellor. In a July 2005 interview with the Financial Times journalists Bertrand Benoit and Andrew Gowers, she explained her approach to politics in a single sentence: “A good compromise is one where everybody makes a contribution.” She went on to add that anyone in politics has to avoid depending on a single interest group, since that dependence is exactly what makes real compromise impossible. At the time, she was a candidate trying to convince voters she could lead a country used to messy, multi-party coalitions rather than clean parliamentary majorities. Sixteen years later, when she stepped down as chancellor in 2021, that line had held up remarkably well as a description of how she actually governed, through four terms, three different coalition partners, and some of the most contentious debates in modern German politics.
A line from before Angela Merkel became chancellor
Germany’s political system rarely hands one party full control of parliament, which meant Merkel spent her entire chancellorship building and managing coalitions. Her Christian Democrats governed alongside the Social Democrats twice, and with the Free Democrats once, across four terms in office. Every one of those arrangements required constant negotiation with parties that disagreed with her on real, substantive issues. The Financial Times interview came at a moment when Merkel was still campaigning to lead the country for the first time. She was explaining, in effect, the operating principle she intended to govern by. What makes the quote worth revisiting is how closely her sixteen years in power actually matched it.
Meaning and interpretation of Angela Merkel’s quote
Merkel’s definition of compromise is narrower than the word usually implies. A lot of people treat compromise as simply meeting in the middle, where both sides give something up and neither is fully satisfied. Merkel is describing something more specific: a compromise only counts as good if every party involved has actually put something into it, not just given something up.That distinction changes how a negotiation should be judged. A deal where one side does all the compromising and the other simply accepts the result, is not a good compromise by Merkel’s standard, even if it technically ends the disagreement. Real compromise, in her framing, requires contribution from everyone at the table, not concession from only one side of it.It also puts responsibility on every party in a negotiation, not just the one usually seen as more powerful or more stubborn. A weaker party that refuses to contribute anything is just as much an obstacle to a good compromise as a stronger party that refuses to give ground. Merkel’s definition does not assign blame based on power. It assigns it based on whether each side actually put something into the outcome.
Sixteen years of coalition government put the idea into practice
Merkel’s coalition governments produced some of the clearest tests of this idea. Her 2005 to 2009 coalition with the Social Democrats, an alliance between Germany’s two largest and historically opposed parties, forced both sides to actually build policy together rather than simply trade concessions. The same pattern repeated in her later 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 view.She was not always successful at holding these arrangements together. Her final coalition, formed in 2018, was strained for years by disagreements within her own bloc and its Social Democrat partners. Even so, the basic mechanism she described in 2005, requiring contribution rather than accepting one-sided concession, remained her default approach to nearly every major decision of her chancellorship.The eurozone debt crisis offered another test. Merkel had to negotiate simultaneously with German voters wary of bailing out other countries, and with European partners who felt German conditions were too harsh. Neither side got exactly what it wanted. Both sides had to move. That, in her own terms, is what made the eventual agreements workable rather than simply imposed.
How to apply Angela Merkel’s quote in daily life
Most people negotiate far more often than they realise, whether that is dividing responsibilities with a partner, agreeing on a plan with colleagues, or settling a disagreement with a friend. Merkel’s standard gives a simple test to apply in any of these situations: has everyone actually contributed something to this outcome, or has one side simply given in to end the discussion faster?A compromise that leaves one person doing all the adjusting tends to resurface as resentment later, even if it looked resolved in the moment. Asking what each person is contributing, rather than only what each person is giving up, tends to produce agreements that actually hold.Think of two colleagues splitting a project where one keeps absorbing extra tasks to avoid conflict. That arrangement might look peaceful for a while. It rarely stays that way. Merkel’s version of compromise would ask a blunter question before the arrangement is settled: what is the other person actually putting in, beyond simply agreeing to end the disagreement.
Other famous quotes by Angela Merkel
- “Freedom does not mean being free of something, but to be free to do something.”
- “When it comes to human dignity, we cannot make compromises.”
- “It’s much, much better to talk to one another than about one another.”
- “The question is not whether we are able to change but whether we are changing fast enough.”
