Handelsblatt’s chief economist suspects that Chancellor Merkel won't be too unhappy about President Trump’s attacks on Germany.

Angela Merkel in the White House with Donald Trump.

The situation is a little reminiscent of the year 1957, when the worn-out German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer entered the election that year with the campaign slogan “No experiments!” In light of the Cold War and the prosperity that Germany had achieved, the motto described change in government as a risk factor.

The strategy paid off. His center-right Christian Democratic Union gained an absolute majority for the first and last time.

Looking today at Angela Merkel, you’ll see an analytically astute, industrious head of government with personal integrity. But you also see someone who appears weary of her office. In the upcoming federal elections, she must face Martin Schulz, who is rhetorically brilliant but inexperienced in domestic politics. Although just a year younger than Ms. Merkel, Mr. Schulz gives the impression of being fresh and youthful.

Politicians can be divided into four basic types: the demagogue, the charismatic leader, the officeholder, and the statesman or woman. Demagogues appeal to the fears of the voters and conjure up horror scenarios only they can prevent from becoming reality. Fortunately, no demagogue has been able to gain a relevant position in government in the Federal Republic of Germany. His counterpart is the charismatic leader. He also seizes on fear but attempts to convince voters that, thanks to the policies he’ll put in place, a better future lies ahead. This is something Willy Brandt managed with his new Ostpolitik at the end of the 1960s.

Ms. Merkel’s chances will get slimmer if the world becomes less turbulent in the coming months.

Usually after the first term in office, when the hopes for a quick and positive change often evaporate, the politician who was elected as a charismatic leader usually morphs into the experienced incumbent in the fight for re-election. Such was the case with Barack Obama in 2012 or Helmut Kohl with in 1994 “red socks campaign.” This strategy aims at conveying a threat-free world to the voters in the case of a renewed mandate.

The statesman, on the other hand, places his own interests, or those of his party, in the background. He wants to achieve what he deems to be right for the country. In this sense, in Germany, one can describe Helmut Schmidt and Gerhard Schröder as statesmen: Mr. Schmidt, because of the NATO Double-Track Decision, and Mr. Schröder because of his Agenda 2010 package of labor market and welfare reforms.

Ever since selecting Mr. Schulz’s selection to be their chancellor candidate, the Social Democrats (SPD) have been rapidly gaining favor with the voters. As a charismatic leader, Mr. Schulz is credible when he espouses the old party promises of justice and equality, the redistribution of income and wealth, better social benefits, working with the trade unions, and increasing the number of well-paid, permanent full-time jobs. With that, he seems to be tapping into the widespread longing for the good old days when fears of being left behind and social decline were unfounded; a time when globalization and digitization were both foreign words.

Many of Mr. Schulz’s fans apparently see this retrospective approach as the better future. With his vague “back to the past” strategy, Mr. Schulz will likely have wind in his sails as long as the overall economic situation remains positive; and as long as he can credibly convey that his agenda of correcting mistakes will only produce winners and no real losers.

The conservative alliance of Christian Democrats and their Bavarian sister party, the Christian Social Union, will focus on the successes of their incumbent in coping with the financial crisis, the euro crisis and the Ukraine crisis. Subliminal fears of a new geopolitical crisis are most likely to be stoked, implying that the better choice would be a crisis manager such as Chancellor Merkel, a leader empowered by a long history of negotiations.

But Ms. Merkel’s chances will become slimmer if the world becomes less turbulent in the coming months. That is, if Mr. Trump and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan calm down, Russian President Vladimir Putin surpresses his craving to expand Russian territory, Marine Le Pen fails in her presidential bid in France and Greece continues to be financed noiselessly. Only then will Mr. Schulz be able to emphasize Germany's economic situation and credibly promise new benefits.

The crucial centrist voters, however, will more likely lean toward Ms. Merkel if there are any attacks that threaten security. Or if Western values like liberal democracy, the rule of law, freedom of the press, individualism, tolerance, and open borders are questioned by politicians like Mr. Trump, Mr. Erdogan or Mr. Putin. Or if the German business model of export-driven growth comes under fire. For many, Ms. Merkel is considered to be the world’s most important and influential representative of these values.

If she manages to stand up to politicians like Mr. Trump, or if her skills as a level-headed crisis manager are needed, Ms. Merkel's chances of securing a fourth term increase. In turbulent times that adversely affect Germany’s sense of comfort, many voters would tend to trust Ms. Merkel more than Mr. Schulz. The latter is selling himself as the newcomer. But sometimes, citizens aren't looking for experiments.

It wouldn’t be the first election in which an external threat helped the government hold on to power. In that sense, it is likely that Ms. Merkel is secretly pleased about Mr. Trump’s verbal attacks on Germany.

To reach the author: [email protected]