Not a specialist? So what?




by Dr.Harald Wiesendanger– Klartext

One of the personnel surprises in Merz’s cabinet is the new Federal Minister of Health, Nina Warken – not a doctor, but a lawyer. What are the advantages of this career changer? What can we expect from her?

At least five points undoubtedly speak in Nina Warken’s favor: According to consistent research, she is by no means identical to Karl Lauterbach. She has three children, which suggests that the health and well-being of the next generation is essential to her. At the cabinet table, she polishes several quotas – as a non-male, non-bald Baden-Württemberg native with motherhood. She was born on May 15, 1979, the same day as Naroa Agirre Kamio, the Spanish pole vault record holder – a promising astrological starting point, as she will have to jump through all sorts of hoops thrown at her. Her star sign, Taurus, stands for reliability, realism, and determination; as a sheep, according to the Chinese horoscope, she is empathetic, creative, modest, and helpful. Sounds good.

The most significant plus point: Nina Warken has never spoken disparagingly about my WAYS OUT /AUSWEGE foundation/charity.

And what else? I have no idea. She studied law and has been working as a lawyer since 2006. Her political focus to date has been primarily on domestic and legal policy – ​​including as chairwoman of a committee of inquiry tasked with investigating the extent and background of spying by foreign intelligence services in Germany. She sits on the Bundestag’s Committee on Internal Affairs, a position she has held since 2018. In the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, she was the rapporteur for asylum law, civil defense, and disaster protection. Since 2019, she has headed the CDU’s Federal Committee on Internal Security, which deals with issues less directly related to medicine, such as strengthening the police, counterterrorism strategies, disaster protection, border security, cybercrime and IT security, video surveillance, data retention, and online searches.

Never mind – her party colleagues describe her as a well-connected “power woman with heart, attitude, and intelligence.” As a “bright generalist,” she will get up to speed “in no time,” the Tagesspiegel predicts.

Diagnosis: Clueless. Therapy: Ministerial post.

What has Nina Warken, Merz’s “big surprise,” had to do with medical issues so far? However, it cannot be said that she is an expert in the field. She has not yet appeared as a health expert, notes the news portal n-tv.de. In this area, she is a “blank slate,” finds the Ärzte Zeitung. “Her positions on medical and pharmaceutical care,” notes the information service Medscape, “are still unclear in detail” – and in general terms as well, to be more precise.

What the mainstream media managed to dig up after strenuous research largely amounts to a few quotes. “The Mainpost newspaper reports statements by Warken during the election campaign: “The CDU/CSU is firmly committed to maintaining local pharmacies and wants, for example, to reduce waiting times for doctor’s appointments by better helping patients find a suitable doctor with appointment capacity.” – “Our healthcare system must be composed of various components that, together, provide safer care for all ages and walks of life.” – “Higher pay alone is not enough to make the nursing profession more attractive. At the same time, family members who care for family members at home must be noticeably relieved.” Because it can be assumed that the future Chancellor doesn’t know much more about Ms. Warken’s professional qualifications, the fear is apparent: To occupy the top position in the Ministry of Health, it is enough to raise specific quotas, to have good intentions for pharmacists and nurses – and to have such a spectacularly strong imagination that one can imaginarily break the healthcare system down into building blocks.

Why doesn’t the electorate learn anything about Ms. Warken’s views on the most pressing challenges facing our healthcare system – and how she intends to address them? The epidemic of chronic diseases. The neglect of genuine preventative care. The influence of the pharmaceutical lobby. The industrialization and profit orientation of the medical industry. Perverse incentives. The exploding costs. The impending collapse of the health insurance companies is the “biggest crisis since the founding of the Federal Republic,” as the DAK board recently warned. The shortage of skilled workers. Data protection for the “transparent,” digitally screened patient. The role of complementary medicine. Preparing for the next pandemic. The benefits and risks of vaccinations. And so on and so forth. MGHA, Make Germany Healthy Again: No less of a project is urgently needed.

We would never put someone in the cockpit of an airplane after they have previously driven a car without an accident. How, then, can we entrust a ministry to a career changer whose assessments and decisions depend on the lives and well-being of millions, not just hundreds?

But that’s how representative democracy works: Millions of eligible voters who know precious little about medicine allow themselves to be represented by people who feel the same way. A special kind of “closeness to the grassroots.”

Expertise? Too risky for the cabinet.

Only cynics take a more relaxed view of this appointment. Who could be better suited to save the German healthcare system than someone who has absolutely nothing to do with it? Without any connection to the subject matter, there’s less risk of getting lost in tedious details. After all, expertise is completely overrated – it only complicates everything anyway. In today’s political world, what counts is the courage to take risks, along with a distinct talent for filling those gaps with eloquence and style. Ask Trump: Expertise is for beginners – real professionals govern blindly. Their strength: They don’t even suspect all the things they know nothing about. Good for inner balance.

Not to be forgotten: Nina Warken’s largely invisible presence in the Bundestag so far shows that she knows how to avoid attracting attention. A quality that could prove extremely useful, even essential for survival, especially in the shark-like health care system.

Anyone who hasn’t yet attracted attention as a health expert at least has no reputation to lose.

One thing is sure: The German healthcare system has never been in more unprofessional hands. And that’s – of course – entirely intentional, lateral thinkers speculate. So let’s look forward to another legislative period that will consistently continue the decades-long health emergency – but this time legally watertight.

How did she handle Corona?

Specific, particularly annoying questions concern those fellow human beings who, during Germany’s Corona years, had to endure being insulted, ostracized, and persecuted as disinformation agents and Covidiots, as antisocial freeloaders and deranged conspiracy theorists. How did Nina Warken behave during the pandemic? Did she dutifully wear a mask everywhere and at all times? Did she keep her distance several meters? Did she allow herself and her children to receive the experimental gene injection? Did she, like almost her entire parliamentary group, support the lockdowns?

In any case, she supported the “federal emergency brake“: In April 2021, she voted for the Fourth Civil Protection Act, which provided for nationwide measures in cases of high incidence – as if the threat of the coronavirus wave were determined by the number of positive PCR tests. She emphasized that fundamental rights apply even in times of crisis – but not without restrictions. (“They still apply, just differently,” according to the Federal Constitutional Court.)

In April 2022, Warken criticized the traffic light coalition for what she considered to be an unclear approach to the discussion on mandatory vaccination. She criticized the lack of a uniform draft law and described the various group proposals as a “confusion” that was unsettling the population. “Instead of living up to their responsibility and introducing a viable bill with one voice, the government factions took refuge in group motions. […] That sent the wrong signal.”

Warken rejected a general vaccination requirement for those over 60, saying such a measure was disproportionate and might not hold up in court. She emphasized the importance of individual decisions – the healthcare system must be protected in other ways. How? For example, through a vaccination registry, which she considers necessary.

The Chancellery’s unilateral actions during the pandemic, bypassing the Bundestag, went against the grain for Ms. Warken. In order to determine the “epidemic situation,” Parliament must be more closely involved: “We are not issuing a blank check here, quite the opposite.” The Bundestag must “review at short and regular intervals whether this epidemic situation still exists.”

Has our future Minister of Health taken note of the RKI leaks (1), and what does she think of them? Is she aware of the significance of these revelations? The National Agency for Infectious Diseases and Public Health, one of the central pillars of the German healthcare system and directly subordinate to its ministry, deceived governments and parliaments, courts, and the media about virtually all aspects of the pandemic – at whose direction. What conclusions does the lawyer draw from this? What does she regret? What does she intend to contribute to the process of coming to terms with the unspeakable years of the coronavirus pandemic?

At least the AfD has the courage to recall Warken’s rather inglorious role during the strangest pandemic in human history. The decision to appoint her was the “worst possible choice,” explains AfD health policy spokesperson Martin Sichert. Nominating her, of all people, demonstrates a “disregard for health policy” by future Chancellor Merz: Instead of a health expert, he appointed a “loyal CDU party soldier and domestic politician.”

The praise from “Pharma Deutschland” is puzzling: The largest trade association of the pharmaceutical industry in Germany, which represents over 400 member companies, calls Warken an “excellent choice” and praises her ability to adapt flexibly to new issues. It’s easy to imagine what kind of “flexibility” the pharmaceutical industry will soon demand from Ms. Warken.

(Harald Wiesendanger)

Note

(1) The completely unredacted “RKI Leaks” documents were published by the online magazine Multipolar on July 23, 2024. They comprised over 4,000 pages of internal protocols from the RKI crisis team from 2020 to 2023. The documents were handed over by an anonymous informant to a team of journalists led by Aya Velázquez and presented at a press conference. The full publication can be found here: https://multipolar-magazin.de/meldungen/0076

An accompanying PDF report entitled “RKI Protocols and Leak: Open Questions” was also published, providing further analysis and context.