Angela Merkel is the third post-war Christian Democratic chancellor to win a fourth electoral term in office. She joins two other distinguished statesmen, who did much to shape the political order in post-war Europe.

Konrad Adenauer helped to restore Germany’s international role and build its social market economy in the aftermath of World War II. Helmut Kohl was instrumental in uniting a divided Germany and anchoring this unity within greater European integration.

Merkel is an heir to both these legacies. She sought to consolidate the image of an economically competitive Germany while not ignoring social and humanitarian issues. She is now hailed as the ‘leader of the free world’ – a beacon of liberal-democratic politics and a reliable elder statesman.

She champions the European project, and once famously said “the euro is our common fate, and Europe is our common future”. Merkel is a reassuring figure amid several European leaders who are uninspiring, dull, vain or downright shady. Her moderate, centrist, Christian democracy has withstood the test of time. However, her success is not unchallenged.

The result of the German elections on September 24 is characterised by an element of continuity, since the German electorate gave Merkel a renewed vote of confidence. There is also an element of correlation with Europe-wide trends, since the two largest parties suffered a drop in support while populist elements have gained electoral representation.

Merkel’s CDU-CSU coalition got 33.2 per cent of the vote (8.4 per cent less than in 2013), which translated into 65 fewer seats in the Bundestag. Martin Schulz, once touted as the only man who could defeat Merkel, led his party to a historic post-war low. The social democratic SPD garnered 20.4 per cent of the vote (5.2 per cent less than in the previous election).

Both the Christian Democrats (in coalition with Bavaria’s Christian Social Union) and the Social Democrats have dominated Germany’s post-war politics. The Free Democratic Party and the Greens often propped up these political groupings through a coalition agreement.

Merkel’s time in office has been characterised by two ‘grand coalitions’. This arrangement was only previously tried at federal level between 1966 and 1969 under Kurt-Georg Kiesinger. The experiment, coupled with questions over Kiesinger’s past, resulted in massive student protests.

Recent grand coalitions were more successful. Merkel led two, between 2005 and 2009 and between 2013 and 2017. While effective, these grand coalitions had the result of putting the Social Democrats in a straitjacket. The Social Democrats had little leeway regarding their ability to criticise a government they formed part of.

The Social Democratic Party has now ruled another grand coalition. It opted to go to the Opposition benches to prepare itself to fight another election should Merkel’s attempts to form a coalition fail. Instead of offering a lifeline, the Social Democrats have proffered a noose.

The poor showing of the leading parties led to a situation where only a ‘Jamaica Coalition’ is possible. Named after the col-ours of the constituent parties and the exotic ideological permutations, it will see Christian Democrats, Conservatives, Libertarians and Greens sharing power. Such a coalition has never been tested federally, but it is the only option available to Merkel.

All parties ruled out collaboration with Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) – a populist grouping which successfully entered the Bundestag for the first time. The party garnered 13 per cent of the vote (an 8.2 per cent increase on the previous election) and 94 seats. It is currently the third-largest party in the Bundestag.

AfD has been labelled neo-Nazi and populist. The neo-Nazi label is not entirely justified; some elements within the party have links with extremist groupings, however these only form a very small fringe minority. On the other hand, the party is a populist party which relies on a nativist, Eurosceptic platform. Their popularity lies in their ability to deliver a simple message and connect it to one of the most pressing concerns facing contemporary Germany – immigration. By refusing to address the issue on the campaign trail, Merkel indirectly strengthened the AfD.

The meteoric rise of the AfD should be a cause for concern. The party has already been successful in the European Parliament and state elections. Although a political cordon sanitaire is in place for parties on the extreme fringes of left and right, the AfD’s rise shows no sign of abating. Had the SPD not gone into the Opposition, the AfD would have been be largest party and the official Opposition.

In the Bundestag, it will likely present a vocal and strident Opposition. With this new platform, certain political debates can no longer be ignored. In his concession speech, Schultz said that “accepting more than one million refugees in our country is still dividing the country”.

Horst Seehofer, the leader of the CDU’s Bavarian counterpart, said Christian Democrats need to get together with the other democratic forces to see what can be achieved over the next few years. He also lent his support to policies which will ensure that immigration and security questions are kept “under control”.

While Merkel has every reason to rejoice in her fourth electoral victory, she is also mindful of the crises which may loom.

Such developments may have negative repercussions for the German political system and the stability of the European political order.

André DeBattista is an independent researcherin politics and international relations.