Why Germany’s climate targets are the right thing to do and in the national interest

Climate targets are the right thing to do – and they are in Germany's interest

The question of "In which year should Germany become climate-neutral?" has been part of the political discussion for some time. The Climate Protection Act passed by the Grand Coalition in 2021 included the target of climate neutrality by 2045, as did the coalition agreement of the "traffic light" coalition. During the collapse of the "traffic light government," the FDP had broken away and advocated postponing the German target to 2050 during the election campaign. After the election, the current federal government reaffirmed the 2045 target in its coalition agreement. The "achievement of climate neutrality by the year 2045" was also enshrined in Article 143h of the Basic Law by the Bundestag during the negotiations on the special fund. At its core, this is about how ambitious and binding Germany should be in implementing its obligations under the Paris Agreement, in particular the 1.5-degree target. The fault lines therefore run between climate protection ambition, economic competitiveness, and international credibility.

In the debate about German climate targets, our position as the CDU is clear: the climate targets derived from the Paris Agreement must remain unchanged. Federal Chancellor Friedrich Merz repeatedly emphasizes this, most recently on July 9 in the Bundestag: "The Federal Government stands by the nationally, European, and internationally agreed goals of climate protection." These goals are firmly anchored in the CDU's basic program, the 2025 election manifesto, and the coalition agreement. Backing away from these commitments would be a step backwards for Germany and Europe alike. This attitude is not only an expression of international responsibility, but also a dictate of economic reason and national security.

Predictability instead of uncertainty: Investments need clear guardrails

For the German economy, it is not only the scale of the challenge that is decisive, but the reliability of the political framework conditions. Political uncertainty leads to investment reluctance, and in the end, that is more expensive for businesses and society than ambitious, reliable targets. Anyone who doubts the climate targets today risks businesses postponing or relocating necessary investments in new technologies, production processes, and locations abroad. That would cost Germany its innovative strength, jobs, and competitiveness.

Experience shows that the clearer and more long-term the internationally coordinated climate targets are, the easier it is for the economy to make investments. This is exactly the framework provided by the Paris Agreement and the European agreements based on it, which are reflected in the German Climate Protection Act. Businesses need planning security to make long-term decisions. An international framework like the Paris Agreement creates this security and makes it easier for German companies to access new markets and technologies.

Climate protection does not automatically lead to an economic boom, but no one would deny that clean technologies are already a growth market. Alongside AI or quantum technologies, clean tech will be one of the future industries that will shape the coming decades, and Germany and the EU still have the chance to hold their own in international competition in this area at least and become the world market leader in clean technologies.

The international framework: The Paris Agreement and Germany's commitment

The German climate targets are not a go-it-alone national approach, but part of an international consensus. The 2015 Paris Agreement, signed by 196 states, commits all signatories to limit global warming to well below 2°C, and if possible to 1.5°C. As part of this agreement and the subsequent legislation, Germany has committed to becoming climate neutral by 2045, a target that is firmly anchored in the Climate Protection Act, the CDU basic program, and the coalition agreement. The explicit mention in the new Article 143h of the Basic Law is more of symbolic significance. The target itself was already constitutionally required before this. The 2021 ruling of the Federal Constitutional Court establishes an obligation on the part of the current generation toward future generations. According to this, emissions after 2045 would only be possible if the interim targets in the next 15 years were tightened and met beforehand. Since this path is completely unrealistic, our Basic Law de facto requires the 2045 climate target.

The advisory opinion delivered by the International Court of Justice on July 23, 2025, along with the earlier opinions of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (ICtAHR, March 2025) and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS, May 2025), reaffirms the binding nature of the Paris Agreement, establishing that states have an international legal obligation to take action against climate change.

This international embeddedness is not only legally binding, but also of central importance politically: If Germany were to pull out of this system, it would not only be a massive breach of trust, but would also put pressure on Europe to follow suit. Such a domino effect would massively weaken the credibility and effectiveness of international climate policy. Many regions of the world, often poorer than Germany, are looking to Europe as a role model today. It is wrong to claim that the rest of the world is not promoting renewable energies. But without a strong European signal, it will be even harder for these countries to convince their populations and economies of the need for an ambitious climate policy. One can always imagine a better joint approach, but weakening the current approach without the prospect of a new one leads to faster global warming and higher costs, also for Germany.

Violating international agreements is in neither the political nor the economic interest of Germany. On the contrary, Germany benefits from a rules-based international order that guarantees reliability and fairness.

Climate protection is climate security, and thus national security

Climate protection is not an end in itself; it serves the security and prosperity of our country. The consequences of global warming have long been noticeable in Germany as well: Extreme heat waves, droughts, forest fires, floods, and crop failures threaten our infrastructure, economic strength, and health. The Lancet Commission calls climate change the greatest health threat of this century. The data is clear: The global average temperature had already risen by 1.62°C above pre-industrial levels at the beginning of 2025, and the rate of warming has quadrupled since the 1980s.

Climate protection is also security policy. Extreme weather and resource scarcity threaten livelihoods and drive conflict and migration, with direct consequences for Europe. Fossil fuel dependencies make nations vulnerable to geopolitical extortion, as the energy crisis has impressively demonstrated. Anyone who invests in climate protection strengthens resilience, sovereignty, and stability both domestically and externally.

There are voices claiming that climate protection is associated with excessively high costs. However, the same applies here as it does to defense spending: No defense is ultimately more expensive than a well-equipped Bundeswehr and NATO. It is the same with climate protection: No climate security will end up being far more expensive than resolute climate protection.

Emissions trading: a market-based solution and a European success factor

It is true: Germany alone cannot save the global climate. But what Federal Chancellor Friedrich Merz repeatedly emphasizes is equally true: While we are "only" responsible for around 2% of global emissions, we also account for only about 1% of the world's population. He further noted that if Germany contributes 20 percent of the solutions, "then we win and the climate wins." Furthermore, if all countries with a share of 2% or less were to stop their climate protection efforts, 40% of global emissions would be affected. By developing and enabling technologies that can be used worldwide, and by taking a leadership role in the European Union, we make an indispensable contribution to global climate protection. Without a strong German leadership role, there is no ambitious EU climate policy, and this is more important today than ever. While the USA under Donald Trump withdrew from the Paris Agreement, no other country followed them. Even Argentina has remained within the Paris Agreement under the new President Javier Milei. On this issue, the rest of the world looks above all to the European Union today. China has begun reducing its emissions in recent months and is willing to take on concrete reduction commitments for the first time. It is in precisely this time that the European leadership role – and thus also the German leadership role in Europe – is more important than ever before.

The only realistic and efficient chance to achieve the climate targets lies in the European emissions trading system. This market-based instrument creates incentives for innovation and investment without overwhelming the economy with rigid requirements. The EU emissions trading zone is the most important trading zone for the German economy. Meanwhile, 34 countries worldwide have decided to introduce their own emissions trading systems or link existing ones – including China, South Korea, Canada, Switzerland, and many more.

With each additional country that joins this system, the region in which companies can do business under comparable conditions grows. This facilitates trade, protects Germany as an industrial location, and promotes global climate protection.

An example of the acceptance of this instrument comes from the US state of Washington: In a referendum in November 2024, 62% of the population voted in favor of maintaining the emissions trading system, partly because a portion of the revenue is returned to citizens.

Parallel to the increase in emission prices, the coalition should introduce an instrument to accompany the people financially on the path to climate neutrality. A climate bonus in the form of "climate money" would be a promising model to protect households, especially those that cannot decarbonize in the short term, with or without subsidies, from potential price spikes. In this way, we want to support the hard-working middle class, for example, people who live in rural areas and rely on an old combustion engine to get to work, or who rent an uninsulated house. At the same time, climate-friendly behavior continues to pay off monetarily. As a first step, at least the electricity tax should be reduced for all citizens as the CO2​ price increases, in order to achieve initial relief from increased energy prices and a climate-policy-desirable reduction in the cost of the energy carrier electricity.

Reliability instead of populism: do not put climate targets up for debate

In light of international treaties, global challenges, and our constitutional requirements, it is unrealistic and dangerous to abandon the climate targets. Verbal attacks on the climate targets do not solve problems; instead, they create uncertainty among the population and the economy. They undermine support for climate protection and increase the difficulties from which we cannot simply extricate ourselves.

The CDU and Friedrich Merz stand for reliability, sustainability, and international responsibility. We think long-term and want to enable future generations to live in freedom and safety. The climate targets are the right thing to do for our country, for Europe, and for the generations to come.