This is the peak!

Summits exert an almost irresistible attraction on people. This applies not only to mountaineers, but also to government politicians. Whenever there is a crisis, a moment of upheaval, or even just something that needs to be resolved with multiple stakeholders, a summit is necessary.

The coalition committee (or was it a summit?) on Wednesday decided on little concrete. However, the four party leaders were able to announce one decision: There will be two summits – one for the ailing steel industry and one for the struggling automotive industry.

It's remarkable that the coalition leaders are selling the mere announcement of the talks as a success. Even more remarkable is the jubilation heard the next day from the SPD, which had even called for the summit on steel by party conference resolution. Eureka, we're having a summit!

There hasn't been a shortage of such conferences in the past either. The last steel summit was nine months ago. The last industry summit was eleven months ago. And the auto bosses visit the Chancellery almost every year. If summits could stimulate growth, Germany would experience an unprecedented boom.

The RND newsletter from the government district. Every Thursday.

By subscribing to the newsletter, I agree to the advertising agreement .

Unfortunately, friendly words and pretty images aren't enough for economic turnaround. Action is needed – something that rarely happens at summits. At the last steel summit in December, for example, then-Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) announced lower energy prices and proposed—warning!—a European steel summit. Nothing has happened since then—except for an escalation of the crisis.

The steel industry has been suffering for years from declining demand, high energy costs, strict environmental regulations, and cheap Asian exports. Now, punitive US tariffs are also being imposed. The situation is dire, but steelmakers are not alone. The automotive industry, mechanical engineering, and chemicals – the crisis is now affecting almost every industry.

The realization that Thyssenkrupp, Salzgitter, Saarstahl, and the others won't make it without political support is also nothing new. Even the possible rescue instruments are known. Energy and grid costs would have to be reduced significantly more than previously agreed, the European market would have to be protected from dumping imports, and a marketable decarbonization strategy would have to be developed.

All of this has been discussed for years, which is why the time is ripe for decisions. Policymakers must answer the question of whether or not they want to keep crude steel production in Germany. There are reasons for both. Proponents argue for jobs, value chains, and resilience. Opponents point out that the number of remaining jobs in the industry, at 80,000, is relatively small, while the global market is quite large.

If one sets aside social democratic blast furnace romanticism and liberal economic faith in the market, one will come to the conclusion that the oversized steel industry must shrink significantly, but perhaps shouldn't disappear entirely. The German economy also needs steel(!), but its economic future certainly lies elsewhere. There is much to be said for solving the problems now as best as possible with a manageable investment of financial and political capital – and then focusing on truly future-oriented industries.

Perhaps the government would do well to ask mountaineering legend Reinhold Messner. He once said that summit euphoria is a cliché for those who stay below. Feelings of happiness only come after the descent, when the challenge has been mastered.

That would be one approach.