The Gap between East and West Germany

There is still a wide gap between East and West Germany, writes Marcel Furstenau on the website of the German broadcaster, Deutsche Welle. There is still a wide gap even amongst young people who have only ever lived in a unified country. The new commissioner for eastern Germany, Elisabeth Kaiser, attempts to explain why.

Elisabeth Kaiser is from Gera, in the eastern state of Thuringia. When the federal commissioner for eastern Germany was born in 1987, Germany was still divided. Two years later, the  Berlin Wall fell, and on October 3, 1990, the communist GDR  became history.

"I did not consciously experience the period of reunification, but the stories of my parents and grandparents have shaped me," Kaiser wrote in an annual report presented in Berlin just in time for the 35th anniversary of German Unity Day. For the 38-year-old member of the centre-left Social Democratic Party (SPD) this is a first, as she has only been in office since May 2025, when the new federal government was formed.

In her report, the political scientist focuses on how younger people are experiencing a Germany that has been united for 35 years. Yet the title she gave it hints at the gap between the former west and east, "Growing up in unity?"

Formally, the answer is "yes," because there is now only one German nation.

"We children of the late 1980s and 1990s are the first generation to have been socialized in a unified Germany," Kaiser writes in the report's foreword. "Nevertheless, for young people growing up there, 'the East' is still much more than a compass point. It is a space that shapes identities and influences lives," she stressed.

East German identity 

Kaiser, who studied at the University of Potsdam in the eastern state of Brandenburg sees differences between herself and younger people from former West Germany.

"Many young people... cannot relate to the label 'West German' — especially if they live on the coast or near the Alps. In contrast, young eastern Germans identify themselves as Ossis far more often," she wrote, using a slang term for people from the former East.

Kaiser believes there are good reasons for this. Even though young Germans have all been grown up in the same country for three and a half decades, the conditions of their upbringing still differ in important ways.

"This is especially true outside the eastern German cities," she said.

Lower incomes, more welfare

In her report, Kaiser references a study on equality between the former East and West. It shows that in small towns and rural regions, public transportation and medical facilities are no longer comprehensively guaranteed in eastern states. In addition, people earn below-average incomes and are more likely to be dependent on social benefits.

"Wealth is also lower in the east than in the west," Kaiser added.

"This shapes the lives of many eastern Germans well into adulthood," she wrote, because they are less likely to be able to rely on their parents for financial support throughout their lives.

In addition, the aging of the population in rural regions of eastern Germany is more pronounced than in western areas. The proportion of young people is well below the national average.  

Rich West, poor East 

When presenting her report, Kaiser elaborated on this aspect: "To this day, young people in the east are disadvantaged because wealth is mainly passed on through inheritance," which most east Germans cannot expect.

The figures published by the Federal Statistical Office for 2024 underline this: The tax offices in western states reported more than €106 billion ($124.5 billion) in inherited or gifted wealth. In the east, including Berlin, the figure was less than seven billion. That amounts to almost four times more in the west per capita. Kaiser finds this problematic and believes that a serious debate over changes to inheritance laws may be warranted.

One idea that has been floated is the "inheritance for everyone" proposal first put forward by the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW) several years ago. This would see all young people in Germany receive an "inheritance" of €20,000 to finance education, start a business or invest in real estate. It would be financed by taxes on larger inheritances.

However, the topic is still unpopular with a lot of conservatives, including some in Chancellor Friedrich Merz Cristian Democratic Union (CDU).

In the end, Kaiser's assessment is a mixed bag. Eastern Germany has developed well in many areas, the economy has grown, there is a vibrant start-up scene, and the region is a pioneer in the expansion of renewable energies.

But in the long run, all this will not be enough to close the gap. And this is likely to become even more difficult to change in the future due to the aging population in the east and the exodus of many young people to the west.

While Berlin's population has not decreased, the east has lost two million people since reunification in 1990 — a decline of 16%. Currently, the five eastern German states still have just under 12.5 million inhabitants.

During the same period, the population in western Germany grew by 10%, to almost 68 million people.

This article was originally written in German.

source: commonspace.eu with Deutche Welle (Cologne)

photo: Elizabeth Kaiser

 

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).
Editor's choice
News
UN Security Council Presidential Statement on the Role of Diplomacy during Active Hostilities

UN Security Council Presidential Statement on the Role of Diplomacy during Active Hostilities

The United Nations Security Council is today expected to adopt a presidential statement on the role of diplomacy during active hostilities. The draft text, which was authored by Pakistan, underscores the importance of maintaining diplomatic engagement even after the outbreak of armed conflict, with a view to containing escalation, facilitating cessations of hostilities and ceasefires, and creating conditions conducive to peaceful political settlements. Resolution 2788 of 22 July 2025, which was initiated by Pakistan, reaffirmed the Council’s commitment to the peaceful settlement of disputes under Chapter VI of the UN Charter. A year later, on 23 July, the Council convened an open debate to review the resolution’s implementation and examine ways of making more effective use of the peaceful dispute settlement tools available under Chapter VI.   The draft presidential statement builds on previous Council products, such as resolution 2788, but it is the first to focus specifically on the role of diplomacy in containing and de-escalating active hostilities. Since the open debate in July, Council members have continued to call for intensified efforts towards de-escalation and dialogue, although differences persist over how proactively the Council should promote mediation and other peaceful means of dispute settlement, particularly in situations where the consent of the parties is contested. In his statement opening the general debate of the 81st session of the General Assembly on 22 September, Secretary-General António Guterres highlighted the devastating consequences of ongoing conflicts in Ukraine, Sudan, and the Middle East, warning that these and other crises illustrate what happens when “force outpaces diplomacy” and stressing the urgency of sustained diplomatic engagement. The negotiations on the draft presidential statement do not appear to have been particularly contentious, although Council members expressed differing views on some elements of the text. Pakistan circulated the initial draft to Council members on 14 October. Following informal consultations with Council members to address comments on the initial draft, Pakistan circulated a first revised draft on 23 October, incorporating several proposed amendments. On 29 October, Pakistan circulated a second revised draft, which it placed under silence procedure until the following day (30 October). After the US broke silence, a third revised draft was circulated on 3 November and placed under silence procedure until this morning (4 November). The draft subsequently passed silence. The agreed presidential statement emphasises the importance of maintaining direct and indirect channels of communication between parties to armed conflict to reduce the risk of miscalculation and create opportunities for sustained political engagement. (click image to read more)

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)