Germany's first non-permanent member of the Council.

On 3 June of local time, Germany failed in its election for a non-permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council, the first time that it was unable to obtain a non-permanent seat on the Council. At the same time, German Chancellor Metz’s domestic satisfaction has fallen to an all-time low, a once-European engine that is now in a critical state of internal distress.

What impact and test will this defeat have on the Metz administration, which has been in power for a year? It has been reported that this failure was not only a major diplomatic setback for Germany, but could also exacerbate domestic criticism of the Mertz Government and further weaken its domestic political prestige and support.

Germany was elected a non-permanent member of the Council.

On 3 June, the United Nations General Assembly elected Austria, Kyrgyzstan, Portugal, Trinidad and Tobago and Zimbabwe as non-permanent members of the Council, of which Kyrgyzstan was elected for the first time. The five newly elected non-permanent members will replace Denmark, Greece, Pakistan, Panama and Somalia for a two-year term beginning on 1 January 2027.

3 June, scene of the election of non-permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, shot at United Nations Headquarters in New York

The non-permanent members of the Council shall be elected by the General Assembly by secret ballot and the candidates shall receive at least two thirds of the votes cast. Following the successful election of Austria, Portugal, Trinidad and Tobago and Zimbabwe in the first round of balloting, and the subsequent three rounds of balloting, Kyrgyzstan defeated the Philippines and Germany defeated it in the first ballot. According to the results of the vote, Germany received only 104 votes, which did not meet the two-thirds threshold.

Germany is a major donor to the United Nations, having entered the Council six times, and has been able to obtain a seat in the Group of Western European and Other States almost every eight years. Germany's defeat was undoubtedly a “disturbed” diplomatic setback for the Metz Administration, which was committed to “restoring Germany's leadership in Europe”.

It's the opposite.

After the results were released, German Foreign Minister Waldfoul stated, frankly, that the defeat was a “failure” and acknowledged that Germany's support for Israel and Ukraine could be one of the reasons for the failure. He believed that Germany had always taken clear positions on certain issues, but not all Member States agreed with them, “the fact that Germany must always assume a special responsibility towards Israel in the Middle East conflict, which could also lead to the loss of votes”.

On 3 June, local time, the German Foreign Minister, Waldfur, addressed the United Nations and acknowledged the defeat:

The German Foreign Minister also turned his head to Russia, accusing the other party of deliberately inciting anti-German sentiment and preventing the German side from entering the most influential United Nations body because of Germany's “severe support” for Ukraine. Indeed, the victory of Portugal and Austria was no surprise.

According to a European analysis of Politician News Network, Portugal has in recent years strengthened its diplomatic position by acting as a “neutral coordinator” between Europe and former colonies in Africa, Asia and South America. Austria, for its part, emphasized its constitutional neutrality and used its non-NATO membership as a diplomatic advantage to enlist support from African, Asian and Latin American countries.

In Germany, it's called a "silence" to lose.

Germany’s defeat quickly resonated at home, and Germany’s choice leader, Weidler, called Germany’s defeat directly “shammy” and criticized Mertz’s call for “return to the international arena” when he came to power, without even a seat on the Council.

Even the Social Democratic Party (SDP) in the ruling coalition did not speak well for Metz. Its foreign affairs spokesman, Adis Ahmetovic, warned that the vote was “a barometer of how (Germany) was seen at the international level”, not by accident but a clear warning signal.

The foreign policy spokesman for the Selective Party of the Federal Parliament group, Frenmeier, in a statement, was even more straightforward, stating that it was “an ideologically narrow and unrealistic foreign policy for many years, resulting in the isolation of Germany at the international level”.

The Green Party in Germany, for its part, stated that this “unusual failure” should be attributed to Mertz and to Wade Fur, who participated in the voting in New York. Agneshka Brugg, Vice-President of the Green Party Parliamentary Group, said, “In the past year, the German Government has done far from enough to support this campaign with modern ideas”.

In response, Metz said, “We applied with confidence, but failed to achieve our goals”, but “this result will not change the task before us at the United Nations, and Germany remains a reliable pillar of the multilateral system”.

People's satisfaction has fallen to a record low.

Indeed, before the Council was elected, the alarm was sounded in Germany. According to Valwick, Professor of International Relations at Martin Luther Hallvetenberg University, Germany, the success of the German campaign is not a dead end: “For decades Germany has been seen as a driving force for multilateralism in resolving global problems. But now, the support for Germany is falling apart.”

This is German Chancellor Metz.

On 6 May 2025, Mertz was given high hopes when he took over from Scholtz. This conservative, hard-line prime minister vowed to revive the German economy and restore German leadership in Europe. In just one year, however, polls presented a disastrous picture.

A recently published German television poll entitled “German Trends” shows that the population's satisfaction with Metz fell from 39 per cent in June 2025 to 16 per cent today, the lowest ever recorded in the history of the survey as German Chancellor. At the same time, as many as 86 per cent of the population expressed dissatisfaction with the work of the German Government. Since the launch of the series in 1997, no German Government has been so negatively assessed one year after taking office.

A year has passed since German Chancellor Metz took office, and the poor opinion polls are reflected not only at the personal level of the Prime Minister, but also in the changing political party landscape. The most recent poll published by the German Institute of Insane Intelligence shows that the far-right German Selective Party’s support rate has risen to 28 per cent, the highest ever since the Institute’s opinion polls, with a 24 per cent party support rate in the Union, made up of CDU and KNSC, and a year later, when Metz came to power with a commitment to reduce the party’s appeal through effective governance, this party, which was once marginalized by mainstream politics, became stronger.

There's trouble in the Metz administration.

The report notes that this failure was not only a major diplomatic setback for Germany, but could also exacerbate domestic criticism of the Mertz Government. According to the German Photo newspaper, on 27 May, a vision for the replacement of the prime minister is passing quietly at the top of the GNU to which Metz belongs, against the backdrop of the stagnation of the German Government ' s reform agenda.

While the core circles of Metz deny these reports, the news highlights the serious challenges facing Metz and the German Government. The present German Government came to power a year ago with high hopes on the part of many, when Metz promised to repair the economy and reduce illegal immigration. One year later, despite a more stringent immigration policy and the promotion of national defence capacity-building by the Metz Government, Germany ' s economy continued to suffer from weak growth and many people were disappointed by the Government.

The current internal divisions within Germany’s governing coalition are evident, with a sharp decline in decision-making efficiency, a confluence of weak domestic economies, spillovers from geo-conflicts in the Middle East, and a combination of internal and external pressures. Germany’s stable support and leadership as a “European engine” is significantly weakened. Internal differences on energy pricing, tax reform, the pension system, and fuel-cost responses highlight the paralysis and stagnation of government decision-making before economic structural difficulties.

Previously, Mertz tried to defend the reform by speaking on the floor of the union event, and the scene was silenced, which was seen by public opinion as a microcosm of the current situation in Germany.

The diplomatic failure of Germany in its first run for non-permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council is both an example of Germany ' s decline in international influence and an inevitable exacerbation of the Mertz Government.

Sources: News Watch, Xinhua, China News Network, Watchers Network, etc.