The controversy began with Twitter, then the German chancellor called out the economic research on a popular talk show, and soon enough, the Washington Post was on the trail, phoning Notre Dame economics professor Rüdiger Bachmann.
Bachmann was watching “Anne Will,” a German talk show viewed by millions, when German Chancellor Olaf Scholz criticized a policy brief explaining that Germany could cut off Russian oil imports without detrimental economic impacts. Bachmann was a co-author of the only brief published at that time.
“I knew immediately who he meant,” Bachmann said. “It wasn’t particularly subtle. It was all but by name.”
Cited in a Washington Post article on March 29, Bachmann became one of the economists pitted against the chancellor without ever speaking to him.
“I find it funny that the Post would pick this up,” Bachmann said. “The whole narrative of me fighting the German chancellor was amusing.”
Since co-authoring his brief, Bachmann said additional economists have conducted analyses showing that Germany can ban Russian oil imports without detrimental economic effects. However, the chancellor maintains that a Russian oil embargo would result in economic disaster.
Despite the chancellor’s remarks that it is “irresponsible to add up numbers that don’t work,” Bachmann said the policy brief has made an impact.
“I do think we’ve moved the needle a little bit,” Bachmann said. “There was a lot of resonance in the parliamentary circles.”
Bachmann said he and his co-authors never intended to recommend an embargo on Russian gas and oil. They merely set out to determine the economic effects of the potential supply shock — whether due to a voluntary oil embargo by Germany or a forced sanction from Russia.
“It was pure scientific curiosity,” Bachmann said. “We wanted to know what the maximum damage could be.”
Unlike the prevailing notion that the economic impacts of cutting off Russian oil would be similar in…
