The staging as a "peace party" triggers resentment in the AfD

The Bundestag building Marie-Elisabeth-Lüders-Haus on the east bank of the Spree stands to the left and right of the former course of the Berlin Wall. A memorial in the building commemorates the division of the city. Last Wednesday, it was the AfD parliamentary group that revived a motto known from the GDR: Under the title "Freedom for Peace", the group's foreign policy working group invited to a "peace concert".

"There was a radio show that had exactly this title," said AfD foreign politician Matthias Moosdorf on the morning of the concert in front of journalists in the Bundestag. "We thought that we would breathe a little life back into this title so that it would not be forgotten." It was the title of an annual "solidarity concert for the victims of the Bonn regime".

For Joana Cotar, a member of the Bundestag who left the far-right party and was born in the Socialist Republic of Romania, such a borrowing is a sign that the organizers “have not learned anything from history”. And even within the party, some people are shaking their heads at how the AfD has been trying to present itself as a “peace party” for several months.

In particular, the most powerful man in the AfD, party and parliamentary group leader Tino Chrupalla, was attracted to this designation. "It's Peace Week because we, as a peace faction, brought in the peace motion this week as well," he said at the concert evening last week in front of selected guests. He later told journalists that the aim of negotiations must be to “stop killing people”. War propaganda shows can be seen “every evening” on German television. Ukrainian composers were not performed that evening, only works by the Russians Pyotr Tchaikovsky and Sergei Rachmaninoff.

Petr Bystron, the foreign policy spokesman for the AfD parliamentary group, came on stage for this. And praised his faction leader, which Chrupalla should be rather uncomfortable with. During the discussions in the Bundestag, Chrupalla "correctly recognized around 100 billion for further armament that this is crazy, and named it that," says Bystron.

He was alluding to a statement made by Chrupalla at the end of February 2022 with reference to the announced special fund for the Bundeswehr. "These 100 billion euros, that's really crazy," said Chrupalla at the time - and had to listen to harsh criticism in his parliamentary group, since the AfD has long advocated better equipment for the armed forces.

At the time, Chrupalla publicly rowed back to the effect that his criticism related exclusively to the construct of the special fund and the new debt associated with it - and was now recognized for his original statement.

For an internal event of the parliamentary group, Bystron recently invited the historian and Gazprom advisor Alexander Rahr, who maintains good contacts in the Kremlin. It is noteworthy that Bystron's largely pro-Russian working group (AK) on foreign policy, to which Chrupalla also belongs, was unable to assert itself on crucial points in the so-called peace motion within the parliamentary group.

This is shown by internal documents available to WELT. There are three different versions of the application.

The first was developed exclusively by the AK Foreign Policy and there in particular by the former parliamentary group leader Alexander Gauland and Matthias Moosdorf. It called for acceptance of the illegal annexation of Crimea. The “recognition of Crimea as an integral part of the territory of the Russian Federation by Ukraine and the guarantor powers” ​​should become part of a “sustainable peace agreement” between Ukraine and Russia. The text makes no mention of Russia's illegal attack, which began in February, and only describes it as a "war". In the first version, faction leader Chrupalla is among the applicants named by name.

At a parliamentary group meeting at the end of January, the move to cede Crimea to Russia caused heated debates. According to participants, the applicants were accused of "submission" and "loyalty addresses". The critics demanded that one should not interfere in the internal affairs of other countries, which should also apply to Ukraine. The motion then had to be removed from the agenda of the Bundestag plenum.

As a result, numerous other working groups got involved in the discussion and were able to defuse several points in days of negotiations. The version finally brought to the Bundestag only says that "unresolved issues relating to Crimea should be resolved within 15 years through bilateral negotiations" between Ukraine and Russia.

The wording from the first version that the European nation-states “should not allow their territory to be divided into spheres of influence by powers from outside the space” is also missing. The concept of "space-alien power" was coined by the constitutional lawyer Carl Schmitt, who was involved in National Socialism.

There are also revealing changes with regard to the (remained the same) demand for a privileged EU partnership for Ukraine with a simultaneous guarantee that it will not become a NATO or EU member. The first version said that Germany and the EU should play "a leading role in the reconstruction of Ukraine". In the approved version, on the other hand, it is said that Germany and the EU could support the conditions for the continued existence of Ukraine "much better than through arms deliveries".

Only in the last version of the application is the “war of aggression contrary to international law” named, albeit at the same time relativized. The EU was too weak to prevent this. Almost the entire faction could gather behind this defused version. According to participants, this was decided with only one dissenting vote. The demand for a gradual lifting of sanctions against Russia, which is prominent in the application, is therefore undisputed.

With regard to the image as a “peace party”, however, parts of the parliamentary group are convinced that such a profile does not fit the AfD or at least should not be placed before all other issues. The fact that the party and parliamentary group are now adorning themselves with the dove of peace – a symbol of the old-left peace movement – ​​on social media, or that the Thuringian AfD head of state Björn Höcke uses well-known slogans there such as “Creating peace without weapons” causes frowns.

Critics complain that the use of the dove of peace and the designation as a "peace faction" were never coordinated. The program of the AfD - the "Fortress Europe", more deportations, a strengthening of the police and armed forces - is not compatible with this.

The fact that a motion by the Defense Policy Working Group for a reactivation of conscription is to be tabled in the Bundestag now of all times could lead to discussions with the advocates of the image of peace. There, the view is sometimes taken that the demand – anchored in the AfD basic program – is not appropriate in the current situation.

The critics of the staging as a "peace party" could feel confirmed by a post-election survey by Infratest Dimap. According to this, only 16 percent of AfD voters in the Berlin House of Representatives elections said that the war in Ukraine played the biggest role in the voting decision.

Chrupalla's environment, on the other hand, can point to poll successes and growth in the Berlin elections, which are seen there as confirmation of their own course. Chrupalla also points out that the parliamentary group and party's public relations work is "discussed and supported in committees".

"Kick-off Politics" is WELT's daily news podcast. The most important topic, analyzed by WELT editors, and the dates of the day. Subscribe to the podcast on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music, among others, or directly via RSS feed.