Franziska Brantner, the co-chair of the Green Party, has demanded specific commitments regarding antisemitism from the Left Party as her party considers possible coalition formation talks in Berlin.
Brantner told Spiegel that the Greens had made it clear prior to the election that a government supported or defined by antisemites could not be sustainable. She added that this same stance applies to individuals connected to organized crime or Islamism.
She took seriously the view of Berlin’s Left Party group leader, Tobias Schulze, who stated that anyone who glorifies, trivializes, or questions the right to existence of Israel should not belong to the Left Party or its faction. Brantner expressed the expectation that he would implement this principle accordingly.
Regarding the decision by the Berlin Left Party on Friday evening to hold exploratory talks with the SPD and the Greens, Brantner stated, “I welcome that leading politicians from the Left have acknowledged their mistakes and promised clarification. However, that alone will not be enough.”
She reminded the party that commitment to the right to exist of Israel is already a stance of the Left Party. Consequently, she argued that it was a reasonable expectation that the foundational principle of any potential government must be the recognition of Israel’s right to exist and the designation of Hamas as a terrorist organization.
Looking toward a potential red-green-red Senate, the Greens conceded that the distribution of ministerial posts would logically come last in negotiations. Nevertheless, she highlighted two specific ministries. The Greens stated that she finds it difficult to imagine the Left Party leading the Interior or Justice Ministry while there are individuals in the party with links to organized crime or extremist groups, such as the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) or Hamas.
Concerning the Left Party’s electoral program proposals-including the abolition of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (Verfassungsschutz) and considerations for restructuring the police, suggesting they should “wherever possible, be replaced or supplemented by social work”-Brantner firmly disagreed. “We hold a completely different position and attitude on that: we will not allow the abolition of either the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution or the police; that is unacceptable to us.”
