Connect with us

Europe

What is the AfD to do about the EU and NATO?

Published

on

Last month, the draft manifesto of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) for the 2014 European Parliament (EP) elections was leaked to the press, unveiling one of its most prominent stances – advocating a ‘controlled disintegration of the EU’. Despite labeling the EU as ‘deeply undemocratic’ and raising doubts about the legitimacy of the EP, the AfD is actively preparing for the 2024 elections with a robust ‘eurosceptic’ list.

During the first part of the AfD congress last weekend, however, party leaders Tino Chrupalla and Alice Weidel referred to the term ‘controlled disintegration’ in the manifesto as an ‘editorial oversight’ and stated that it would be removed in the second part of the congress this weekend.

These statements created a commotion within the party. Björn Höcke, the party’s Thuringia chief and alleged member of the ‘radical’ faction, insists on retaining the statement and has even threatened a ‘revolt’ if he is not given the opportunity to speak. On the other hand, Christine Anderson, ranked fourth on the EP list and allegedly part of the ‘moderate’ wing of the party, continues to advocate for Germany’s immediate departure from the EU.

A federation of nation-states instead of the EU

“We demand a restructuring of Europe in order to use the potential of nation-states and rebuild the bridge to the east,” Chrupalla said last month.

Arguing that the European Union ‘usurps national competences without replacing the nation-state’ and that the European Commission is ‘not democratic enough’ because it ‘lacks legitimacy’, Chrupalla also cited EU sanctions against Russia as a prime example of the EU’s ‘illegitimacy’, saying they ‘do not benefit citizens’ and lead to rising inflation and stagnation.

Instead of the EU, the AfD proposes ‘a new European economic and interest-based community, a league of European nations’, the co-chairman said.

AfD’s quest for ‘Staatsvolk’

In its manifesto, the AfD explicitly rejects the idea of a ‘federal Europe’. “Such an entity has neither a Staatsvolk, which are necessary prerequisites for successful states, nor the necessary minimum cultural identity,” the AfD’s draft reads.

The emphasis on Staatsvolk is ours. In literal translation, the concept of ‘people of the state’ encompasses both all national origins of a sovereign state and another, more ‘ethnonationalist’ meaning, which emphasizes the dominant national element in a sovereign state to the exclusion of other minorities. The first meaning refers to all citizens living on the territory of a country, regardless of their ethnic origin; the second refers to an exclusionary ethnonationalism.

It is important to remember that the meaning of many words in Germany was transformed with the National Socialist government. ‘Volk’ is one of them. This word, which we can easily translate into Turkish as ‘people’, for example came to refer to the German nation bound by blood and soil in the Nazi dictionary.

There are clearly people within the AfD who can defend both meanings of Staatsvolk. The AfD’s arguments in the manifesto strongly revolve around the concepts of ‘nation’, ‘sovereignty’ and ‘identity’. The terms ‘nation’ and ‘national’ alone appear 145 times in the election program.

Is the AfD changing instead of the EU?

The AfD argues that decisions should not be made in Brussels but at the center of the nation-state. The program’s introduction talks about ‘globalist elites’ taking over the EU.

The debate around the controlled disintegration of the EU could become even more heated now that the AfD has accepted the application to join the right-wing group Identity and Democracy (ID) in the EP. The current main ID parties, the French National Union (Marine Le Pen) and the Italian Lega (Matteo Salvini), seem to have softened their positions on a federal Europe.

Marine Le Pen, for example, has abandoned her previous advocacy of dissolving the EU and is instead pushing for a ‘fundamental reform’ of the bloc. Similarly, the Lega is now gradually abandoning its ‘eurosceptic’ ideas and is trying to build a broad alliance with center-right forces for the upcoming elections.

In an interview with Deutschlandfunk at the end of last month, Harald Weye, the AfD parliamentary group’s spokesman for European policy, argued that the phrase ‘controlled disintegration of the EU’ was literally ‘one person’s grammatical carelessness’. In the elections of 2017, 2019 and 2021, the AfD openly advocated a ‘Dexit’ – Germany’s exit from the EU – as a ‘must’. The program for the 2021 Bundestag elections stated: “The transformation of the European Union into a planned economic superstate in recent years has led us to the realization that our fundamental reform approaches cannot be implemented in the EU. We consider it necessary for Germany to leave the European Union and establish a new European economic and interest community,” it said.

AfD’s plan for a ‘more German Europe’

An analysis of the Magdeburg party conference in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (faz) claims that the co-chairs have different views on the issue. According to faz, Alice Weidel sees withdrawal as absurd, but Tino Chrupalla is as sympathetic to a controlled break-up of the EU as he is to withdrawal from NATO.

According to a report in WELT, sources close to AfD leader Weidel say that the AfD is advocating a softer wording in order not to scare its partners in the ID, including its allies in the EP, the National Union and the Lega. Weidel recently told Stern, “I prefer to talk about breaking up the EU into parts, which makes sense in some parts, such as common security and defense policy. But that’s where it has failed so far,” he said.

A similar attitude can be seen in the attitude towards the eurozone. “Germany doesn’t need the euro,” the party’s 2013 Bundestag election campaign said. The following year, this position was softened and a ‘more flexible monetary order’ was proposed for the EU and ‘the stability-oriented euro countries should create a smaller monetary system among themselves on the basis of the Maastricht Treaty’.

Ten years later, the draft European Election Program for 2024 does not even mention leaving the Eurozone. It is now only about changing the Eurosystem. In fact, the AfD’s proposal to keep Germany in the eurozone and introduce a more ‘stability-oriented’ monetary system is criticized as making the EU ‘even more German than before’. The European economic area, which is very favorable for German capital, should remain with a common currency, but the costs of maintaining it should be reduced. Above all, there should be no ‘transfer payments’ to other countries at Germany’s expense.

It is important to note that the AfD is not alone. During the Greek crisis, the Free Democrats (FDP), and Frank Schäffler in particular, opposed the bailout package for Greece and financial aid for the Eurozone in general. There is no doubt that these ideas are also quite widespread within the CDU/CSU.

Germany’s withdrawal from NATO is being discussed

In addition to the EU, another topic of discussion is the US and NATO.

In the party’s European election manifesto, seven AfD state leaders, including Björn Höcke, call for ‘European states to finally take responsibility for their own security in their own hands’ and describe NATO as ‘the so-called protective umbrella of a distant hegemon’.

The Seven’s motion argues that the ‘Zeitenwende’ (turning point) that Chancellor Olaf Scholz proposed last year for the reform of the German army should mean that European states should ‘take responsibility for their own security into their own hands’ instead of seeking refuge under the ‘so-called protective umbrella of a distant and self-serving hegemon’.

The motion goes on to say that European countries have been ‘set back’ by the policies of the European Union and that “the policy of military alliance has exacerbated these developments. The EU’s Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP) has failed to establish an independent European collective security system in the face of the US-led NATO,” the motion says.

The motion seeks to amend the preamble of the Federal Program Commission’s draft motion. The proposal states that the eastward expansion of the EU and NATO has given the US ‘even deeper influence over the European order’. The seven believe that European countries are being drawn into conflicts that are not their own and are diametrically opposed to their ‘natural interests’, such as ‘fruitful trade relations in the Eurasian region’.

But Martin Vincentz, the leader of the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, does not want the motion to be perceived as a position against NATO. “As one of the signatories, I don’t see the motion as an exit from NATO, but as a strengthening of European defense policy in the interest of NATO,” Vincentz told WELT AM SONNTAG.

It is hard to say that there is a clear consensus within the party on relations with the US and NATO. For example, a joint motion by Kurt Kleinschmidt, president of Schleswig-Holstein, and state parliamentarians from North Rhine-Westphalia and Berlin states that ‘excellent political relations require that American foreign and security policy strategies do not contradict German and European strategies’.

The group also wants to include in the European election manifesto a sentence from the basic program adopted in 2016: “NATO membership is in Germany’s foreign and security policy interests insofar as NATO limits itself to its task as a defense alliance.”

Another motion for an amendment on NATO was submitted by some state parliamentarians from Hamburg and North Rhine-Westphalia. “In view of the emerging and possibly unstoppable bloc formation between the two rivals, the United States and China, we believe that it is best for Germany to remain in the current alliance and use all possibilities to prioritize its own national interests,” the motion reads.

This includes expanding NATO’s European footprint and thus Germany’s own economic, cultural and military capabilities “in order to have a stronger influence in the world and to avoid having to obey Washington’s every whim,” according to the motion. According to the AfD, “then there would also be no need for a permanent deployment of US troops in Europe.”

The AfD’s 2017 party program ‘Manifesto for Germany’ also states that “NATO membership is in Germany’s interests in terms of foreign and security policy as long as NATO’s role remains as a defense alliance. We are in favor of a significant strengthening of the European pillar of the North Atlantic Alliance.” However, the AfD favors the withdrawal of allied troops and nuclear weapons deployed on German soil.

Europe

Ramstein format delivers massive military packages to Ukraine

Published

on

The 28th meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, held in the Ramstein format, concluded with unprecedented military support for Ukraine from its allies.

According to a statement from the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense, the security assistance to be provided this year is expected to exceed the figures from all previous years of the full-scale war.

Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov stated after the meeting, “The 28th meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group in the Ramstein format was another confirmation that partners remain reliable and determined in supporting Ukraine.”

Umerov emphasized that Ukraine achieved significant results, adding, “According to the outcomes of the meeting, our partners announced new aid packages and significant support measures.”

Record drone aid from Britain

Britain announced a record £350 million in aid for drone procurement. According to Minister Umerov, this will enable the delivery of 100,000 drones to Ukraine in 2025.

Overall, Britain’s military support in 2025 will amount to £4.5 billion, with £247 million of this sum allocated for the training of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

Germany’s massive €5 billion package

Germany approved a new military aid package totaling €5 billion.

Umerov shared the information, stating, “The Federal Parliament (Bundestag) has already approved this decision.” The package will specifically include funding for long-range weapons to be produced in Ukraine, as well as the delivery of air defense systems, weapons, and ammunition.

Netherlands’ contribution to naval power

The Netherlands is providing an aid package worth €400 million. This package includes a mine countermeasures vessel, boats, and naval drones.

Belgium’s long-term commitment

Belgium announced a long-term initiative. Within this framework, €1 billion in annual aid will be provided to Ukraine until 2029, and a mine countermeasures vessel will be delivered.

Norway allocated $700 million for drones, focusing on Ukraine’s defense industry, and $50 million to the NSATU Trust Fund.

Canada allocated $45 million for drones, electronic warfare systems, IT solutions, and Coyote and Bison armored vehicles.

Sweden will contribute €440 million to international programs for the procurement of artillery ammunition, drones, and other weapons for Ukraine.

Continue Reading

Europe

‘Force with force’: DGAP calls for aggressive EU strategy in US trade dispute

Published

on

Officials from the German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP) state in their public announcements that the EU should respond to the US government “force with force” to stop it.

Brussels’ measures against the Trump administration’s tariffs have so far been extremely timid. In April, the EU prepared a list of US goods threatened with retaliatory tariffs in response to US steel and aluminum tariffs; this list includes goods such as soybeans and Harley Davidson motorcycles, valued at 21 billion euros.

Additionally, it prepared another list of US goods worth 95 billion euros, planned to be finalized next week; this list includes cars and auto parts, aircraft, medical devices, and chemicals.

‘The only way to fight Trump is to risk instability’

The EU’s cautious approach is causing growing dissatisfaction among economic experts and political advisors. For example, DGAP expert Markus Jaeger argues in his new article that the EU should adopt a more aggressive policy.

Jaeger states that attacking US states where Trump has a broad voter base with tariffs is pointless, as these measures “rebound without hitting Trump.” Instead, he suggests that directly addressing “the president’s cost-benefit calculations” would be a better approach.

The German expert points out that past experiences have shown Trump avoids a “comprehensive financial instability risk” and withdraws tariffs when such a risk emerges. He recalls, for instance, that a significant stock market decline prompted Trump to freeze the tariff war against China.

Therefore, Jaeger calls for the EU to switch to a strategy involving a “credible and effective retaliatory threat,” stressing that, if necessary, an escalation of the conflict against “hostile protectionist measures” should not be avoided.

According to Jaeger, a former employee of Deutsche Bank Research, “risking comprehensive instability” if necessary is the only tactical way to defend against Trump.

‘China did what the EU couldn’t do against the US’

A more fundamental critique came from another DGAP expert, Shahin Vallée.

Vallée previously served as an economic advisor to EU Council President Herman Van Rompuy, then-Economy Minister Emmanuel Macron, and finally George Soros.

Vallée argues that the EU’s efforts to understand and deal with US President Donald Trump after his re-election have been a “complete failure.”

The DGAP expert argues that the EU failed to recognize the need to respond to Trump “force with force,” “openly and visibly.” He believes Brussels missed the “extraordinary opportunity” that arose when Trump was “colliding head-on with the entire world simultaneously.”

According to Vallée, it would have been possible to make Trump yield if action had been taken to isolate the US by immediately forming alliances with countries like China or Canada.

Vallée asserts that China achieved this success by “resisting and leveraging its power in critical areas,” compelling the US to “completely surrender.” He further claims China managed this without needing EU cooperation in a future economic war with the US.

According to the expert, the EU is currently stuck in the next round of tariff threats and will face even stronger pressure in the future.

‘Respond to force with force’

In this context, Vallée insistently calls for the EU to make a “complete U-turn” in its economic policy towards the Trump administration.

According to the author, as a first step, Brussels should immediately implement retaliatory tariffs against US steel and aluminum tariffs. Simultaneously, it should announce new counter-tariffs against automotive tariffs and suspended “reciprocal” tariffs; this should cover imports from the US exceeding 150 billion euros.

Secondly, the EU should restrict exports of goods that the US cannot substitute. Vallée gives the example of lithography technology used in semiconductor manufacturing, likely referring to equipment produced by the Dutch company ASML, which is used in manufacturing the most advanced chips and currently has largely no alternative, at least in the West.

Thirdly, the DGAP expert advocates for measures against US service sector imports. These measures include imposing digital taxes on the profits of large US internet companies on one hand, and restricting the activities of US financial service providers benefiting from European assets on the other.

Vallée advises being prepared for a “sharp escalation” of the conflict in this regard.

Continue Reading

Europe

Vatican under Pope Leo XIV warns against AI ‘playing God,’ urges ethical development

Published

on

The new leader of the Catholic world, Pope Leo XIV, has made reducing the risks of “uncontrolled artificial intelligence” the defining mission of his papacy.

In his first official address to the cardinals, the new Pope warned against the dangers artificial intelligence poses to “human dignity, justice, and labor.” Two days later, speaking to journalists, he praised the technology’s “immense potential” while also emphasizing the responsibility to “ensure it is used for the benefit of all people.”

Like Pope Leo XIII, whose name he took and who called for “restructuring” relations between workers and capital during the industrial revolution in the last quarter of the 19th century, Leo XIV positions himself as a “guardian of the social fabric” against uncontrolled modern technologies.

Indeed, the new Pope had said he took this name pointing to the role of his predecessor, who published the famous papal encyclical Rerum Novarum, in “social matters.”

Franciscan friar Paolo Benanti, a Vatican advisor on artificial intelligence ethics, told POLITICO, “The Church asks us to look to the heavens, but also to walk on earth as the times require,” adding that it is not unusual for the church to offer expertise in such a futuristic field.

Maria Savona, an AI expert and professor of innovation economics at Luiss University in Rome and the University of Sussex, stated, “The Vatican wants to avoid certain AI developments that could harm human rights and dignity and disproportionately affect low-skilled workers.”

The Vatican’s efforts to secure a place for itself in artificial intelligence regulation began with Leo’s predecessor. In 2020, Pope Francis brought together technology companies like IBM and Cisco, as well as religious and political leaders, to sign the Rome Call for AI Ethics, a commitment to developing artificial intelligence technologies that are “accountable and benefit society.”

In January, the Vatican issued an official statement warning that artificial intelligence could lead humanity to become a “slave to its own work.”

Leo, the first pope from the US—the homeland of Silicon Valley and the tech revolution—and a mathematics graduate, is in a “unique position” to carry this banner, according to POLITICO.

Meanwhile, Washington is spearheading a deregulation move in the AI field. President Donald Trump rolled back the security rules set by his predecessor, Joe Biden, and announced a half-trillion-dollar AI plan with leading company OpenAI.

According to Benanti, the church’s role as an “expert in humanity” can encourage leaders, especially in Catholic countries, to “create AI that values people and aligns with social justice.”

In Leo’s first meeting with Italian leader Giorgia Meloni, the two pledged to continue working for “ethical and human-centered artificial intelligence development.” Last year, at Meloni’s invitation, Francis had addressed G7 leaders on artificial intelligence ethics.

Savona commented, “The Vatican’s interest in artificial intelligence is not strange. Francis also showed great interest in climate change, one of today’s significant problems. The Church’s mission is to adapt to the world while remaining true to its fundamental principles.”

Savona argued that as power concentrates in the hands of tech giants and wealthy nations, the Vatican could use its network in the “Global South” to ensure “more democratic access” to artificial intelligence and push for European-dominated regulations to be adapted to global standards.

On the other hand, Leo himself has fallen victim to AI-generated content. In the first week of his papacy, a YouTube video was published allegedly showing Leo praising Burkina Faso’s President Ibrahim Traoré for contrasting the Vatican’s wealth with poverty in Africa.

The Vatican stated that the video was a “deepfake” and part of a recent wave of AI-generated content on African platforms glorifying Traoré as an example of pan-African leadership.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey