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

European stocks suffer worst day in nine months

Published

on

European stock markets had their worst day in nine months as a wave of selling that began with fading hopes of a rapid cut in US interest rates spread across the globe.

Indices in Europe and Asia fell sharply, following steep falls on Wall Street on Monday after strong US retail sales figures showed the Federal Reserve may cut interest rates less this year than previously thought.

Across the region, the Stoxx Europe 600 fell 1.5 per cent, its biggest one-day drop since July last year. Energy groups, banks and miners represented in the commodity-heavy index led the declines in Europe, while London’s FTSE 100 fell 1.8 per cent, its worst day in nine months.

Wall Street’s benchmark S&P 500 index closed down 0.2 per cent, while the technology-heavy Nasdaq Composite fell 0.1 per cent after steeper falls in the previous session. On Friday and Monday, the S&P 500 recorded its worst two-day losing streak since the regional banking crisis in March 2002.

Hong Kong’s Hang Seng, South Korea’s Kospi and Japan’s Topix all lost more than 2%, while China’s CSI 300 fell 1.1%.

Emerging market currencies also weakened against the dollar on expectations of fewer US rate cuts, prompting intervention by Asian central banks such as Indonesia and South Korea.

As changing interest rate expectations hit currency markets, the Indonesian rupiah fell 2 per cent against the dollar to 16,176 rupiah, its lowest level in four years.

Bank Indonesia Governor Perry Warjiyo said on Tuesday that the central bank had stepped in to support the rupiah, which has fallen about 5 per cent this year and is one of Asia’s worst-performing currencies.

The Indian rupee also fell 0.2 per cent against the dollar to a record low of 83.64 rupees, while the Malaysian ringgit traded near a 26-year low, down 0.3 per cent, a day after the country’s central bank said it would “manage risks from increased financial market volatility”.

The Korean won also fell 0.9 per cent to a 17-month low, and the finance ministry and the Bank of Korea said in a joint statement on Tuesday that they were ‘closely monitoring foreign exchange movements and supply and demand with special attention’.

Continue Reading

EUROPE

Swiss parliament refuses to join ‘Russia Sanctions Task Force’

Published

on

The Swiss parliament has rejected a government proposal to join the US-led sanctions task force against Russia, saying it was sufficient to cooperate with the body as an independent party.

The committee of G7 countries is tasked with freezing and seizing Russian assets that fall under sanctions imposed by the European Union and the United States over the war in Ukraine.

Switzerland has so far resisted pressure to formally join the task force, saying it was already in regular contact with the group and that cooperation was working well.

On Wednesday, MPs voted 101-80 against the Greens’ proposal, parliament said in a statement. The bill said Switzerland, “as a custodian of Russian assets and the main centre of Russian commodity trade”, bore a special responsibility for the effectiveness of sanctions.

A spokesman for the economy ministry told Bloomberg it welcomed the parliament’s decision as it confirmed the government’s position.

Sanctions are a hot topic in traditionally neutral Switzerland, where the government is caught between international and domestic pressure. Groups opposed to weakening neutrality, including the People’s Party, recently collected enough signatures to force a vote on adding a permanent non-alignment stance to the constitution.

This would also prohibit the government from participating in any sanctions regime.

Continue Reading

EUROPE

EU signals cuts in aid to poor countries in the bloc

Published

on

The European Commission has sided with ‘fiscally conservative’ governments, led by Germany, in resisting calls to finance spending through more borrowing and to attach new conditions to the hundreds of billions of euros it gives to the European Union’s poorest countries.

In effect, this marks the end of an era of “free money”, when the bloc’s huge post-pandemic rescue fund was made up of shared debt rather than national contributions, and EU funds for things like new roads, hospitals and renewable energy projects were mostly channelled to eastern and southern European countries without them having to do anything in return.

The Commission, which is responsible for managing the EU’s seven-year, €1.2 trillion budget, funded mainly by member states, has started thinking about the model from 2028.

Questions will multiply as countries negotiate how much money to allocate to different programmes. The Commission will make a formal proposal in the summer of 2025, which must be unanimously approved by governments before the end of 2027.

Common pool mechanism set up during pandemic

Since the start of the last seven-year cycle, the EU has built up a €723 billion post-pandemic emergency fund, which for the first time in the bloc’s history is based on pooling borrowing on behalf of 27 countries rather than government contributions, adding to the complexity this time around.

According to two senior Commission officials who spoke to POLITICO on condition of anonymity, many EU countries, especially the most indebted, want the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) to be replicated after it expires in 2026 to create an “investment fund,” while the Commission opposes that.

To make matters worse for some poorer countries, the Commission wants to extend the ‘cash for reforms’ model of the bailout fund to the current ‘cohesion policy’, which aims to reduce the gap between rich and poor regions and accounts for around a quarter of the total budget.

Germany and the Netherlands strongly opposed to joint borrowing

The EU executive has shied away from the idea of setting up such an investment fund to finance defence and green spending in the coming years because of opposition from fiscally conservative countries such as Germany and the Netherlands. But debt-ridden capitals fear that shelving the RRF would lead to a huge shortfall in spending on long-term projects.

Although the Commission does not have the final say on the shape of the next EU budget, its proposal will serve as a basis for negotiations between capitals. The most sensitive policy decisions, such as whether to set up a new investment fund, will depend on the outcome of the European Parliament elections in June and the composition of the new executive.

All funds to be given in return for ‘reform’

The Commission believes that the Cohesion Fund could be used as a tool to push governments to reform a range of issues that have been lagging behind for years, including pensions and democratic standards.

This would mean a change from the current model, where funds are disbursed on the basis of agreed criteria, rather than as a ‘carrot’ for meeting specific targets.

This would allow the Commission to continue implementing reforms across the EU without incurring new debt or significantly increasing its budget.

The difference between the two funds is crucial

There is an important overlap between the projects financed by the RRF and the Cohesion Fund. Both funds allocate a significant share to poor countries such as Portugal in the west or Bulgaria in the east.

But officials point out that there are differences between the two. “Cohesion funding should be a long-term development approach, involving local and regional partners,” EU Cohesion Commissioner Elisa Ferreira told POLITICO. All these elements may not be present in emergency instruments like the RRF,” she said.

Commission officials acknowledge they will have a hard time selling the new cohesion model to poorer member states.

One official said countries that currently struggle to use cohesion funds would not welcome stricter rules and a tighter link to reforms.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey