Left Party Congress | Peace issue: Lowest common denominator found

In interviews, essays, and position papers, Left Party figures repeatedly express views on foreign and security policy that contradict the current party platform and resolutions, such as those against arms deliveries to Ukraine. This is likely to remain the case. This is probably why the federal executive committee's main motion to the Chemnitz party conference this weekend included a very short paragraph on the topic, which articulated the minimal consensus within the organization.

In addition, however, the delegates submitted a separate statement on the issue. The three-page motion entitled "Without Ifs and Buts: Say No to Armament and War Competence!" was passed with a large majority on Friday evening. The fact that this was passed was also due to the fact that motion G11 was a merger of three documents submitted by different groups, which the party executive had negotiated in advance in consultation with the proposers.

The Left Party continues to claim to remain "a peace party." It is "unconditionally committed to international law and the protection of those who suffer from the world's wars," the main motion states. It continues: "In the future, we want to do a better job of getting our proposals for diplomatic and other non-military means to end wars accepted."

At the request of the Communist Platform, this passage was expanded to include further statements such as that they oppose “the forced militarization of all areas of society and all attempts to reintroduce conscription,” as well as the planned stationing of US medium-range weapons on German soil.

Towards the end of the party conference, the debate over the approval of the Left Party's senators and ministers in the Bremen Senate and in the Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania state government for circumventing the debt brake in the Basic Law for rearmament and arms deliveries, as well as for investments in infrastructure, played a role again. This clearly contradicted the position of the entire party as well as the then Left Party group in the Bundestag, which had voted unanimously against it in March. The ministers would therefore have been obligated to enforce an abstention from the vote in the Bundesrat within their respective coalitions.

The fact that they failed to do so—even though the arms buildup package would have received a majority in the state chamber even without the approval of the two states—sparked great outrage within the party. Delegates voiced this outrage again in Chemnitz. The youth association submitted a motion calling on the ministers and senators to resign. The motion was voted on Saturday shortly before the end of the delegate conference and was narrowly rejected by 219 votes to 192, with several abstentions.

Party leader Ines Schwerdtner had previously stated that she fully agreed with the motion's criticism of the behavior of the Left Party's government members, but opposed the idea of ​​"making an example." She had already expressed similar views in her opening speech at the conference. She advocated for the culture of solidarity within the party, also called for in the main motion, under the motto of a "learning party" and "revolutionary friendliness."

On Friday evening, European Parliament member Özlem Alev Demirel criticized the voting behavior of the Schwerin and Bremen governments, saying it "cost us credibility." One delegate stated that the approval of the arms buildup package in the Bundesrat was "tantamount to enabling entry into war."

The leading motion also explicitly criticizes the ministers' behavior. The clear stance of the party and the Left Party in the Bundestag against the rearmament course "should have led to a refusal of approval in the Bundesrat," the executive committee writes. They want to learn from this and prevent similar occurrences in the future.

"We need processes within the party that enable joint decisions between different levels on key issues of our time and on decisions that affect the foundations of the party platform." In the future, "decisions of particular importance" must be discussed at an early stage. The fact that The Left holds responsibility in cities, districts, and federal states gives it the opportunity to "demonstrate in practice" that it "makes a difference." "But it must do so," it continues. In the fall, "proposals for binding, joint decision-making processes" will be developed.

Differences on the matter arose again during the debate on the motion against rearmament and "war readiness." Among other things, it states that the government and media are constructing "narratives" "to get the population behind the course of the CDU/CSU and SPD." The claim that Russia could "soon attack NATO territory" is stoking fears. The paper again rejects arms deliveries to Ukraine. The "armament of the century" makes it clear that it is not about defense, but rather "that we should be prepared for war."

Brigitte Forßbohm from Hesse commented that the motion tended to adopt Kremlin narratives, "trivializing" and "ignoring" the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine. While she also doesn't believe that "Russia will soon be standing in Berlin," she does believe that the Baltic NATO states are "highly endangered."

The party's Bremen regional spokesperson, Christoph Spehr, brought the topic of UN peacekeeping missions into the debate. In a world rapidly changing with regard to the distribution of economic and military power, Die Linke could not approve "if the UN does not exercise its responsibility to protect." According to its current platform, Die Linke has so far rejected German participation in peace-enforcing, i.e., military, UN missions.

Spehr further emphasized that there was no way around "clarifying what constitutes structural non-aggression while simultaneously being able to defend oneself." Like Forßbohm, he accused the motion of naivety: It might have been possible to believe in the past that The Left could "take a stand against Western imperialism." But that only works "as long as one believes that good exists elsewhere." But there are no good ones anymore.

Wulf Gallert of the party executive committee, meanwhile, advocated for the adoption of the paper. He argued that the Left Party must publicize "peace policy initiatives" and present "a clear alternative to the militaristic policies of the federal government." The key motion also paved the way for the initiation of a debate on a new party platform for the party's future positions.

The party conference condemned the escalation of Israel's war against the population of Gaza on Saturday afternoon in an urgent motion entitled "Stop the expulsion and famine in Gaza – implement international law!" Party leader Jan van Aken supported the request, and the document was subsequently passed with a large majority. At the beginning of the party conference, party leader Ines Schwerdtner emphasized that The Left Party represents "the resistance" against the "deliberate starvation" of children in the Gaza Strip.