Even in Brussels, some observers are wondering whether our German government can actually agree on anything anymore. It can, albeit often only after maximum escalation and in small steps – like yesterday on the cornerstones of the basic child allowance.
The compromise should take some pressure off the cabinet meeting taking place today, Tuesday and Wednesday, at Schloss Meseberg. The way should now be clear for tax relief for companies through the Growth Opportunities Act. However, this does not mean that the coalition partners have run out of issues to argue about.
There is an ongoing discussion about the industrial electricity price, which is also being closely monitored by the EU Commission because of the competition effect. Like Economics Minister Robert Habeck, the SPD parliamentary group is pushing for temporary help for energy-intensive industries and key sectors with a subsidized electricity price. “We have given the Chancellor our expectation that we expect help with the electricity price,” said MP Jens Zimmermann at yesterday’s parliamentary group retreat in Wiesbaden.
However, Olaf Scholz did not even enter into a detailed discussion. His counter-argument: 1,500 electricity-intensive companies receiving aid and 500,000 companies not benefiting – that would not go down well in the country. In addition, questions of EU state aid law had not been clarified – Margrethe Vestager had already announced that she would take a close look. Finance Minister Christian Lindner, on the other hand, fears the billions in costs of a subsidy that would last for years. It is becoming clear that no decision will be made in Meseberg either.
Have a good and successful day!
Completing the Green Deal before next election’s European elections could be more difficult than expected. In particular, the departure of ex-Commission Vice-President Frans Timmermans, who left the Brussels establishment to join the Dutch election campaign as a leading candidate, is slowing down the processes at the EU level. After all, Timmermans was not only seen as a pioneer of the Green Deal, but also as its loudest advocate.
Time and again, the former Commission Vice-President had defended the Green Deal with all his might, making him increasingly a red rag for his critics, especially in the European People’s Party (EPP). The conflict erupted over the renaturation bill, which the EPP tried to block – ultimately without success. The bill was finally passed by the European Parliament with a narrow majority, although in a significantly weakened version.
The highly controversial legislative proposal is now once again on the agenda of the EU Parliament’s Environment Committee (ENVI). Today, Tuesday, the Committee resumes its work. Also on the agenda is the at least equally controversial Industrial Emissions Reduction (IED) Regulation, with which the EU Commission aims to curb pollutant emissions from industrial plants, including large livestock farms.
Representatives of the European Parliament and the Council are scheduled to meet here on Oct. 10 and Nov. 28 for a final trilogue under the supervision of the Commission. For their part, the technical teams will meet about 20 times to prepare the compromises. As a reminder, the Council wants to limit the number of establishments that will be affected by the new directive. The Parliament is in favor of maintaining the status quo so that cattle farms are kept out of the scope of the text.
And another controversial proposal will be negotiated in Brussels in the coming weeks and months: the Sustainable Use of Pesticides (SUR) Regulation. With the pesticide regulation, the Commission wants to halve the use of pesticides by 2030 and completely ban pesticides of particular ecological concern.
The controversial law, which was introduced months later than originally planned, has experienced further delays, behind which activists and Green MEPs suspect a tactical maneuver. With votes in parliamentary committees postponed by several months and the Council only recently receiving an additional impact assessment from the Commission, the law may not be ratified in time for the elections.
In this time-pressured context, the Spanish EU Presidency has convened the agricultural experts of the EU-27 for the first technical meeting on the regulation on Sept. 14. According to the agenda, the representatives of the states will first discuss the additional study on the impact of the SUR regulation, which was published by the Commission at the beginning of July. After that, they will revisit the ban on pesticides in sensitive areas. This item, one of the most controversial in the text, had not been the subject of negotiations in the Council since the end of 2022.
In doing so, Spain is calling on states to vote on the compromise proposal sent by the executive last November. So far, Madrid plans to hold four meetings of the working group on the SUR regulation, but does not exclude the possibility of convening additional meetings if necessary.
It was also previously planned that the EU Commission would present its proposal for a law on sustainable food systems in the third quarter of 2023. Originally announced as overarching legislation for the Farm to Fork strategy – the agri-food component of the Green Deal – environmentalists here fear, however, that the proposal could end up focusing more on food safety.
In early July, the Commission proposed to relax EU rules on New Genomic Techniques (NGTs). The term is used for scientific methods to modify certain traits of crops. However, it is unlikely that this controversial green genetic engineering initiative will be finalized before the elections.
For although the issue is a priority for the Spanish Council Presidency, there is opposition from the European Greens, several member states and the EU organic sector. The NGT proposal is part of a broader package from the Commission, including a law on soil monitoring and a revision of the seed marketing framework, both of which are now under a similarly tight timetable.
However, an agreement on the soil monitoring initiative might be easier to reach, as the draft presented by the EU executive is already much less ambitious than the originally envisaged “soil health law”.
Meanwhile, the first phase of the revision of animal welfare regulations – quality control by the Regulatory Review Board (RSB) – has been successfully completed. Now Paris is stepping in: Marc Fesneau, the French agriculture minister, released a statement on Aug. 9 setting out his red lines as well as some suggestions for the future legislative package. Among other things, France calls on the Commission to ensure harmonization of texts within the EU. The ministry also advocates – as does the Commission, by the way – that animal welfare labeling should only be voluntary.
France’s Agriculture Minister spoke out in favor of supporting the industries in phasing out cage farming and assured that France and Germany are holding talks to reach common positions. However, it is out of the question for France to follow Berlin’s example with regard to the ban on live exports to third countries, said Marc Fesneau. The issue remains a red line for Paris.
As far as the timetable in Brussels is concerned, the proposals are to be presented in October or November. However, this makes it clear that the dossier will not be completed before the European elections.
Ms. Rackete, you have always been an activist. Will the left-wing movements move into the EU Parliament with you in 2024?
We want to keep the balance and on the one hand represent the climate justice movement in Germany, but also global movements in my candidacy. In the area of migration, there are many people who are affected by EU policies, but who do not live in the EU, or who are here but have no right to vote. Frontex operates everywhere, including in many states in Africa. Because I am an ecologist, I would like to work thematically at the interface of climate justice, agriculture and nature conservation. There are also many international examples: Let’s think of feed imports from Argentina or Brazil. There are also environmental pollution and land rights, for example in lithium mining.
Although you are running as a non-party member, your candidacy has been read as meaning that you are now supposed to save the left. Do you want to save the left?
In Germany, we need a party to the left of the Greens that asks critical questions about fair distribution and economic growth. We know that resources on this planet are limited, that there can be no green growth. However, the German Greens continue to argue in a capitalist logic – in this, by the way, they differ in part from other European Greens. The left does not. And that’s important because we have to understand that there is no need for green growth, but for fair distribution. That’s why we need a law to cap resource consumption. That is an important concern for me. Because this is also about the fair distribution of resources, which is extremely unequal worldwide and even in Germany.
You’ve only answered half the question. How much do you personally care about the left?
I think it’s really difficult at the moment to find any person who says: This Left Party, as it is now, is close to my heart. Most people are pretty frustrated with it right now, but they also see opportunities for the future. Because I’m not a party member, what’s important to me right now is the content.
You are primarily associated with sea rescue and climate protection. These are issues that are not yet part of the core brand for many left-wingers. Will the party’s orientation change with you?
I am convinced: We need a left-wing party that represents the interests of marginalized groups. And by that I don’t just mean the classic workers in the low-wage sector, but also migrants, people without jobs, people who are affected by discrimination. These are the groups that a good left party must represent, and it must advocate for redistribution from top to bottom. After all, we know that the income gap has widened, who is most affected by inflation, and so on. And there’s a lack of a party that makes sense of this unifying class politics. And I think the moment to commit to that is now.
Now you may have to compete against Sahra Wagenknecht and her new party in the European election campaign. Maybe you’ll sit on a podium with her one day. Are you preparing for this scenario?
That’s probably what will happen. For me, the decisive questions are: Who do we want to convince, who do we want to represent? The program of the left has been totally clear in recent years: It is pro-migrant and has a clear stance for human rights, a clear stance for radical climate protection through redistribution and a fair tax system. That is also what I can represent in terms of content. It is a mistake to think that people who are in a precarious living situation are therefore also nationalists. Instead, we need to make it clear how we can create real redistribution.
In France, we’ve seen that splitting a left-wing party at the polls can also hurt it. Are you afraid of losing voters if the left splits?
A split is, of course, the crisis that everyone has been trying to avoid. But it can also be an opportunity to move forward. To create clarity, to attract new people, to involve them and perhaps also to win back those who have left in recent years.
How would you try to restore trust with voters?
Content and arguments are important. But people are also reached through emotions, as we know from psychology and brain research. We don’t make our decisions on the basis of rational arguments. In fact, the problem of the left in society is that it tries too much with content. Many people think that, no matter who governs in Berlin, things are always distributed from the bottom up – which is partly true. Even as a young generation, there are enough reasons to be angry. About how poorly wealth and opportunities are distributed, or that corporations keep preventing real CO2 savings. Their anger must be taken seriously. That’s why we need to address the feeling of many people that they are not being heard and not being represented.
On what points does your understanding of left-wing politics differ from Ms. Wagenknecht’s?
I believe I can represent a credible internationalist position both through my involvement in sea rescue and in the climate movement. This was once fundamental to socialist politics, but has also suffered in recent years from the shift to the right. That makes it all the more important now to put it back in the forefront. There is no need to pit low-wage workers in this country against migrant workers. After all, they are both being bled dry for the profit of the corporations – and those are the same ones who influence political decisions with lobbying millions.
Do you perceive the possible founding of a Wagenknecht party as competition?
No, because it cannot be assumed that she will work for equality, human rights or the solution to the biggest social problem of this and future generations: the climate crisis.
For a hero of Russia, Yevgeny Prigozhin has surprisingly quickly slipped from the top spots on Russian news sites. Apparently, the man who did the dirty work abroad for President Vladimir Putin is quickly to disappear from public memory. Now it’s about Wagner’s structures and business that are to be taken over – or maintained.
Already after his march on Moscow two months ago, Prigozhin was forced to hand over heavy military equipment of his troops to the National Guard and go into exile. He had already withdrawn from Ukraine, and parts of his militia set up camp in Belarus. Since then, Poland and the Baltic states have complained about Wagner units in their neighboring country and demanded that Minsk kick the troops out of the country altogether.
The situation is more complicated in Africa and Syria: There, on the one hand, regular Russian forces are trying to succeed Wagner, but whether they will succeed is not yet clear. US security analyst John Lechner does not consider Prigozhin’s death crucial to Wagner’s presence in Africa. Speaking to Table.Media, he said: “I think we’re more likely to see a lot of continuity from Wagner in Africa. After all, Wagner was also a consequence of Russia’s unwillingness and inability to send regular troops to Africa. Wagner structures are established, and the troops have contacts and experience on the ground. It will be difficult to replace them entirely.”
This is exactly what the Russian Defense Ministry seems to be trying to do, at least in Libya and Syria. One day before Prigozhin’s death, Russian media reported on a visit by Deputy Defense Minister Yunus-Bek Yevkurov to Libya. Future military cooperation was reportedly discussed.
According to exiled Russian investigative journalist Andrei Sakharov, Yevkurov had already been to Syria before Libya, where the express purpose was to end cooperation with Wagner. In Syria, Russia maintains a military port in Tartus and a military airport in Hmeimim.
In addition to Libya, Wagner is active on the African continent in Sudan and the Central African Republic (CAR). A study by the NGO Global Initiative describes the Wagner model there as a “state takeover”. In exchange for natural resources – gold and diamonds in particular – Wagner provides political and military support to the regime of President Touadéra. In Mali, the military government of Faustin-Archange Assimi Goita has never officially confirmed Wagner’s presence, but speaks of Russian military trainers. He regularly telephones Putin.
At the end of June, the Russian president admitted publicly for the first time that the Kremlin was financing Wagner. According to the statement, the group received the equivalent of around €930 million from the state budget from May 2022 to May 2023.
Russia has maintained close relations with many African countries since the Cold War. As recently as July, Putin invited African heads of state and government to St. Petersburg for the Africa-Russia Summit. Fewer participants attended than planned, but Putin once again successfully positioned himself as Africa’s friend and helper, harking back to the old Soviet narrative of the anti-colonial struggle.
Wagner chief Prigozhin was present in St. Petersburg, shortly after his attempted insurrection. There he had his picture taken with African participants, including the Central African Republic’s chief of protocol. Against this background, both Russia and the African partner countries have an interest in making Wagner activities appear stable, Lechner said.
For now, Prigozhin’s death doesn’t mean much for military operations in Africa and related economic activities, Lechner said. “Prigozhin as a person will be difficult to replace. Few people have that kind of charisma. But Wagner’s business continues. And Prigozhin himself has never been a leader directly on the ground. It will probably depend in the long run on how the relationship between Wagner and the Russian state is settled.”
Wagner’s influence could even expand in the fragile Sahel, Lechner suspects. “Niger doesn’t really have another option, so I think we’ll see Wagner forces there. And other Russian private militias that could fill that gap don’t exist.”
Since, according to the governments in Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger, Western partners did not fulfill the wishes for stronger military support, Russia continues to be seen as an alternative for the time being. Whether this is good news for the people on the ground can be doubted. The security situation in central Sahel is deteriorating, with violence against civilians multiplying from January 2018 to July 2023, according to data from the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED). In Burkina Faso, where former officer Ibrahima Traoré has ruled as interim president since the fall 2022 coup, the situation is most dramatic, with well over 100 attacks recorded each month in 2023.
Niger has seen the least violence against the population, with 50 or fewer cases per month. But the current ruler, Tchiani, justified his coup just over a month ago by citing a deterioration in the security situation.
In Mali, where UN units of the Minusma mission are gradually handing over their military bases to the government, Islamic State extremists have expanded their control. According to a recent UN report, the Islamists doubled the territory they control in less than a year. Rival groups close to Al Qaeda were also gaining power, the UN said. Russia announced continued activities in African states after the death of mercenary chief Yevgeny Prigozhin.
“Russia will continue to provide comprehensive support to Mali and other interested African partners on a bilateral, equal and mutually respectful basis”, Russian Deputy UN Ambassador Dmitry Polyansky told the UN Security Council on Monday. So far, some 1,000 mercenaries from the Wagner group have supported the military government in Mali in the fight against Islamists. with Viktor Funk
With its campaign for Germany to withdraw from the Energy Charter Treaty, the Berlin-based Non-Governmental Organization Powershift lobbied the German government. The fact that Germany withdrew from the treaty at the end of 2022 is therefore also seen by the organization as its own success. Berlin’s withdrawal had repercussions as far as Europe; after all, the Commission has now proposed a collective EU withdrawal. Among its other successes, Powershift counts the halt to TTIP and Berlin’s coal exit. Tine Laufer, the executive director, notes: “Sometimes we ourselves are amazed at how far we get.”
Tine Laufer is a true Berlin native, a “Berliner”. She grew up in former East Berlin in Prenzlauer Berg. The 46-year-old studied law at Humboldt University in Berlin, where she completed her second state examination. For a master’s degree in international relations, she went to Australia, to the University of New South Wales in Sydney. And because she “has a lot of different interests”, she decided to do another master’s degree in organizational studies, which involved time abroad in Russia and Armenia. In this context, she managed the information center of the German Academic Exchange Service in Armenia from 2010 to 2015. Thus, she has enjoyed a “very large generalist education”, as she says.
Privately, she is driven by the desire to contribute to a fairer world with more climate protection. That’s why she joined Powershift at the end of 2017 and took on the role of managing director at the beginning of 2018. The organization was founded in 2010 and today has ten employees. Powershift sees itself neither as a classic NGO nor as a think tank – “a mixture of both” is the best description. Because: “We don’t want to write large scientific studies, but rather break down the difficult facts to such an extent that the interested public can understand them.”
Laufer tries to avoid hierarchies in her organization: “We’re all equal and we all deserve the same thing.” As managing director, she makes sure that everything runs smoothly apart from the substantive work: personnel issues, finances, normative decisions and changes to the articles of association. “I keep an overview and intervene if something is not running smoothly. But within the substantive issues, everyone has the greatest possible freedom to make decisions.” All decisions affecting the overall organization are discussed and agreed upon by the team. She describes her management style as “participative”: “We talk until we agree.”
Lobbying is an important part of Powershift’s work. Whether this takes place at the national or European level depends on the respective issues. Laufer herself is permanently in Berlin and keeps an overview from there. But her colleagues often travel to Brussels to establish and maintain contacts with the parliament. Currently, the Mercosur trade agreement is an important topic at the EU level. Powershift has already been working on the content of this for several years, as Tine Laufer reports, and thus “currently has no problems with Mercosur in establishing contact with decision-making MEPs”.
She is concerned that in the wake of multiple crises and supply chain disruptions, “legislative proposals are now being pushed through parliaments at a total speed, giving the impression that it’s all about security of supply, with the focus on climate protection and human rights taking a back seat.” She cites the Critical Raw Materials Act as an example, saying the short timeframes within which legislative proposals must be acted upon “bypass established democratic decision-making processes“. For Tine Laufer, the perceived pressure to secure raw materials at any price in international competition with China is not compatible with consistent climate policy and an associated reductionist approach. She currently sees a lack of coherence in European policy. Clara Baldus
Even in Brussels, some observers are wondering whether our German government can actually agree on anything anymore. It can, albeit often only after maximum escalation and in small steps – like yesterday on the cornerstones of the basic child allowance.
The compromise should take some pressure off the cabinet meeting taking place today, Tuesday and Wednesday, at Schloss Meseberg. The way should now be clear for tax relief for companies through the Growth Opportunities Act. However, this does not mean that the coalition partners have run out of issues to argue about.
There is an ongoing discussion about the industrial electricity price, which is also being closely monitored by the EU Commission because of the competition effect. Like Economics Minister Robert Habeck, the SPD parliamentary group is pushing for temporary help for energy-intensive industries and key sectors with a subsidized electricity price. “We have given the Chancellor our expectation that we expect help with the electricity price,” said MP Jens Zimmermann at yesterday’s parliamentary group retreat in Wiesbaden.
However, Olaf Scholz did not even enter into a detailed discussion. His counter-argument: 1,500 electricity-intensive companies receiving aid and 500,000 companies not benefiting – that would not go down well in the country. In addition, questions of EU state aid law had not been clarified – Margrethe Vestager had already announced that she would take a close look. Finance Minister Christian Lindner, on the other hand, fears the billions in costs of a subsidy that would last for years. It is becoming clear that no decision will be made in Meseberg either.
Have a good and successful day!
Completing the Green Deal before next election’s European elections could be more difficult than expected. In particular, the departure of ex-Commission Vice-President Frans Timmermans, who left the Brussels establishment to join the Dutch election campaign as a leading candidate, is slowing down the processes at the EU level. After all, Timmermans was not only seen as a pioneer of the Green Deal, but also as its loudest advocate.
Time and again, the former Commission Vice-President had defended the Green Deal with all his might, making him increasingly a red rag for his critics, especially in the European People’s Party (EPP). The conflict erupted over the renaturation bill, which the EPP tried to block – ultimately without success. The bill was finally passed by the European Parliament with a narrow majority, although in a significantly weakened version.
The highly controversial legislative proposal is now once again on the agenda of the EU Parliament’s Environment Committee (ENVI). Today, Tuesday, the Committee resumes its work. Also on the agenda is the at least equally controversial Industrial Emissions Reduction (IED) Regulation, with which the EU Commission aims to curb pollutant emissions from industrial plants, including large livestock farms.
Representatives of the European Parliament and the Council are scheduled to meet here on Oct. 10 and Nov. 28 for a final trilogue under the supervision of the Commission. For their part, the technical teams will meet about 20 times to prepare the compromises. As a reminder, the Council wants to limit the number of establishments that will be affected by the new directive. The Parliament is in favor of maintaining the status quo so that cattle farms are kept out of the scope of the text.
And another controversial proposal will be negotiated in Brussels in the coming weeks and months: the Sustainable Use of Pesticides (SUR) Regulation. With the pesticide regulation, the Commission wants to halve the use of pesticides by 2030 and completely ban pesticides of particular ecological concern.
The controversial law, which was introduced months later than originally planned, has experienced further delays, behind which activists and Green MEPs suspect a tactical maneuver. With votes in parliamentary committees postponed by several months and the Council only recently receiving an additional impact assessment from the Commission, the law may not be ratified in time for the elections.
In this time-pressured context, the Spanish EU Presidency has convened the agricultural experts of the EU-27 for the first technical meeting on the regulation on Sept. 14. According to the agenda, the representatives of the states will first discuss the additional study on the impact of the SUR regulation, which was published by the Commission at the beginning of July. After that, they will revisit the ban on pesticides in sensitive areas. This item, one of the most controversial in the text, had not been the subject of negotiations in the Council since the end of 2022.
In doing so, Spain is calling on states to vote on the compromise proposal sent by the executive last November. So far, Madrid plans to hold four meetings of the working group on the SUR regulation, but does not exclude the possibility of convening additional meetings if necessary.
It was also previously planned that the EU Commission would present its proposal for a law on sustainable food systems in the third quarter of 2023. Originally announced as overarching legislation for the Farm to Fork strategy – the agri-food component of the Green Deal – environmentalists here fear, however, that the proposal could end up focusing more on food safety.
In early July, the Commission proposed to relax EU rules on New Genomic Techniques (NGTs). The term is used for scientific methods to modify certain traits of crops. However, it is unlikely that this controversial green genetic engineering initiative will be finalized before the elections.
For although the issue is a priority for the Spanish Council Presidency, there is opposition from the European Greens, several member states and the EU organic sector. The NGT proposal is part of a broader package from the Commission, including a law on soil monitoring and a revision of the seed marketing framework, both of which are now under a similarly tight timetable.
However, an agreement on the soil monitoring initiative might be easier to reach, as the draft presented by the EU executive is already much less ambitious than the originally envisaged “soil health law”.
Meanwhile, the first phase of the revision of animal welfare regulations – quality control by the Regulatory Review Board (RSB) – has been successfully completed. Now Paris is stepping in: Marc Fesneau, the French agriculture minister, released a statement on Aug. 9 setting out his red lines as well as some suggestions for the future legislative package. Among other things, France calls on the Commission to ensure harmonization of texts within the EU. The ministry also advocates – as does the Commission, by the way – that animal welfare labeling should only be voluntary.
France’s Agriculture Minister spoke out in favor of supporting the industries in phasing out cage farming and assured that France and Germany are holding talks to reach common positions. However, it is out of the question for France to follow Berlin’s example with regard to the ban on live exports to third countries, said Marc Fesneau. The issue remains a red line for Paris.
As far as the timetable in Brussels is concerned, the proposals are to be presented in October or November. However, this makes it clear that the dossier will not be completed before the European elections.
Ms. Rackete, you have always been an activist. Will the left-wing movements move into the EU Parliament with you in 2024?
We want to keep the balance and on the one hand represent the climate justice movement in Germany, but also global movements in my candidacy. In the area of migration, there are many people who are affected by EU policies, but who do not live in the EU, or who are here but have no right to vote. Frontex operates everywhere, including in many states in Africa. Because I am an ecologist, I would like to work thematically at the interface of climate justice, agriculture and nature conservation. There are also many international examples: Let’s think of feed imports from Argentina or Brazil. There are also environmental pollution and land rights, for example in lithium mining.
Although you are running as a non-party member, your candidacy has been read as meaning that you are now supposed to save the left. Do you want to save the left?
In Germany, we need a party to the left of the Greens that asks critical questions about fair distribution and economic growth. We know that resources on this planet are limited, that there can be no green growth. However, the German Greens continue to argue in a capitalist logic – in this, by the way, they differ in part from other European Greens. The left does not. And that’s important because we have to understand that there is no need for green growth, but for fair distribution. That’s why we need a law to cap resource consumption. That is an important concern for me. Because this is also about the fair distribution of resources, which is extremely unequal worldwide and even in Germany.
You’ve only answered half the question. How much do you personally care about the left?
I think it’s really difficult at the moment to find any person who says: This Left Party, as it is now, is close to my heart. Most people are pretty frustrated with it right now, but they also see opportunities for the future. Because I’m not a party member, what’s important to me right now is the content.
You are primarily associated with sea rescue and climate protection. These are issues that are not yet part of the core brand for many left-wingers. Will the party’s orientation change with you?
I am convinced: We need a left-wing party that represents the interests of marginalized groups. And by that I don’t just mean the classic workers in the low-wage sector, but also migrants, people without jobs, people who are affected by discrimination. These are the groups that a good left party must represent, and it must advocate for redistribution from top to bottom. After all, we know that the income gap has widened, who is most affected by inflation, and so on. And there’s a lack of a party that makes sense of this unifying class politics. And I think the moment to commit to that is now.
Now you may have to compete against Sahra Wagenknecht and her new party in the European election campaign. Maybe you’ll sit on a podium with her one day. Are you preparing for this scenario?
That’s probably what will happen. For me, the decisive questions are: Who do we want to convince, who do we want to represent? The program of the left has been totally clear in recent years: It is pro-migrant and has a clear stance for human rights, a clear stance for radical climate protection through redistribution and a fair tax system. That is also what I can represent in terms of content. It is a mistake to think that people who are in a precarious living situation are therefore also nationalists. Instead, we need to make it clear how we can create real redistribution.
In France, we’ve seen that splitting a left-wing party at the polls can also hurt it. Are you afraid of losing voters if the left splits?
A split is, of course, the crisis that everyone has been trying to avoid. But it can also be an opportunity to move forward. To create clarity, to attract new people, to involve them and perhaps also to win back those who have left in recent years.
How would you try to restore trust with voters?
Content and arguments are important. But people are also reached through emotions, as we know from psychology and brain research. We don’t make our decisions on the basis of rational arguments. In fact, the problem of the left in society is that it tries too much with content. Many people think that, no matter who governs in Berlin, things are always distributed from the bottom up – which is partly true. Even as a young generation, there are enough reasons to be angry. About how poorly wealth and opportunities are distributed, or that corporations keep preventing real CO2 savings. Their anger must be taken seriously. That’s why we need to address the feeling of many people that they are not being heard and not being represented.
On what points does your understanding of left-wing politics differ from Ms. Wagenknecht’s?
I believe I can represent a credible internationalist position both through my involvement in sea rescue and in the climate movement. This was once fundamental to socialist politics, but has also suffered in recent years from the shift to the right. That makes it all the more important now to put it back in the forefront. There is no need to pit low-wage workers in this country against migrant workers. After all, they are both being bled dry for the profit of the corporations – and those are the same ones who influence political decisions with lobbying millions.
Do you perceive the possible founding of a Wagenknecht party as competition?
No, because it cannot be assumed that she will work for equality, human rights or the solution to the biggest social problem of this and future generations: the climate crisis.
For a hero of Russia, Yevgeny Prigozhin has surprisingly quickly slipped from the top spots on Russian news sites. Apparently, the man who did the dirty work abroad for President Vladimir Putin is quickly to disappear from public memory. Now it’s about Wagner’s structures and business that are to be taken over – or maintained.
Already after his march on Moscow two months ago, Prigozhin was forced to hand over heavy military equipment of his troops to the National Guard and go into exile. He had already withdrawn from Ukraine, and parts of his militia set up camp in Belarus. Since then, Poland and the Baltic states have complained about Wagner units in their neighboring country and demanded that Minsk kick the troops out of the country altogether.
The situation is more complicated in Africa and Syria: There, on the one hand, regular Russian forces are trying to succeed Wagner, but whether they will succeed is not yet clear. US security analyst John Lechner does not consider Prigozhin’s death crucial to Wagner’s presence in Africa. Speaking to Table.Media, he said: “I think we’re more likely to see a lot of continuity from Wagner in Africa. After all, Wagner was also a consequence of Russia’s unwillingness and inability to send regular troops to Africa. Wagner structures are established, and the troops have contacts and experience on the ground. It will be difficult to replace them entirely.”
This is exactly what the Russian Defense Ministry seems to be trying to do, at least in Libya and Syria. One day before Prigozhin’s death, Russian media reported on a visit by Deputy Defense Minister Yunus-Bek Yevkurov to Libya. Future military cooperation was reportedly discussed.
According to exiled Russian investigative journalist Andrei Sakharov, Yevkurov had already been to Syria before Libya, where the express purpose was to end cooperation with Wagner. In Syria, Russia maintains a military port in Tartus and a military airport in Hmeimim.
In addition to Libya, Wagner is active on the African continent in Sudan and the Central African Republic (CAR). A study by the NGO Global Initiative describes the Wagner model there as a “state takeover”. In exchange for natural resources – gold and diamonds in particular – Wagner provides political and military support to the regime of President Touadéra. In Mali, the military government of Faustin-Archange Assimi Goita has never officially confirmed Wagner’s presence, but speaks of Russian military trainers. He regularly telephones Putin.
At the end of June, the Russian president admitted publicly for the first time that the Kremlin was financing Wagner. According to the statement, the group received the equivalent of around €930 million from the state budget from May 2022 to May 2023.
Russia has maintained close relations with many African countries since the Cold War. As recently as July, Putin invited African heads of state and government to St. Petersburg for the Africa-Russia Summit. Fewer participants attended than planned, but Putin once again successfully positioned himself as Africa’s friend and helper, harking back to the old Soviet narrative of the anti-colonial struggle.
Wagner chief Prigozhin was present in St. Petersburg, shortly after his attempted insurrection. There he had his picture taken with African participants, including the Central African Republic’s chief of protocol. Against this background, both Russia and the African partner countries have an interest in making Wagner activities appear stable, Lechner said.
For now, Prigozhin’s death doesn’t mean much for military operations in Africa and related economic activities, Lechner said. “Prigozhin as a person will be difficult to replace. Few people have that kind of charisma. But Wagner’s business continues. And Prigozhin himself has never been a leader directly on the ground. It will probably depend in the long run on how the relationship between Wagner and the Russian state is settled.”
Wagner’s influence could even expand in the fragile Sahel, Lechner suspects. “Niger doesn’t really have another option, so I think we’ll see Wagner forces there. And other Russian private militias that could fill that gap don’t exist.”
Since, according to the governments in Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger, Western partners did not fulfill the wishes for stronger military support, Russia continues to be seen as an alternative for the time being. Whether this is good news for the people on the ground can be doubted. The security situation in central Sahel is deteriorating, with violence against civilians multiplying from January 2018 to July 2023, according to data from the Armed Conflict Location & Event Data Project (ACLED). In Burkina Faso, where former officer Ibrahima Traoré has ruled as interim president since the fall 2022 coup, the situation is most dramatic, with well over 100 attacks recorded each month in 2023.
Niger has seen the least violence against the population, with 50 or fewer cases per month. But the current ruler, Tchiani, justified his coup just over a month ago by citing a deterioration in the security situation.
In Mali, where UN units of the Minusma mission are gradually handing over their military bases to the government, Islamic State extremists have expanded their control. According to a recent UN report, the Islamists doubled the territory they control in less than a year. Rival groups close to Al Qaeda were also gaining power, the UN said. Russia announced continued activities in African states after the death of mercenary chief Yevgeny Prigozhin.
“Russia will continue to provide comprehensive support to Mali and other interested African partners on a bilateral, equal and mutually respectful basis”, Russian Deputy UN Ambassador Dmitry Polyansky told the UN Security Council on Monday. So far, some 1,000 mercenaries from the Wagner group have supported the military government in Mali in the fight against Islamists. with Viktor Funk
With its campaign for Germany to withdraw from the Energy Charter Treaty, the Berlin-based Non-Governmental Organization Powershift lobbied the German government. The fact that Germany withdrew from the treaty at the end of 2022 is therefore also seen by the organization as its own success. Berlin’s withdrawal had repercussions as far as Europe; after all, the Commission has now proposed a collective EU withdrawal. Among its other successes, Powershift counts the halt to TTIP and Berlin’s coal exit. Tine Laufer, the executive director, notes: “Sometimes we ourselves are amazed at how far we get.”
Tine Laufer is a true Berlin native, a “Berliner”. She grew up in former East Berlin in Prenzlauer Berg. The 46-year-old studied law at Humboldt University in Berlin, where she completed her second state examination. For a master’s degree in international relations, she went to Australia, to the University of New South Wales in Sydney. And because she “has a lot of different interests”, she decided to do another master’s degree in organizational studies, which involved time abroad in Russia and Armenia. In this context, she managed the information center of the German Academic Exchange Service in Armenia from 2010 to 2015. Thus, she has enjoyed a “very large generalist education”, as she says.
Privately, she is driven by the desire to contribute to a fairer world with more climate protection. That’s why she joined Powershift at the end of 2017 and took on the role of managing director at the beginning of 2018. The organization was founded in 2010 and today has ten employees. Powershift sees itself neither as a classic NGO nor as a think tank – “a mixture of both” is the best description. Because: “We don’t want to write large scientific studies, but rather break down the difficult facts to such an extent that the interested public can understand them.”
Laufer tries to avoid hierarchies in her organization: “We’re all equal and we all deserve the same thing.” As managing director, she makes sure that everything runs smoothly apart from the substantive work: personnel issues, finances, normative decisions and changes to the articles of association. “I keep an overview and intervene if something is not running smoothly. But within the substantive issues, everyone has the greatest possible freedom to make decisions.” All decisions affecting the overall organization are discussed and agreed upon by the team. She describes her management style as “participative”: “We talk until we agree.”
Lobbying is an important part of Powershift’s work. Whether this takes place at the national or European level depends on the respective issues. Laufer herself is permanently in Berlin and keeps an overview from there. But her colleagues often travel to Brussels to establish and maintain contacts with the parliament. Currently, the Mercosur trade agreement is an important topic at the EU level. Powershift has already been working on the content of this for several years, as Tine Laufer reports, and thus “currently has no problems with Mercosur in establishing contact with decision-making MEPs”.
She is concerned that in the wake of multiple crises and supply chain disruptions, “legislative proposals are now being pushed through parliaments at a total speed, giving the impression that it’s all about security of supply, with the focus on climate protection and human rights taking a back seat.” She cites the Critical Raw Materials Act as an example, saying the short timeframes within which legislative proposals must be acted upon “bypass established democratic decision-making processes“. For Tine Laufer, the perceived pressure to secure raw materials at any price in international competition with China is not compatible with consistent climate policy and an associated reductionist approach. She currently sees a lack of coherence in European policy. Clara Baldus
