The German Left Party and foreign policy

In the German national election later this month, the Social Democratic Party (SPD) has a good chance of coming in first and have the ability to lead a new government coalition. One possibility would be what is called a Rot-Rot-Green coalition, a coalition government of the SPD, the Left Party, and the Greens.

The national government in Germany had an SPD-Green coalition from 1998-2005 under Chancellor Gerhard Schröder (SPD) and Vice Chancellor Joschka Fischer (Greens). The Left Party has never been a national coalition partner, although they have been coalition partners in state governments in Germany.

The Left Party began as the Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS), the successor party to the former ruling party in Communist East Germany, the Socialist Unity Party (SED). This is a recent description of the major German political parties from Deutsche Welle: Rina Goldenberg, Germany's political parties — what you need to know 01.03.2021. She writes:

The Left party was formed out of a merger of the SED successor, the Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS), and Labor and Social Justice - The Electoral Alternative (WASG), a western German movement of trade unionists and disgruntled SPD members alienated by the welfare cuts introduced by Gerhard Schröder. The most prominent of these defectors was Schröder's first finance minister and SPD chairman, Oskar Lafontaine, who later led the Left party and is still a prominent figure guiding the party from his Saarland base.

Partly because of its association with the East German dictatorship, the Left remains a pariah for the other mainstream parties and has never been part of a federal government coalition — though it has some government experience at state level. [my emphasis]

The Austrian news weekly Profil ran a feature on foreign policy issues that would be points of negotiation in a Red-Red-Green coalition, "Die außenpolitischen Irrfahrten der Linken" (37: 12.09.2021). They raise six points, with my comments from what I think is a realistic view of the issues. Profil presents them as direct quotes from Left Party positions.

"lch gratuliere Prasident Maduro zu seinem Wahlsieg." ("I congratulate President Maduro on his election victory.")

This refers to the Left Party's refusal to recognize the America clown coup government headed by Juan Guaidó. This really may be the dumbest regime change operation that the US has ever undertaken, and that's not an easy record to top. The EU's current policy is also not to recognize Guaidó non-existent government, as the Voice of America reports in EU States No Longer Recognize Guaido as Venezuela's Interim President 01/25/2021.

"Die chinesischen Kommunisten haben Hunderte Millionen Menschen aus der Armut befreit." ("The Chinese Communists have freed hundreds of millions of people from poverty.")

This strikes me as the oddest point of the six. The quoted sentence is plainly true, and is not seriously disputed. China has the largest economy in the world in terms of purchasing power, and it's commonly assumed the US, the EU nations, and pretty much every other country I've heard of that China is a rising economic power that is becoming even more influential in world politics than it currently is. Whether such results could have been achieved with a different kind of government is a related but separate question. But recognizing the fact of the dramatic reduction of poverty is not really a controversial observation.

They refer to an article by Hans Modrow in Nueus Deutschland, which reflects Left Party perspectives, that they described as "a love hymn to [Chinese] President Xi Jinping." (I was unable to find the specific article online to which they refer.) Modrow was the final Communist head of government in East Germany and is currently head of the Left Party's Council of Elders.

"Putin müsste besonders dämlich sein." ("Putin must have been particularly stupid.")

The big beef with the Left Party's foreign policy is it's relatively friendly position toward Russia. Balancing Germany's interest in peaceful relations with Russia with the need to counter Russian threats to Europe is a long-running concern of German foreign policy. The Weimar government, for instance, cooperated with the Soviet Union in the 1920s on military training in violation of the Versailles Treaty because the two countries had a common interest in doing so. The Biden-Harris Administration this year cleared the way for completion of the joint German-Russian pipeline project Nord Stream 2, which the US government would have preferred not to have completed.

The Left Party's dovish position on Russia does not mean that they advocate a Putin-style government. They don't. Whatever one thinks of their positions or the dark suspicious some people may harbor about them, they are not advocating Putinism for Germany.

The quote is from Gregor Gysi, who was the first head of the PDS (and the last head of the SED) who is still a prominent figure in the Left Party expressing skepticism about whether the Russian government was behind the attempted assassination of dissident Alexei Nawalny. I would say it's at best a silly position for Gysi to take, but that quoted statement could also be seen as hedging his bets on the likelihood.

"Wir lehnen die Pläne einer europaischen Verteidigungsunion ab." ("We reject the plans for a European Defense Union.")

The European Union nations have generally been in practice pretty unenthusiastic about the concept, too. There is a European Defense Agency. The US has generally discouraged the idea, although the Establishment Democratic Center for American Progress think tank recently posted The Case for EU Defense 06/01/2021, which notes, "Removing the American brakes currently placed on EU defense may not lead to dramatic advances. No EU army will suddenly emerge, and the United States will not determine what EU defense looks like. The EU will have to decide."

The wheels do seem to turn slowly on major decisions in the EU. There are good arguments for a European military force. But it's complicated. One of the complications is that France in particular is active in military interventions in the African Sahel, which other EU countries should regard with a very critical eye. France has also been intervening in Libya, which (to put it politely) has so far not worked out especially well.

A common defense force would also need a clear EU foreign policy orientation, which is also complicated. Defense relationships with non-EU NATO countries including Britain and Turkey are also significant factor in this particular challenge.

"Wir werden kein Bekenntnis zur NATO abgeben." ("We will not declare allegiance to NATO.")

This seems on its face like a very big deal for coalition politics. But as long as the Left Party doesn't hold the Foreign Minister or Defense Minister positions, there would be a lot of wiggle-room for the Left to insist on some kind of constructively critical outlook on NATO while recognizing that Germany has treaty commitments it has to honor.

The NATO alliance is remarkable for its longevity. It certainly seems to me that some kind of re-definition or revision of NATO's purpose should have been more seriously considered after 1989. And it seems obvious to me that the eastern expansion of NATO was undertaken without the consideration that should have been given to the Russian response. The West can be and will be critical of Russian policies in Ukraine, Georgia, and Belarus, including Russia's formal annexation of Crimea from Ukraine. But more critical thinking about NATO's purpose among the participating government could certainly be valuable.

"Da muss ich ehrlicherweise sagen, die habe ich nicht alle im Blick." ("I have to say honest, I don't have the all in view.")

The quote is from Left Party co-chair Susanne Henning-Wellsow, which the Profil article mocks as though she wasn't aware where current German foreign military missions were, although it sounds more to me like a standard Mugwump response to a question she preferred not to answer. Profil notes that the German Bundeswehr currently has 2,500 soldiers involved in 10 countries, including Kosovo, Mali, and South Sudan. The Left Party has taken a very distinct position of restraint on foreign military missions.

What are the most likely sticking points for a Red-Red-Green coalition?

My inclination is to think the Left Party's general position on relations with Russia is likely to be the biggest sticking point because it's the most likely to have immediate policy implications, for instance, on German policies related to Ukraine, Belarus, and the Baltic states.

The European defense union is not a burning popular issue in Germany, and the SPD and Greens aren't banging the drums to accelerate that, although it will continue to be a consideration as long as the European Union exists in its current form.

I would expect that differences with the SPD and the Greens over China could be finessed more easily than those over Russia. NATO policies could be much stickier for coalition negotiations. But if the three parties are serious about governing together, they all know some mutually agreeable way has to be found for the Left Party to affirm its commitment to current German treaty commitments as a governing party. And something similar is likely to hold for German soldiers' participation in foreign missions.