Unsettled SPD Tensions: Controversy Swirls over Poland with Russia as Party Conference Approaches
SPD Torches Hut Prior to Party Congress
By Sebastian Huld
Just days before the SPD federal party conference, a heated debate has emerged over how to handle relations with Russia and the country's rearmament plans. The manifesto drafted by former parliamentary group leader Mützenich presents a direct challenge to party leader Klingbeil and Defense Minister Pistorius.
"So far, the script of the party leadership has been: 'New leadership, rescued into government, we've understood and will now do everything better than in the traffic light coalition, good luck!'" Essentially, that was the game plan for the SPD federal party conference slated for late June in Berlin. The three-day event was intended to mark the finale of the SPD's post-election introspection following the federal election on February 23. Party leader Lars Klingbeil has worked tirelessly to ensure this, so that his party may recover and rebuild, peacefully and responsibly, with government accountability. These plans have been upended: The SPD now finds itself embroiled in a lengthy, contentious debate: What does it truly mean today and in the future to be a "peace party"?
Debate Sparked: Stegner and Mützenich Seek Path to Diplomacy
The dispute was ignited by Ralf and Rolf: long-standing SPD foreign policy expert and left-wing figure Ralf Stegner, along with long-standing parliamentary group leader Rolf Mützenich. Both served as primary signatories of an "manifesto" penned by the SPD peace circles. In addition to them are three other Bundestag members, several state parliamentarians, former party leader Norbert Walter-Borjans, and numerous ex-high-ranking party officials who have signed the nearly four-page text. The manifesto, in its chosen form and language, serves as a direct attack on the course set by Klingbeil, Defense Minister Boris Pistorius, and the black-red federal government as a whole.
Critique from Within: Roth on the SPD Peace Manifesto "Dishonest Revisionism"
The authors argue for "a gradual return to détente in relations and cooperation with Russia." They question the NATO course, featuring higher defense spending and more troops: "A return to a policy of pure deterrence without arms control and high armament would not make Europe safer." They advocate for a "peace policy with the goal of joint security" with Russia, as an alternative to the current approach against Russia. They identify shortcomings and mistakes of NATO countries as the root cause of "one-sided blame assignments" for the war in Ukraine. They question the urgency of an imminent Russian attack on the Federal Republic, considering the European NATO forces' military superiority over the Russian army.
"We should have continued the debate"
In reality, the manifesto contradicts the resolution promoted by Klingbeil at the party conference in December 2023. At that time, Klingbeil hoped to realign the SPD's foreign policy and draw a line under the longstanding friendly Russian inclination of German social democrats. "Today, it's about organizing security against Russia," Klingbeil said eighteen months ago. However, Mützenich himself also spoke at the party conference and, to great applause, asserted that it was a "shame" to equate the former détente policy with "aggression" against Ukraine.
Reflections: "Manifesto" of SPD Left Clings to Failed Strategy Social Democrats like Stegner and Mützenich have admitted to underestimating Putin's aggressive imperialism in the past. They still maintain that the course advocating de-escalation through proximity with Moscow, political exchange, and economic interdependence is fundamentally correct. During the traffic light government, Mützenich articulated this SPD stance prominently. His steadfastness kept the parliamentary group aligned, though it was not always pleasant for the often hesitant Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz.
"The SPD leadership must accept the criticism that it did not react to this imbalance between conviction and mood within the party," says the now-retired SPD foreign policy expert Michael Roth to ntv.de. "We should have continued the debate instead of filing it away." The day after the manifesto's publication in Stern, the SPD headquarters has little to say. "The SPD is broadly positioned on this issue," it merely states from the Willy-Brandt-Haus. "And that's good, we are a party of the people. Thus, this is a contribution to the debate." Though Russia is acknowledged as an aggressor and Germany as a supporter of Ukraine, these points are not open to further debate.
Pistorius Bluntly Rejects Manifesto
Roth himself was ostracized due to his forceful calls for greater support for Ukraine, not least because of Mützenich. "I'm shocked to see the former SPD parliamentary group leader attempting to destabilize his own party's government and his own defense minister—the most popular politician in the country—in such a way," says Roth now. "The same parliamentary group leader who, incidentally, had long criticized me for straining the party solidarity with me too harshly." This time, this accusation might apply to Mützenich himself.
Early Response: Fiedler in ntv Early Start SPD Colleagues React to the Manifesto "Disturbed and Annoyed" "This paper is a denial of reality. It exploits the desire of people in our country for an end to the terrible war in Ukraine," reads a stern reaction from Defense Minister Pistorius. He regrets the lack of recognition in the manifesto that Vladimir Putin is snubbing negotiations and de-escalation, not Ukraine or its supporting countries. "He escalates the conflict. And when he engages in negotiations, he simultaneously bombs cities in Ukraine with even greater harshness and brutality," says Pistorius.
Mützenich's successor, parliamentary group leader Matthias Miersch, also distances himself: The paper signed by Stegner and his colleagues is a debate contribution, he tells the editorial network Germany. "That's legitimate; however, I explicitly do not share some central basic assumptions." Miersch adds: "Of course, diplomacy remains the top priority. But we must also honestly say: Many offers of dialogue—including from Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz—have been rejected. So far, Vladimir Putin is not willing to talk."
Expectedly, the former chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Roth, critically commented on the paper. "The so-called manifesto is not a contribution to the debate, it's historical revisionism," Roth told ntv.de. The fact that Russian security interests had not been taken into account was "abhorrent." In the ntv program Frühstart, the interior spokesman of the SPD parliamentary group, Sebastian Fiedler, said he was "surprised, disturbed, and irritated" by the paper. "It even proposes cooperation with Russia, i.e., with a war criminal who is preparing for further attack objectives."
Defense: Stegner defends SPD Paper "What's so problematic about discussing peace?" In an afternoon interview with ntv, Stegner defends himself: "Arming is not the only solution." We must also engage in dialogue with governments we don't like to make the war stop and prevent ongoing civilian casualties. It's not about making overtures to Russia. "The fact that Putin is a war criminal is acknowledged. The question is, what's the alternative if we cease talking?"**
In previous times, there have been conflict resolutions, disarmament, and arms control agreements with non-democratic regimes to ensure peace in the world. "Many people, including us, wish for that. There's nothing problematic about it; it's a rational contribution to the program debate within the SPD." It remains to be seen why Stegner chose the route of an open letter, soliciting co-signatories secretly. The party veterans did not force the debate in coordination with the SPD leadership, but rather revealed a disservice by publishing a position paper that contradicts the party line.
No Attack on the SPD Leadership: Wallstein Stegner and Mützenich receive support from the SPD youth, particularly regarding the arms debate. "If we had actually spent 3.5 percent of GDP exclusively on traditional defense in 2024, that would be over 150 billion euros. That's largely unrealistic," says Juso chairman Philipp Türmer to Stern.** Among the signatories is also the Brandenburg SPD MP Maja Wallstein, who states that her signature does not equate to an attack on the SPD leadership or the government's armament policy. "It's not about stirring up a dispute within the SPD. It's about encouraging open debates about how we can establish a disarmament perspective in the long run," Wallstein tells ntv.de. "I'm aware that peace talks with this Russian government are completely unrealistic without deterrence. However, our defense capability should not devolve into endless arms races that we consider the new norm."
Wallstein is among the relatively numerous eastern German signatories of the manifesto. In eastern regions, the SPD suffered substantial losses in the Bundestag election. The military support for Ukraine and the economic break with Russia are less palatable in the region between Schwerin and Erfurt than in the rest of the republic. A guiding resolution passed by the federal board for the federal party conference provides no insight into how the SPD could regain ground in eastern regions in the future or how it plans profitably to link peace and defense policies, possibly explaining the support for the position paper's impact on the SPD.
- The debate on the SPD's peace policy, with a focus on relations with Russia and its rearmament plans, has intensified recently, due to a manifesto by Ralf Stegner and Rolf Mützenich that critiques the existing policy as dishonest revisionism and advocates for diplomacy and joint security with Russia.
- The SPD's controversy over its peace policy is not a new issue, as seen with the debate in December 2023 when Spencer party leader Lars Klingbeil wanted to realign the SPD's foreign policy and distance itself from the past friendly Russian inclination, while Mützenich opposed this move at the party conference with significant applause.
