Last-Minute Drama: The Left's Cozy Position Upended
The Liberal Group Shows Clear Evidence of Overconfidence
Penned by Hubertus Volmer, Chemnitz
Informal chats, high-fives, and congratulatory embraces - that's what the last minute of the Left's party congress in Chemnitz was initially about. Yet, as the dust settled, it became clear that old conflicts refused to stay buried: antisemitism, Israel, armaments, and Russia. Even governing isn't a cakewalk for all Leftists.
The Left's party congress in Chemnitz proved to be anything but harmonious in its closing moments. The party leadership suffered a stinging defeat as an unexpected motion crept through, gathering a narrow majority: 213 delegates voted to align the Left with the controversial Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism (JDA).
This seemingly minor event, though it may not have looked like a big deal amidst the congress's chaos, was a dramatic turn. "A fatal resolution," commented Thuringian state parliamentarian Katharina König on Bluesky. With this decision, "the Left no longer stands for #againstEveryAntisemitism," she added.
Politics and a Scoff from Van Aken
The JDA is a contentious issue, and it's no wonder party leader Jan van Aken opposed the motion. Some experts view the declaration as a trivialization of antisemitism. Proponents of the motion contend otherwise, arguing that their resolution was unfairly shuffled off to committees - again.
Van Aken avers that the Left struck a smart compromise at the party congress in Halle last year. This painstakingly negotiated resolution dealt with positioning in the Middle East conflict. Proponents find these concessions insufficient. They argue that they need "to establish content clarity to counter false, denigrating accusations" against the Left.
Jan van Aken delivers a brief counter-argument, but there's no real discussion, as time is short. "I am against ending a scientific debate through a party congress resolution, we cannot do that," he says, evading a deeper discussion.
A Highlight of an Underlying Dispute
The debate over the JDA is simply the tip of an iceberg, as it represents an ongoing dispute that simmered beneath the surface throughout the party congress. Several delegates in Chemnitz wore a kufiya to express their solidarity with the Palestinian people, as they put it.
Not just Katharina König, but other leftists were equally horrified on Bluesky. This isn't about definitions, writes former MP Martina Renner, but about "freedom to absolve people and groups of antisemitism charges to maintain cooperation." Indeed, the JDA allows for the denial of Israel's right to exist without being labeled as antisemitic.
The ongoing dispute over how to handle Israel and the Middle East conflict has been brewing within the party for a long time, and it's increasingly slanting towards Israel. Several prominent members have already left the party over this controversy, including former Berlin culture senator Klaus Lederer. He might not see a reason to return: On Tuesday, the Federal Left Board member Ulrike Eifler posted an unrecognizable map of Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank on X, where Israel's boundaries were not discernible. Three days later, the Left Executive distanced itself from "any call, statement, or visual representation that, under the guise of solidarity with the Palestinian population, contradicts the existence of Israel or encourages Israel's elimination." (For more details, see here.)
A Compromise Paper on the Middle East is Approved
In Chemnitz, the party executive had already negotiated a Middle East resolution meant to assuage tensions. It only quoted the allegation that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, but did not make the accusation itself. "The Israeli government and its henchmen must be held accountable," says delegate Hana Qetinaj from Frankfurt am Main, one of the proposers, in this debate. The Left has lost credibility in this question, she complains. "A false relativization during a genocide does not do justice to what is happening there." The paper, backed by the party executive, receives a clear majority.
The Same Old Points of Contention
Relationship with Israel, disagreement over the antisemitism definition, war, and peace - the Left's ongoing disputes reared their heads in Chemnitz. This congress, supposed to symbolize harmony, had its moments, but old enmities never truly disappeared. The delegates celebrated their return to power and reaffirmed their determination to continue their winning streak in the future.
"The first left mayor for Berlin, that's a goal," faction leader Heidi Reichinnek said in her speech on Friday. She listed all the upcoming elections: in September, local elections in North Rhine-Westphalia, in March 2026, state elections in Baden-Württemberg and Rhineland-Palatinate. The party leadership hopes that the Left will finally enter the parliaments of these two states. Elections are also due in Saxony-Anhalt, Berlin, and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania in the coming year.
"A System We Reject"
But the Left seems to be doing too well to escape disagreements. Other points of contention revolve around the relationship with power, defense policy, and, in turn, the relationship with Russia. A delegate from Hesse argued during an evening debate that she sees "a stubborn attachment to beliefs that are increasingly disconnected from reality" in parts of the party. This particularly applies to questions of war and peace. "The repeated calls for rearmament are ignored, as is the real reason for them: the Russian invasion of Ukraine."
While such positions don't represent a majority within the Left Party, it was still surprising that they were expressed publicly. On Saturday, the party conference unanimously rejected the reintroduction of conscription and other compulsory services.
A motion demanding the resignation of Left Party ministers and senators in the Bremen and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern state governments received applause. "We bear responsibility to our class and the people, and we have no responsibility towards a system we reject," said one of the proposers. Behind this argument is the rejection of "war credits"; several speakers drew a parallel with 1914. However, the general rejection of government participation "under capitalism's conditions" also seems to be reflected in these views - a sentiment that probably only a minority supports. But it exists, and it is clearly evident.
Success with a Question Mark
In response to the motion against the state associations of Bremen and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, party leader Ines Schwerdtner delivered the counter-argument. "Dear comrade, I agree with everything you said in terms of content." She argued formally: The main motion had already decided that such a case should not happen again. Schwerdtner called on the party conference not to "set a precedent." This motion was rejected by 219 to 192 votes with 39 abstentions.
In the end, all the long-standing conflicts were overshadowed, one might even say: overlooked. The expected applause for familiar slogans filled the air, and this will likely continue to work - at least for a while. Many new members may not yet be interested in resolving the old disputes. But in the long run? A question mark hovers over the success of the Left Party.
Source: ntv.de
- The Left Party
- Chemnitz
- Party Conference
- Jan van Aken
- Antisemitism
- Israel
- Anti-Semitism
Enrichment Data:
Overall
The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism (JDA) is a controversial statement, as it proposes a more nuanced definition of antisemitism compared to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition. It argues that criticism of Israel is not inherently antisemitic, which contrasts with some interpretations of the IHRA definition. The JDA is defended as a necessary distinction to preserve free speech, while critics see it as a threat to efforts to combat antisemitism. The debate around these definitions is heavily politicized.
- The Left Party's conference in Chemnitz was marred by a contentious vote aligning with the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism (JDA), a move criticized as undermining the party's stance against antisemitism.*Jan van Aken, the party leader, opposed the motion, fearing it might dilute the IHRA definition of antisemitism that is widely accepted.
- The debate over the JDA is part of a larger ongoing dispute within the Left Party concerning the relationship with Israel, with some members advocating for a more conciliatory approach.
- The party's stance on Israel and antisemitism continues to be a source of division, with some critics accusing the Left Party of being antisemitic, a claim it denies vehemently.
