dinsdag 16 januari 2024

Politicians from Germany’s AfD met extremist group to discuss deportation ‘masterplan’

 




Politicians from Germany’s AfD met extremist group to discuss deportation ‘masterplan’

Martin Sellner, member of the Identitarian Movement, reportedly spoke of ‘re-migration’ ideas

Politicians from Germany’s far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party, including a personal aide to its leader Alice Weidel, met the head of the rightwing extremist Identitarian Movement and neo-Nazi activists to discuss a “masterplan” for mass deportations in the event of the party coming to power, it has been reported.

The meeting, which was first reported on Wednesday by the investigative outlet Correctiv, took place last November at a countryside hotel on the outskirts of Potsdam. It is likely to feed a fraught debate over whether the AfD should be banned due to growing concerns that it poses a fundamental threat to German democracy.

Buoyed up by discontent over immigration, the AfD is polling in first place in all five of Germany’s eastern states, three of which are holding elections later this year. While both the conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and the liberal, pro-business Free Democratic party (FDP) have, for now, ruled out entering coalitions with the party, its presence at the meeting suggests a far-right organisation with its eye on political gains in the near future.

Martin Sellner wearing a grey hoodie
Martin Sellner, a key figure in the pan-European ‘New Right’, who is banned from the UK, reportedly spoke about mass deportation at the Potsdam meeting. Photograph: Christian Bruna/EPA

Invitations seen by Correctiv and the Guardian describe the meeting as an opportunity to present “an overall concept in the sense of a masterplan”. The meeting was attended not only by two state and municipal-level AfD politicians but also one active member of the Bundestag, Gerrit Huy, as well as Roland Hartwig, a former MP who has acted as a personal aide to Weidel since September 2022. One party branch of the AfD’s has described Hartwig as being tasked with the party’s “strategic positioning”.

The AfD figures were meeting with Martin Sellner, who was tasked with introducing the “masterplan” and is a key figure in the pan-European “New Right” and who, in 2019, was permanently barred from entering the UK because of his extremist views. The Identitarian Movement, whose Austrian branch Sellner used to lead, openly opposes the idea of multicultural societies and expounds the conspiracy theory of a “great replacement” to replace Europe’s white population with people from Africa and the Middle East.

The Identitarian Movement is on a list of organisations whose membership the AfD considers incompatible with party membership, and the party has denied ties to the movement in the past. However, in recent years the AfD has done little to distance itself from the activist network.

One key idea that Sellner has been trying to nudge into the political mainstream is “re-migration”: the forceful return of migrants to their countries of origin via mass deportations. Such deportations would target not only asylum seekers but, as Sellner elaborated in a recent article for the New Right journal Sezession, also citizens holding German passports who, he claims, “form aggressive, rapidly growing parallel societies”.

According to Correctiv’s account, the explosive subject of “re-migration” apparently dominated the discussions between AfD politicians and rightwing extremist activists, with Sellner allegedly presenting the forcible extradition of “non-assimilated” German citizens as the biggest “challenge” if the AfD were to gain power.

Alice Weidel at a press conference
An aide to Alice Weidel, the leader of AfD, was also said to be at the meeting. Photograph: Hannibal Hanschke/EPA

Ideas discussed at the meeting, according to Correctiv, included that of deportations to an unnamed state in northern Africa that would provide space for up to 2 million people. People who lobby on behalf of refugees in Germany could also go there, Sellner is reported to have suggested.

In a statement sent to the Guardian, Sellner confirmed he had presented the idea of “re-migration” at the meeting but said it was not about a “secret masterplan” and his comments had been shortened and taken out of context.

During the meeting, Sellner said, he had made it “unmistakably clear that no distinction can be made between different types of [German] citizens – that there must be no second-class citizens – and that all re-migration measures have to be legal”.

“Remigration also includes not only deportations, but also local assistance, Leitkultur [‘guiding culture’] and pressure to assimilate. The demand is part of an alternative migration and family policy, the aim of which is to control immigration so that it does not exceed Germany’s reception limits.”

Huy, the AfD Bundestag delegate, is reported to have claimed that she developed her own “re-migration” concept, and appeared to suggest her party no longer opposed the government’s plan to lift a ban on dual citizenship for that reason. “Then you can take away the German [citizenship], and they still have one,” she is alleged to have said at the meeting. Currently it is illegal under German law to strip people of citizenship if it means they would then become stateless.skip past newsletter promotion

In a phone call with the Guardian, Huy confirmed her attendance of the meeting and that the discussion of “re-migration” was on the agenda. “In 2017, I presented my party association chairman with plans for a re-migration programme for non-German nationals who can’t find their way into the labour market, which were not picked up by the party,” Huy said. “I still stand by those proposals.”

Huy said she could not remember if plans for the removal of German nationals were also part of the discussions at the Potsdam meeting. Her comments on dual citizenship, she said, “were clearly meant as a joke”.

Contacted by Correctiv and the Guardian, neither Weidel nor Hartwig commented on the report. The AfD confirmed that Hartwig had been at the meeting but said the reported proposals were not party policy.

“The AfD won’t change its position on immigration policy because of a single opinion at a non-AfD meeting,” the party told Reuters.

Gerrit Huy looks at the camera
Gerrit Huy, an AfD MP, confirmed that she had attended the meeting and that ‘re-migration’ was on the agenda. Photograph: Facebook

The AfD’s gradual transformation from an economically liberal, anti-euro party into what many believe to be a far-right outfit is not new. In the three eastern states where the party could triumph at elections this year – Saxony, Saxony-Anhalt, and Thuringia – the party has been classified as “certified rightwing extremist” by the German domestic spy agency, allowing its covert surveillance and potentially even infiltration. The party, however, denies that it is extremist.

Postwar Germany defines itself as a “militant democracy”, and its constitutional court can shut down political parties if they pursue anti-constitutional goals – and are in a position to achieve these goals. In recent weeks, some politicians, such as the co-leader of Olaf Scholz’s Social Democrats (SDP), have called for a debate about whether the constitutional court should consider such a ban for the AfD.

Others, including the SPD’s federal commissioner for the east, Carsten Schneider, have said that such a move could backfire by further radicalising AfD supporters, especially if the constitutional court were to reject a ban.

In practice, the bar for outright party bans is relatively high. In 2017, Germany’s top constitutional court ruled that even though the radical-right NPD resembled Adolf Hitler’s Nazi party, it would not be banned because it did not pose a sufficient threat to democracy.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/10/politicians-from-germany-afd-met-extremist-group-to-discuss-deportation-masterplan


------------------------------------------------------------------

My Comments,

For all those who might be contemplating, that "they are back" (and on their way to the center of political power) I would ask to consider the idea, that "they" (the white supremacists engulfed in re-establishing the reign of Hitler and Mussolini ideology), I might state, that "They" not only are back, but had never really quite disappeared from the political stage.  More in particular : "they", the nazi's and their basic racist and fascist instincts had been carefully preserved after WWII by the CIA.

That covert operation called "Gladio" (in fact a litter of extreme-right organizations, called the stay-behind army corps) had been set up all over Europe with the task of "resisting and sabotaging" the communist hordes whenever Stalin would order his Sowjet army to occupy the rest of liberated Europe.

Under this pretext, in post-war Germany many lower to middle rank SS military had been approached, in order to  join and prepare for the arrival of the Soviet-troops in Germany.  For that reason, those SS-people had been given stocks of arms and munition by the allies, that had been hidden in secret locations. 

So one should not be surprised at all, about the political plans of an organization like the AfD, to design special programs to deport large swatches of non-white Germans, once they should enter any sort of national political platform.

One should also keep in mind, that recent USA GOP presidential representatives - like Donald Trump - in fact are sharing the very same authoritarian white-supremacist sentiments as the German AfD movement : Immigrants are "poisoning the blood" of America...

 

maandag 15 januari 2024

Ex-Shin Bet head says Israel should negotiate with jailed intifada leader




Ex-Shin Bet head says Israel should negotiate with jailed intifada leader

Israel will not have security until Palestinians have their own state, Ami Ayalon says in Guardian interview


A former leader of the Shin Bet domestic security force has said Israel will not have security until Palestinians have their own state, and Israeli authorities should release Marwan Barghouti, jailed leader of the second intifada, to direct negotiations to create one.

Ami Ayalon, a retired admiral who also commanded Israel’s navy and was wounded in battle and decorated for his service, also said destroying Hamas was not a realistic military goal, and the current operation in Gaza risked entrenching support for the group.

“We Israelis will have security only when they, Palestinians, will have hope. This is the equation,” he said in an interview at his home. “To say the same in military language: you cannot deter anyone, a person or a group, if he believes he has nothing to lose.”

He said Israel’s war in Gaza was a just one, after the horrors of the 7 October attack, in which Hamas slaughtered at least 1,200 people and took more than 240 others hostage. But too many Israelis could not accept that Hamas did not represent all Palestinians, or that they had a legitimate claim to their own state, he said.

Ayalon said most Israelis believed that “all Palestinians are Hamas or supporters of Hamas”, and they did not accept the concept of a Palestinian identity. “We see them as people, not ‘a people’, a nation,” he said. “We cannot accept [the idea of a Palestinian people] because if we do, it creates a huge obstacle in the concept of the state of Israel.”

He believes releasing Barghouti, a Palestinian who has been jailed since 2002, serving a life sentence for murder after leading the second intifada, would be a vital step towards meaningful negotiations. According to recent polls he would beat senior Hamas figure Ismail Haniyeh in open elections.

“Look into the Palestinian polls. He is the only leader who can lead Palestinians to a state alongside Israel. First of all because he believes in the concept of two states, and secondly because he won his legitimacy by sitting in our jails.”

He admitted that Israel’s current political climate, where his views are extremely unpopular and the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has promised to “destroy Hamas”, meant there was little prospect of his advice being followed immediately. “Every time when I say hatred is not a plan, it is not a policy, people are very upset,” he said.

Support for Barghouti reflects the fact that current Palestinian backing for Hamas is rooted not in enthusiasm for the group’s ideology, but the sense they are the only faction fighting effectively for a Palestinian state, Ayalon said.

The non-violence embraced in recent years by the rival Fatah faction has been discredited by repeated failures of diplomatic efforts to achieve a Palestinian state, which is dangerous to both Israelis and Palestinians.

He came relatively late to his current views, after leaving the military where the enemy is just a target to be killed, he said. His position at Shin Bet required him to regularly meet Palestinians, including visiting PLO leader Yasser Arafat.

He made Palestinian friends, among them PA security chief Jibril Rajoub and Sari Nusseibeh, a philosophy professor from Jerusalem who can trace his family’s presence there back to the 7th century. “So can I tell him, OK, this land is mine and you are a visitor here? It is nonsense.”

Ayalon said attempts to normalise a Middle East in which the Palestinians did not have a state or much hope of one, was one of the factors in Hamas launching the attacks on 7 October.

He said: “In a way what [senior Hamas figure Yahya Sinwar] wanted to do, was to tell everyone in the Arab world, the Muslim world and the international community, America, Europe: you will not achieve anything in the Middle East, unless you put the Palestinian issue on the table.

“The tragedy is, that he did it. Today you just have to listen to [Joe] Biden. No one believes we can achieve a better reality here unless we accept the reality of two states.”

He said the one thing almost everyone in the international community agreed upon – both Israel’s enemies and its allies, from China to the US, Russia to regional powers – was the need for a two-state solution.

“The other option is to go on fighting, when we know that the wars are becoming more and more violent, and we know today that the enemy is becoming more and more radical.”

The nature of Hamas meant that its destruction was an impossible goal for a military, Ayalon said, although he declined to comment on Israel’s current leadership.

Hamas is not just a militia, but “an ideology with an organisation, and the organisation has a military wing”, he said. “You cannot destroy ideology by the use of military power. Sometimes it will be rooted deeper if you try.

“This is exactly what we see today. Today, 75% of Palestinians support Hamas. Before the war, it was less than 50%.

“For Israel to achieve security, the country needs to set a realistic military goal, such as the destruction of Hamas military capabilities and death or exile of its leaders,” he said. They also needed to discuss what would happen in Gaza after the fighting ended, or risked the war extending indefinitely, he said.

“I’m so upset that we are not willing to discuss the day after. Because I know what happens to wars without a political goal. The war becomes a goal in itself, instead of being a means to achieve a political goal,” he said. “We are experts: this is exactly what happened to us in Lebanon, this is exactly what happened to us in the West Bank. And I am afraid that this is what will happen if we go on fighting without defining a clear essence of victory. What is a victory?”

But he says change only comes under pressure, and he believes 7 October could prove a tragic turning point. He recalls as a young soldier hearing Moshe Dayan say he would rather have no peace deal with Egypt and keep the Sinai, than make peace and give up the Sinai. Two years later came a lasting peace deal with Cairo.

“This is exactly what we say today when it comes to the West Bank. We believe that security will be achieved if we conquer, if we occupy, only by military power. And what [the] Yom Kippur [war] proved to us, is we shall suffer violence because of the occupation. Occupation will not bring us security, it brought us violence and death.”

He points to the very existence of Israel as proof that a minority view can become reality. “The Zionist movement is the result of a dream,” he said. “The majority of Jewish people stayed in Europe and were assassinated there. A minority of Jews created a dream, and it took them about 50 years to achieve it. We should not underestimate the power of hope and the power of a dream.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/14/shin-bet-ami-ayalon-calls-on-israel-release-intifada-leader-marwan-barghouti


------------------------------------

My comment :

Although his analyses of the position of the two conflicting parties might - from the perspective of his side of the ethnic equation that is - be (not so much correct, as well an effort of being) constructive, he again does make the basic mistake, in trying to dictate the Palestinians who to choose for his objective.

I do remember Meir Dagan (ex-Mossad) once having said the very same thing, but Dagan at that time seemed to be rather empathic, then pragmatic in suggesting that scenario. 

I think the Palestinians – and yes, they are indeed a People and not just peoples – have gone now (most certainly after the still ongoing ethnic cleansing endeavor of Nakba 3.0) beyond the idea of having to share their territory with a community of settler colonial terrorists (that call themselves a People, purely on reli-metaphysical grounds) : They want their entire territory back, and not just a part of it, and rightly so…