The Greens in the Middle East dilemma: no heart for Gaza?

Sometimes irreconcilable debates are already inflamed on a piece of fabric. In this case: the Palestinian cloth. For the Green Member of the Bundestag Marlene Schönberger, such a Kufiya can be separated from the history of anti-Semitic terror, “writes the 35-year-old from Bavaria on Instagram.

The entry of the rather unknown MPs leads to a wave of comments, most of them angry to hater -filled. “So never again Greens,” said the tenor of the criticism of many users who, in the name, have strikingly often migration history.

Schönberger’s group colleague Kassem Taher Saleh, 31 years old, also contradicts. “The Kufiya is not a sign of anti-Semitism,” says the Greens politician, who came from Iraq to Saxony at the age of ten, “but of Palestinian culture and yes, also of resistance to injustice.”

Anti -Semitic terror or resistance to injustice? These two views can hardly be reconciled. The debate is so dangerous for the Greens because it points far beyond the Kufiya: What is the correct positioning in the Middle East conflict?

In the past few weeks, there have been the view of green top forces that the topic may have harmed more in the Bundestag election than they had previously thought. The Greens lost around 700,000 votes to the Left Party, which ended up with Muslim voters even the strongest force.

If the suffering and dying in Gaza particularly busy, the Greens obviously did not find themselves again. At the campaign stands, disappointment struck them up to the bare anger of a voter milieus, the voice of which they would like to be a self -image. People are “freaked out” on the subject, reports a green man.

Now the party wants to try to clarify. Just how? On Sunday, the Greens come together for a small party congress, in an application to this state council, the federal board asks: “How do we discuss difficult and polarizing topics, especially the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?” A maximum spongy wording. The Greens are aware of the explosive power.

“Such a debate requires a lot of sensitivity, clear limits, and must take place in trusting rooms far from the excited headlines,” says Greens boss Franziska Brantner. After October 7, the war in Gaza, which started as a self -defense, caused “immeasurable suffering” in the civilian population. “These two aspects are also reflected in the German debate, which is becoming increasingly unforgettable.”

That is why there is “great social gap,” says the politician of the party’s realo wing, which is why an empathetic exchange is needed. “As a party, we want to give the room again – even the quieter and differentiated voices.”

Can that go well? The green youth considers the debate to be overdue. From “fear of burning their fingers”, the Greens, like all parties, have avoided the topic, says Jakob Blasel, chairman of the youth organization. The “entanglement of the Greens into the federal government” made it difficult to communicate a clear attitude towards Gaza – “but at the latest during the Bundestag election we should have been clear”.

Blasel points out that many people with migration history in German discourse do not find themselves. “A decisive solidarity with Israel, which is not up for debate, must not lead to the fact that we lose sight of the suffering of the civilian population in Gaza and look away from the human rights violations of the Israeli army.”

The Middle East Zwickmühle of the Greens is particularly reflected in the work of Annalena Baerbock. Since October 7, the Green Foreign Minister has tried to convey with travel -intensive commuting diplomacy. Again and again she asked the Netanyahu government to moderate and organized humanitarian aid for the Gaza strip. At the same time, Germany’s chief diplomat was involved in the fact that Israel is no longer being isolated.

An attempt was made to keep the topic “in the middle”, says a MP. However, one thing stayed in particular in Israel and in the Arab states and in Germany’s propalestinian community: Baerbock show too much understanding of the supposedly wrong side.

It is not a war between Jews and Muslims, says Taher Saleh, “but between the terrorist organization Hamas and the right -wing extremist government of Netanyahu.” The member of the Bundestag expects more courage to differentiate: “There may be and must criticize Netanyahus in Gaza.”

But how loud can this criticism fail without giving the tailwind who want to repay Israel entirely from the map? And what does that mean for German Middle East Policy? For Taher Saleh it is clear: “Set arms deliveries, respect decisions of the International Court of Justice and recognize Palestine as a state for a two -state solution.”

The ghosts differ on the ban on arms. The green youth demands that they no longer deliver weapons “which can be used against the civilian population”. The party internal Federal Working Group (BAG) also thinks peace and international. The Greens are forced to “do the balancing act”, says BAG spokesman Peter Heilrath. “We want to defend Israel as a home of the Jews and at the same time denounce the violation of men.”

To refuse Israel weapons aid, Volker Beck would never come to mind. When Taher Saleh represents a side of the party spectrum, the Greens veteran is at the other end as President of the German-Israeli Society. “Israel weapons for his self -defense is not a legitimate position,” says Beck. “Israel has been the attacked since 1948.” A statement that provokes contradiction.

BAG spokesman Heilrath sees the Greens-like the whole German society-in a difficult position. “Anyone who is very radically on one of the pages is often badly informed,” says Heilrath. The factual exchange about controversial aspects is correspondingly difficult. “We as the Greens are increasingly being pushed into a one -sided party consumption because both sides show little willingness to put themselves in the situation of the others.”

Clarification of the conflict on the state council was not to be expected. At least there is an agreement that the dispute should not be managed in public. “We need an orderly procedure for civilized debates in which the most shrillest voices do not dominate,” demands Volker Beck.

Even the determination of who is to be responsible for the debate in the Greens is potential for conflict. When it comes to the Middle East, little things are often enough to ignite bitter debates.