The traffic light is facing a billion-dollar hole, there will be elections in Europe in June and there is a threat of a major Russian offensive in Ukraine. SPD leader Lars Klingbeil explains in an interview whether Germany is prepared for all of this – and says what needs to happen now.
It’s Tuesday, Lars Klingbeil is nervous. In the evening, FC Bayern welcomes Real Madrid in the semi-finals of the Champions League. The die-hard Bayern fan couldn’t have known at the time of the interview that it would be a rather disappointing 2-2 (from Munich’s perspective).
Klingbeil actually has every reason to be politically uneasy: historians recently wrote an incendiary letter to the SPD leadership about their comrades’ Russia policy. A huge budget hole threatens to tear the traffic light apart, and on top of that, the FDP is constantly dancing on the noses of its coalition partners with new proposals.
But when it comes to these questions, the SPD leader appears rather calm in an interview with t-online. Klingbeil explains why, in his view, the SPD historians have overshot the mark, why CDU leader Merz should set limits on his European election top candidate Ursula von der Leyen, and warns that Germany “may have to mobilize money and weapons for another ten years.” to help Ukraine.
t-online: Mr. Klingbeil, well-known historians with the SPD party record recently accused the SPD of a “dangerous denial of reality” in its dealings with Russia in an incendiary letter. Were you angry that the letter was made public?
Lars Klingbeil: No. I think it’s good when historians get involved in public debates. However, I do not agree with some points in the letter.
The assumption that the SPD has basically not yet begun to work on its Russia policy. That’s simply not true. We have a party conference resolution that clearly states that we have made mistakes and sets a new course. This was preceded by many public events, also together with the history forum, which initiated these changes in course. We are the only party that has done this. This is still pending at the Union.
On Tuesday you invited the historians to a discussion at the SPD party headquarters. What did they tell you?
The conversation was confidential and remains so. But I can say this much: it was a good conversation.
Another accusation in the letter was: In the SPD there were increasingly “anti-science statements and derogatory statements” towards experts. Is there something to that?
I value the exchange with scientists and often meet with experts and think tanks. That enriches my work.
Federal President Frank-Walter Steinmeier just hit the same note when he called military experts “caliber experts” who discussed arms deliveries “exuberantly” and “with growing ambition.” Was that wise, especially from someone who represents the failed Russia policy of the last few years?
Frank-Walter Steinmeier was one of the few politicians in Germany to admit his mistakes in Russia policy and apologize for them. He made it clear that debates should be broader. I wish that too.
The “freezing” speech by SPD parliamentary group leader Rolf Mützenich sparked a heated controversy a few weeks ago. You can now also hear in the SPD that she was clumsy in the least. Should such demands be avoided in the future?
I can only repeat what I have already said several times: the debate about Rolf Mützenich’s speech was absurd. The SPD is clear in its support for Ukraine. Nevertheless, it is right to debate not only arms deliveries, but also diplomatic initiatives. We cannot allow the concept of peace to be occupied only by the carmen and the right-wing radicals from the AfD. By peace they mean surrender to Putin and that is wrong.
