Some German Social Democrats call for diplomatic talks with Russia
Prominent figures from Germany's Social Democratic Party (SPD) have signed a manifesto calling for diplomatic talks with Russia, in what appears to be a stand-off over the defence policy of the coalition government, in which the SPD is the junior partner.
The position paper, which has been made available to dpa and has been signed by more than 100 people, laments a "compulsion to increase armament and prepare for a supposedly imminent war."
"Military alarm rhetoric and huge armament programmes do not create more security for Germany and Europe, but lead to destabilization and a strengthening of the mutual perception of threat between NATO and Russia," the document states.
While it is unclear whether all signatories are members of the SPD, prominent party figures including the former leader of the parliamentary group Rolf Mützenich, former party chief Norbert Walter-Borjans and foreign policy expert Ralf Stegner are among them, as are several federal and state lawmakers.
Dubbed "Manifesto," the paper could cause a stir at the SPD party conference scheduled for later this month, where the party is set to elect a new leadership following its disastrous showing in February's parliamentary elections.
Coming off the heels of leading a squabbling three-party coalition, the SPD, one of Germany's two traditional mainstream forces, was relegated to third place behind the conservative bloc and the far-right Alternative for Germany.
The party conference will be preceded by the NATO summit in The Hague, where member states are expected to agree on a significant hike in defence expenditure.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Germany announces new 1.9B euro Ukraine aid boost
Germany's defense minister on Thursday pledged a new military aid package for Ukraine worth 1.9 billion euros, as European and NATO officials met in Rome to discuss bolstering the bloc's defense and security spending amid rising risks of Russian aggression. Berlin's pledge will likely bring relief to Kyiv after Washington signaled a reduction in next year's budget for military aid to Ukraine. Germany is Ukraine's second-largest backer, and along with other European nations has been under increasing pressure to make up for the Trump administration's retreat from supporting Ukraine's military operation. Russia has stepped up strikes on Ukrainian urban centers in recent days, and despite Washington urging negotiations, both sides seem as far as ever from progress toward a peace deal, analysts said.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - A federal solution: The United States of Palestine
As French President Emmanuel Macron tries to revive the same solution that has failed time and time again, the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict continues. With with no lasting solution in sight, it may be time to revisit a concept both deeply historical and radically pragmatic: the idea that Jordan — long tied to the Palestinian people by geography, identity, governance and religion — should take the lead in shaping a new federal solution for Palestinian self-determination. Few remember today that Jordan was, and in many ways still is, part of historic Palestine. Before the 1921 creation of Transjordan under British supervision, the territory we now call Jordan was understood as part of the larger Palestinian entity — the land between the Mediterranean and the Iraqi desert. Though carved out and handed to a Hashemite emir from the Saudi Hejaz, Jordan has always remained tethered to the Palestinian cause, demographically and spiritually. Today, more than 70 percent of Jordan's population is of Palestinian origin. These Jordanian-Palestinians see themselves not as outsiders but as integrated citizens of the Hashemite state. Their presence has not weakened Jordan's identity — it has enriched it. From Nablus merchants to Jerusalem-born educators, the Palestinian community in Jordan is a cornerstone of the kingdom's civic and economic life. Jordan also has a unique religious and political legitimacy in the region. From 1948 to 1967, it ruled the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and continues to serve as custodian of the Muslim holy sites there, by international agreement. No other government — not the Palestinian Authority, nor Hamas, nor any regional actor — holds that trust. Unlike the divided and often dysfunctional Palestinian political bodies in Gaza and the West Bank, the Hashemite Kingdom has maintained 100 years of strong, stable governance. It has proven its ability to rule justly, suppress extremism and maintain strategic alignment with Western interests. Amman is a loyal U.S. and NATO partner. It has withstood the storms of Arab nationalism, Islamist extremism, regional war and refugee crises — all while keeping its institutions intact and its society relatively moderate and open. In contrast, every attempt at Palestinian self-rule — from the Palestine Liberation Organization's early years through the current Hamas-Fatah split — has ended in disappointment. Palestinian leadership has, at various times, aligned with morally and strategically disastrous actors: the Nazis during World War II, the Soviet bloc during the Cold War, and Saddam Hussein in the 1990s. Internal corruption, repression and a reckless embrace of violence have robbed generations of Palestinians of the chance to live in peace and dignity. It is time to imagine something better: a federal model in which Jordan assumes sovereign oversight of the United States of Palestine. Under this model, Jordan would recognize and integrate several Palestinian states or provinces into a federated structure. Inside current Jordanian borders, three to four states would be formed, each with local state control and democratic representation. The Palestinian-ruled areas in the West Bank would become another state. Gaza, currently caught between Hamas and the Israeli Defence Forces, would form yet another. All of these would retain autonomy over education, internal policing and local governance, while reporting back to a federal authority in Amman — itself restructured to reflect shared governance between the different states. This model may sound unprecedented in the Middle East, but it is not so different from the federal system of the United Arab Emirates or that of the United States. Just as Alaska and Hawaii — non-contiguous and culturally distinct — are integral parts of the American union, so too could a Palestinian West Bank and Gaza remain part of a wider Jordanian federation. Amman would act as the political capital, whilst managing Jerusalem's Islamic holy sites on behalf of all Muslims — a responsibility it already holds with international consent. The Hashemite family would remain the ruling monarchy but the prime minister would be chosen by popular vote by the states. This is almost identical to the United Kingdom, in which the Windsor family are the ruling monarchy but the prime minister is chosen by popular vote by the citizens of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Island. The benefits could be profound. First, dissent within Jordan would be channeled into structured political representation. Palestinian-Jordanians would no longer be torn between their heritage and their passports — they would be empowered stakeholders in a shared, sovereign future. Second, Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza would gain credible, experienced governance. Jordan's bureaucracy, civil service and military are among the most respected in the Arab world. Corruption would fall; investor confidence would rise. With Jordanian oversight, Palestinian autonomy would no longer mean instability and isolation. Third, Israel would gain a reliable partner on its eastern and southern borders — one that has a proven record of rejecting terrorism, maintaining peace agreements, and safeguarding regional stability. This would allow Israel to manage its borders securely while supporting genuine Palestinian self-rule under a legitimate and moderate umbrella. Finally, the broader region and the West — especially the United States — would benefit from an end to one of the world's most polarizing and destabilizing conflicts. Domestic political pressures would ease. Radical groups would lose their most powerful propaganda tool. And a long-elusive dream — a real solution for the Palestinians — would finally emerge. Of course, such a vision would require bold diplomacy, careful constitutional design, and broad popular buy-in from Palestinians, Jordanians and Israelis alike. But the alternative — endless stalemate, fractured governance and cycles of violence — is far worse. A century after the fall of Ottoman rule, the time has come for an old-new vision of federal statehood — one rooted not in slogans or fantasies but in history, practicality and hope. Terry Newman is an entrepreneur and investor who works throughout the Middle East. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
European allies reaffirm 'unwavering support' for Ukraine in Rome
European foreign ministers have reiterated their "unwavering support for Ukraine," during a conference hosted by Italy's top diplomat Antonio Tajani in Rome on Thursday. The meeting focussing on EU security and the war in Ukraine was attended by the foreign ministers of Germany, France and Poland, alongside Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte and EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas. It came less than a month before the fourth Ukraine Recovery Conference, scheduled for July 10-11, at which some 2,000 representatives from politics, business and international organizations plan to discuss Ukraine's long-term prospects. In a joint declaration, the ministers affirmed their commitment to Ukraine's "people, democracy, security, sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders." German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul told Ukraine's Sybiha: "Our support ... for Ukraine remains rock solid: politically, economically and militarily." Asked by a journalist when he was planning his first call with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, the German minister said he currently did not see any reason or opening for such a move. Wadephul, who took office on May 6, said Germany would always coordinate such steps with its European partners. While stressing that Berlin was "naturally always open to negotiations" in this format, Wadephul said that it must be "acknowledged that Russia is not ready to negotiate, but is seeking war." As long as this is the case, "we stand firmly alongside Ukraine." Wadephul's comments came amid a debate back home sparked by members of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), the junior partner in government, who have called for direct diplomatic calls with Russia. Both the SPD leadership, as well as Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who like Wadephul belongs to the conservative bloc, have rejected the demands, stressing that the recent heavy attacks on Ukraine showed that Russia was nowhere near ready to negotiate. After a bilateral meeting with Tajani, Wadephul's schedule sees him leave Rome for the Middle East on Thursday evening. Through Sunday, he plans to visit a host of countries, including Egypt, Lebanon, Jordan and Israel.
