To some, Putin is regarded as a criminal, while for others, he serves as a trading associate.
The front-runners for the European election have distinct opinions on how to approach Russia in a recent televised debate. This becomes evident through their stance on President Putin. Questions about climate policy also create heated emotions, especially regarding the ban on combustion engines.
During a scrutinizing discussion on ZDF's quest for a more appealing understanding of complex EU politics, the main topics for debate were foreign policy, the migration pact, and the Green Deal. The most intriguing part took place when addressing Ukraine policy. All participants affirmed their desire for maintaining peace in Europe, with Russia's war of aggression in Ukraine needing to end. However, their views on how to accomplish this differ significantly.
Gernot Hassknecht, one of the participants, broke the ice with some comic relief before diving into the serious matters.
Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, leader of the FDP's list for the upcoming European election, spoke candidly: "Typical people can't negotiate with Putin since criminality lies at the core of his nature as he has intentions of erasing Ukraine."
Rene Aust, a candidate for the AfD's European election, attempted to appear pro-Russian. According to him, the EU's task is to establish trade relations with Putin in order to end the war. Aust danced around the question of whether he didn't care about Putin's war crimes, making it difficult to pinpoint his stance.
AfD's leading candidate Maximilian Krah was unable to attend due to accusations of Russian influence. Some background - investigators searched the former employee of Krah, Guillaume P., on Wednesday in Brussels and Strasbourg, as well as his residence in Brussels. Belgium's Public Prosecutor's Office revealed that these inquiries were related to the pro-Russian propaganda network connected to the website "Voice of Europe".
The BSW (Alliance of Sahra Wagenknecht) was represented by Fabio De Masi. He shared conflicting views, viewing Russia's invasion in Ukraine "as a criminal act"; however, he added a historical context and blamed the expansion of NATO as a contributing factor to Russia's actions. De Masi then had the audacity to state that not only Russia but also NATO had committed war crimes.
Manfred Weber, the CSU's leader and chair of the conservative EPP faction in the European Parliament, pushed for the enhancement of NATO's defense capacity, expressing concerns over Russian aggression along the Baltic States' borders. Weber held firm in his belief that Putin would not relent, urging the European Union to fortify its defense if faced with a potential attack on the NATO region of Europe. Furthermore, the EU intends to rescind the ban on incandescent bulbs.
The conversation was frequently interrupted by people providing knowledge about the E.U., as well as speed rounds of rapid-fire question answering. Standard questions made for lighter moments, such as when Katarina Barley, SPD's lead candidate, was asked who the greatest living Social Democrat was, causing her to laugh and then ponder over Manuela Schwesig.
The discussion on the EU Migration Pact had the potential to be engaging; it fell short. Participants shared little new information about the EU's migration policy, especially from the AfD.
The debate on the Green Deal was more captivating. The comprehensive climate plan was pioneered by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, who faced pressure from the CDU to retract several legislative proposals. Friedrich Merz, the Union's party leader, prioritized economic considerations. A new campaign from the Union advocates for the repeal of the ban on incandescent bulbs.
Von der Leyen, who is the lead candidate for the CDU in the Commission presidency, is not directly involved in the conversation. Instead, Daniel Caspary, the chair of the CDU/CSU group in the European Parliament, is invited. When asked about the significance of the Green Deal, Caspary adds his own perspective. While he acknowledges the importance of the Green Deal, he also voices the need to stop passing "proposals, bans, and restrictions", particularly with regard to internal combustion engines.
Weber, a fellow panelist, expresses her skepticism about the proposal. She says that they can't just accept everything that's presented to them, even if von der Leyen is the Union's lead candidate. When the moderator Dunja Hayali brings up the fact that the Conservatives have accepted the law in the European Parliament, Weber shakes her head.
The Green candidate for chancellorship, Terry Reintke, defends the importance of the Green Deal. She believes that green technologies and electric cars are crucial for economic growth in Europe. However, she points out that the German industry is currently falling behind its international competitors. Reintke supports the ban on incandescent bulbs and thinks it could help promote the transition to electric car production in the EU.
When an AfD politician like Aust speaks on the topic, the conversation becomes heated. Aust views the subsidies for green technology in Europe as an example of "market distortion", and believes that people will adapt to climate change by themselves. Barley tries to interject, but Weber cuts her off. Barley becomes frustrated and complains, "Men." Weber continues speaking, but Hayali eventually steps in to silence him. Aust then responds to Barley's question about how people should cope with environmental disasters, denying that climate change was the cause of the Ahr Valley flood in July 2021.
As the show wraps up, fortunes cookies are given to the panelists. Finally, an audience member expresses her frustration with the political bickering, asking the politicians to put the interests of the EU ahead of their petty disagreements. "Democratic parties have nothing to do with me in the European Parliament," she says. Hayali acknowledges her sentiments with a smile, calling it the "best closing statement." But how can these politicians work together when they have such differing opinions?
