They do not want to drift. They want to determine their own topics, even to say what they stand for. The Greens have emphasized this again and again in the past year. At least these days, they have made it: The Greens have, apparently without need, started a debate on the asylum law. If you believe them, they are scared of the reactions themselves. But what happened?
Annalena Baerbock has chaired the party since the end of January. She came from the second rank of the Bundestag. Her choice, like that of her co-chair Robert Habeck, was a turning point. Many party members worried about the profile of the Greens, because both Baerbock and Habeck are attributed to the "Realo" wing, ie the wing, which is considered pragmatic and rather conservative.
But since then, the new leaders have been trying to overcome the infamous wing battles.
The dispute between the Realos and the Left is ignited by social policy, economic policy, security policy and asylum policy. The ecology unites the party.
A rough tone
In an interview with the "Süddeutsche Zeitung" Baerbock said that delinquent asylum seekers would have to be preferred to deportation. Confidence in the rule of law was being upset because law was often not enforced quickly enough. The right to asylum also means that those who have no claim to stay would have to return to their countries. One must invest 400 million euros annually for at least ten years in the rule of law. Faster procedures are urgently needed.
This is a rough tone for the Greens. But these are not completely new demands.
On their website, they write that claiming asylum, deserve a fair and fast procedure. Not everyone who comes can stay. "If an application for asylum is denied and there are no other reasons that preclude return (such as good integration, illness, family situation and the situation in the country of origin), voluntary return has priority over deportations." That sounds different. More about the greens.
The interview was followed by the expected reactions. The "taz" wrote that the Greens no longer wanted to miss the debate over a tougher asylum policy. The "Süddeutsche Zeitung" spoke of an adjustment rigorism of the Greens.
Only the party itself attracted little attention. Baerbock has, it is said, before the interview with political experts advise, even after some party friends written. Obviously, she was aware that the interview in her party could cause annoyance. Why did she keep it anyway?
One must know: At the time of the interview, the Hessian Greens were in coalition negotiations. The Federal Council is currently blocking a bill that seeks to declare the Maghreb states Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria and Georgia as safe countries of origin. If Hesse had given up its abstention and consented, the law would have come into force.
Before that, the party was scared. Now apparently in the coalition agreement that Hesse will not agree to the bill. The interview can also be understood as a signal to the Hessian Greens: The party leadership will not stand up against tougher demands in asylum policy. But the safe countries of origin in the Federal Council will continue to be blocked.
Away from the dream dancer image
The Greens are relieved because this could have become a major quarrel in the party, in which the wing arithmetic again played a greater role.
Nevertheless, just a few years ago, the sentences of the party leaders would have been commented differently. The perception of the Greens has changed. "The discussion is not a shift of the discourse, but a change of tone," says one MP.
The Greens want to present themselves as realistic in the debate. They know that if they want to govern, they must move away from their image as dream dancers in asylum policy. You have to clarify what they stand for. Because they really want to govern. Critics feel misunderstood. After all, the interview was more complex than the individual sentences that had been singled out again.
Baerbock's co-chairman Habeck stood behind her, calling her interview precise and courageous. At the beginning of his new book he writes: "Language creates the world." She is never just a picture of her, but always bring her out.
Apparently, the Greens want to try out what happens when they actually dare to say what they have clasped already in some program. So far, the party seems to follow its lead.