00:00 / –:–
Berlin’s Left has won the election. At the same time, three different matters are at issue: Ferat Koçak’s contact with a son of the Remmo family, the documented cooperation between the Neukölln Left and the VPNK, and recurring conflicts over antisemitism and hatred of Israel within the party. Each of these cases must be assessed on its own. Taken together, however, they raise one question: How consistently does the party leadership draw boundaries when problematic incidents originate within its own ranks?
With 25.7 percent of the second votes, Die Linke became the strongest political force in the Berlin House of Representatives election on September 20, 2026. The SPD, Greens and Left are preparing exploratory talks. This has given internal party conflicts and controversial contacts a different political significance. A party that wants to lead Berlin’s Red Town Hall must be judged by how it deals with such matters.
Koçak’s Remmo chat dates from February
Issa Remmo appeared at the Left’s election-night celebration in Neukölln. The party said he had not been invited. This visit alone does not prove a political connection.
A different matter became politically explosive: After the election, Firas Remmo, Issa Remmo’s son, published a chat with Left Bundestag member Ferat Koçak. The exchange dates back to February 17, 2026. In it, Koçak asks Firas Remmo to distribute an excerpt from his Bundestag speech about so-called clan crime. The two address each other as “brother.”
Koçak confirmed the contact, apologized and said that he had initially not known whom he was writing to. He communicated every week with hundreds of people from Neukölln and had written to Firas Remmo “like any other Neukölln resident.” The greetings to his father had been a matter of politeness.
However, the published chat raises questions about this account. Der Tagesspiegel points out, that Koçak had someone convey “respectful greetings back.” The word “back” suggests that a previous greeting had been sent. In the same exchange, Koçak also asked when his chat partner would be at the office and announced that he could stop by in the morning. The actual closeness of the contact therefore remains unresolved.
Koçak himself described contacts by elected officials with people considered part of organized crime as unjustifiable. He temporarily withdrew from the Interior Committee. Irene Mihalic, the Greens’ First Parliamentary Secretary, went further: She urged him to resign his Bundestag mandate and described expelling him from the Left parliamentary group as “the bare minimum.”
VPNK: Political cooperation despite intelligence-service findings
This must be considered separately from the cooperation between the Neukölln Left and the United Palestinian National Committee, or VPNK for short.
The Berlin Office for the Protection of the Constitution describes the VPNK as an umbrella designation under which supporters of Hamas and the PFLP jointly organized rallies. The VPNK is not identical to Hamas. However, the Office for the Protection of the Constitution explicitly describes the joint appearance of supporters of extremist organizations under this umbrella.
The Neukölln Left knows about this assessment and rejects it. At the same time, the district association confirms on its own website that it has been in contact with VPNK representatives for months and has taken to the streets with them. It even expresses its “utmost trust” in VPNK representatives at events organized by the Neukölln Left.
This is neither about a selfie nor an accidental visitor. It concerns political cooperation confirmed by the district association itself.
Passende X-Beiträge
Aus dem SCHLAGSEITE X-ArchivEralp calls recurring incidents “isolated cases”
A third complex concerns antisemitism and hatred of Israel within the party. In May, Elif Eralp published a five-point plan to protect Jewish life. The paper contains specific demands. What matters, however, is how the party leadership enforces these standards within its own structures.
During rapper Dahabflex’s performance at an election campaign event organized by the Neukölln Left, phrases including “Death to the IDF” and intifada slogans were heard. Eralp subsequently said she was appalled and expected consequences.
In a n-tv interview on September 14, 2026 she was asked about the “repeated incidents of excessive hatred of Israel” in her party. Eralp replied that these were “isolated cases” and stated: “As a party, we are completely clear on this.”
By that point, the Dahabflex performance, the cooperation between the Neukölln Left and the VPNK, and the internal party dispute over the LAG Palestine Solidarity were already known. The latter had circulated a video combining footage from Auschwitz with images from Gaza. The LAG Shalom of Berlin’s Left called the suggested equivalence “infamous” and “oblivious to history” and demanded that the state association draw clear boundaries.
Euronews also reported a few days before the election that, for scheduling reasons, Eralp and her office did not answer the specific question of how the party intended to respond to antisemitic or Hamas-glorifying slogans at events attended by Left politicians.
Berlin’s Left criticized over antisemitism
After the election, Josef Schuster, president of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, said that Berlin’s Left had repeatedly attracted attention during the election campaign for crossing antisemitic red lines. Because, in his view, sufficient personnel and political consequences had failed to materialize, he described its assurances as “lip service.”
Schuster later clarified that he had not labeled the entire party antisemitic across the board. However, he maintained his criticism of the party leadership: In his view, it was not apparent that the leadership was actively taking action against antisemitic incidents within its own ranks.
Israel’s ambassador Ron Prosor expressed himself even more sharply. Speaking to the Jüdische Allgemeine he referred to “completely unrestrained antisemitism” that had broken out within the party and to a “concrete and immediate existential threat” to Berlin’s Jewish community.
Such assessments are significant for the political credibility of a pledge to protect Jewish life.
Brantner sets conditions for taking government responsibility
Among the Greens, the debate has now also reached the question of government. Co-federal chairwoman Franziska Brantner said in an interview with Der Spiegel that she could “hardly imagine” the Left taking charge of the Interior or Justice Ministry as long as there were people in the party with connections to organized crime or extremist forces such as the PFLP or Hamas.
Brantner explicitly links this statement to specific people and connections. She does not claim that the party as a whole is classified as extremist by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution. The coalition negotiators in Berlin will also decide how the ministries are allocated.
For a joint government, Brantner additionally demands a clear basis for dealing with Israel and Hamas: Israel’s right to exist must be recognized and Hamas must be identified as a terrorist organization. In doing so, she refers to the fact that recognition of Israel’s right to exist is already the Left’s adopted policy.
Thus, the three matters converge again without being equated: The Remmo chat concerns how a member of parliament dealt with a member of a family from the organized-crime milieu. The VPNK issue concerns an anti-Israel and extremist-influenced scene described by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution. Dahabflex and the internal party dispute concern antisemitism and hatred of Israel.
The common political question is not whether these matters are identical. They are not. What matters is whether a party claiming the right to govern consistently investigates problematic contacts, extremist networks and antisemitic incidents within its own ranks, draws boundaries and enforces consequences.
The election victory has not settled these questions. It has made them more urgent. Anyone seeking to lead Berlin and assume responsibility for the police, the justice system and the protection of Jewish life will be judged not only by programs and statements of distance, but by how the leadership acts when the problems arise within its own political environment.
ℹ️ Factual basis and primary sources for the article 📑
▶️ Der Tagesspiegel – Koçak and Remmo:
Koçak’s clan chat and open questions about his account
Documents Koçak’s offer to meet, the greeting sent “back” and the contradictions in his explanation.
▶️ Der Tagesspiegel – February chat:
Koçak’s chat with Firas Remmo
Dates the published chat to February 17, 2026, and contextualizes his Bundestag speech.
▶️ Berlin Office for the Protection of the Constitution:
Berlin reports by the Office for the Protection of the Constitution
Classification of the VPNK and the intelligence-service-relevant anti-Israel scene in Berlin.
▶️ Neukölln Left:
Palestine Solidarity Working Group within the Neukölln Left
The organization’s own account of its cooperation with the VPNK and its declaration of “utmost trust” in its representatives.
▶️ n-tv:
Interview with Elif Eralp on September 14, 2026
Eralp’s statement that recurring cases of excessive hatred of Israel concerned “isolated cases.”
▶️ Euronews:
Antisemitism in Berlin’s Left
Reporting on Dahabflex and the unanswered questions put to Eralp before the election.
▶️ Central Council of Jews in Germany:
Berlin elections 2026
Josef Schuster’s criticism of how Berlin’s Left dealt with antisemitic incidents.
▶️ Jüdische Allgemeine:
“Existential threat to Berlin’s Jews”
Assessment by Israel’s ambassador Ron Prosor.
▶️ taz / Spiegel interview:
Brantner’s conditions ahead of the exploratory talks
Documents her statements on the Interior and Justice ministries and connections to organized crime, the PFLP and Hamas.
▶️ Der Tagesspiegel:
The Greens’ conditions for possible coalition formation
Documents Brantner’s demand for a commitment to Israel’s right to exist and for Hamas to be identified as a terrorist organization.
🔎 Found an error, criticism or addition?
SCHLAGSEITE.eu stands for careful research and transparent corrections. Have you found a factual error, unclear wording or a broken link? Then send me your note. If possible, please provide a verifiable source.
