The Berlin Left Party won the election. With 25.7 percent of the second votes, it became the strongest party on September 20, and Elif Eralp wants to move into the Red City Hall. Today, her party will decide at a state party conference whether to invite the SPD and Greens to exploratory talks. The debate over hatred of Israel and problematic structures within Berlin’s Left Party is therefore no longer a marginal campaign issue. It is a question of government.

Since September 22, Eralp has been co-chair, alongside Tobias Schulze, of the new Left parliamentary group. For a possible red-green-red government, the question is therefore no longer merely what went wrong during the election campaign. What is decisive is which political structures a possible governing mayor tolerates, limits or ends within her own party.

In the n-tv interview of September 14 Eralp was asked about recurring cases of virulent hatred of Israel within her party. She spoke of individuals doing things that did not correspond to the party line. n-tv explicitly summarized her answer as a statement about isolated cases.

Since then, the list has grown longer. This is not only about a rapper, a guest at an election party or an ill-fated chat. It concerns incidents that have continued for months and, in some cases, years: Dahabflex’s campaign appearance, the publicly documented cooperation between Neukölln’s Left Party and representatives of the VPNK, Ibrahim Ibrahim’s appearances, the state working group for solidarity with Palestine, and the confirmed contact between Bundestag member Ferat Koçak and Firas Remmo.

Koçak and Eralp had been part of the same network since 2019

Before discussing Koçak’s later contacts, an older connection belongs in the chronology. Elif Eralp and Ferat Koçak had already organized together in 2019 in the intra-party network LINKS*KANAX.

Eralp documents the founding herself on her website. She was among the initial signatories of the founding manifesto. Ferat Koçak is on the same list. The network was intended to organize and make more visible migrant voices and voices affected by racism, both within and outside the Left Party.

This is relevant to today’s debate because Koçak was not an unknown Neukölln lawmaker to Eralp whose name only surfaced in September 2026. Both had been part of the same intra-party network for years. This does not establish that Eralp knew about later chats, but it does show a longstanding political connection within the Berlin state party organization.

Dahabflex was not an unannounced incident

At the end of August, Neukölln’s Left Party held the campaign event “Angry at Capitalism” at Herrfurthplatz. The rapper Dahabflex performed there at the district association’s invitation. During his performance, among other things, he sang “Death to the IDF”. According to rbb spectators danced and clapped while politicians present did not intervene.

Eralp subsequently responded clearly. She condemned calls for violence, stated that those responsible should have intervened immediately, and demanded clarification and consequences within the Neukölln district association.

Then, at first, surprisingly little happened.

On September 5, state co-chair Kerstin Wolter confirmed to Tagesspiegel that no consequences had been implemented by that point. The state executive board had held a special meeting with representatives of Neukölln’s Left Party, but there were initially no publicly apparent personnel or political consequences. As recently as September 22, Josef Schuster, president of the Central Council of Jews, expressly criticized the fact that the incident had not resulted in personnel or political consequences.

Eralp’s distancing therefore becomes a political problem of a different kind. A lead candidate can demand consequences. What matters is whether the state and district associations subsequently implement them.

The district association had invited the artist. Politicians were present. No one intervened. Weeks later, the visible result was not a clear personnel consequence, but the next debate about the same district association.

A press release is a distancing statement. Control over one’s own political apparatus is something else.

Neukölln’s Left Party publicly confirmed its exchange with the VPNK

The background to the United Palestinian National Committee, or VPNK for short, carries even greater weight.

The 2024 Berlin Office for the Protection of the Constitution report states that PFLP supporters, together with Berlin Hamas supporters, organized numerous rallies under the umbrella designation VPNK. The finding is specific: under this umbrella designation, supporters of both organizations appeared together.

Neukölln’s Left Party knew of this assessment and publicly rejected it. On its own website, the district association stated that it had already been in contact with representatives of the VPNK for months and had taken to the streets together with them. Neukölln’s Left Party even expressed its “fullest confidence” in its own contacts. The statement remains accessible on the district association’s website to this day.

The contact was therefore neither concealed nor accidental. It was politically intended, publicly described and defended against criticism.

Passende X-Beiträge

Aus dem SCHLAGSEITE X-Archiv

Jüdische Allgemeine 13.10.2026 · 20:01 Uhr Die Berliner SPD und Grüne haben im Streit über den Umgang mit Antisemitismus die Sondierungsgespräche mit der Linken unterbrochen. Jüdische Allgemeine 29.09.2026 · 07:00 Uhr Streit über Antisemitismusvorwurf: Linke zeigt Dobrindt an. Der Minister kommentiert im Fernsehen einen Versprecher der Moderatorin über die Berliner Linke Elif Eralp. Die sieht… Mena-Watch 27.09.2026 · 07:01 Uhr Die Berliner Linke feiert ihren Wahlerfolg. Doch Kontakte zu Clan-Chef Issa Remmo, Chats seines Sohnes Firas mit Ferat Koçak und ein PFLP-Unterstützer auf der… Jüdische Allgemeine 08.10.2026 · 07:00 Uhr Auf dem »Media TLV Summit« diskutierten Experten Fragen von Technologie und Krieg, Extremismus und Antisemitismus sowie die Rolle der Medien. Jüdische Allgemeine 07.10.2026 · 19:38 Uhr Antisemitische Anfeindungen und der gestiegene Antisemitismus setzen viele Jüdinnen und Juden zusätzlich unter Druck. Auch die Nachfrage nach psychologischer Unterstützung ist gestiegen. Dr. Kleiman…

Ibrahim Ibrahim had been known long before the election party

One of the actors from this environment is Ibrahim Ibrahim. He appeared in Berlin as a representative of the VPNK. The research association democ describes him as a longtime PFLP activist.

His public statements went considerably beyond sharp criticism of Israel. At an event in October 2025, Ibrahim, according to documentation by democ glorified Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar as a “steadfast leader” and “martyr hero”. Sinwar was among the central figures responsible for planning and carrying out the Hamas massacre of October 7, 2023.

Ibrahim therefore did not first appear in the political environment of Neukölln’s Left Party on election night. As early as 2025, he had appeared at events organized by Neukölln’s Left Party as a VPNK representative. His political background was publicly documented.

A photograph with Ferat Koçak was taken at the election party. Koçak later stated that he had not known about Ibrahim’s political background and expressly distanced himself from statements glorifying violence and terrorism.

The photograph is therefore not the decisive point. The decisive point is the background: Ibrahim had already appeared in the district association’s environment as a VPNK representative and had publicly glorified Sinwar. His renewed appearance in September 2026 therefore did not occur without a known political background.

The Palestine structure sits inside the party

The state working group for solidarity with Palestine, too, cannot be reduced to a single activist. It is an intra-party structure of Berlin’s Left Party.

One of its leading voices is Hannah Bruns. A motion to expel her from the party has now been filed with the state arbitration commission. Several party members submitted it.

One publicly documented statement shows particularly clearly why her positions go far beyond ordinary criticism of an Israeli government. Bruns stated that the liberation of Palestine would only be achieved when “Tel Aviv is once again in Palestine’s hands”. The motion to expel her from the party and the statement have since been publicly documented.

The statement explicitly includes Tel Aviv, a city in internationally recognized Israeli territory, in her vision of a future political space determined by Palestinians. Bruns later confirmed the quote to dpa, but said it had to be understood in context. According to her account, she advocates peaceful coexistence between Israelis and Palestinians in a single state.

In July 2025, Bruns also stated that she did not want to distance herself from forces that, in her view, were waging a justified struggle against Israel. When subsequently asked about the Hamas massacre of October 7, she said she would “distance herself from absolutely nothing”.

No decision has yet been made on the motion to expel her from the party. Politically, something else is already decisive: the working group for solidarity with Palestine is not a private initiative outside the party. The conflict is taking place within an organized party structure.

At the same time, the fact that Left Party members themselves applied for her expulsion shows that there is resistance within the party to Bruns and her positions. The conflict is intra-party and therefore can be treated neither as merely an attack by political opponents nor as the affair of an outsider.

Koçak’s Remmo chat was more political than a greeting

Ferat Koçak is now at the center of a second incident. After Issa Remmo appeared at the Neukölln election party, the Left Party stated that he had not been invited and had later been sent away.

Shortly afterward, his son Firas Remmo published a chat with Koçak. Koçak confirmed the communication. Among other things, he wrote: “Respectful greetings back to your father.” Later, he sent Firas Remmo an excerpt from a speech in the Bundestag and asked him to disseminate it.

The content of this speech makes the incident more politically interesting than a merely friendly chat.

On January 29, 2026, Koçak spoke in the Bundestag about the term clan crime. In the official plenary record he described it as a political slogan with a racist history. At the same time, he made clear that organized crime exists and must be fought consistently. He saw the central problem with the term “clan” as being that it places entire families under general suspicion.

Koçak later sent Firas Remmo an excerpt from precisely this debate and asked him to circulate it.

Koçak subsequently stated that he had not known whom he was writing to during the initial contact. Shortly afterward, he said, he became aware of the identity of his conversation partner. He himself described the later message containing his speech as a mistake. He apologized and suspended his work on the Bundestag’s Committee on Internal Affairs until further notice.

The political point is therefore clear: A lawmaker who criticizes the term “clan crime” because of its sweeping effect asks the son of a member of the Remmo family to circulate precisely that speech. No further connection needs to be constructed for the purpose of assessing this. The confirmed incident stands on its own.

A clear line in the Remmo case, months of exchange with the VPNK

After Issa Remmo appeared, Eralp drew a clear line. In RBB Inforadio, she stated, her party wanted nothing to do with organized crime. To her knowledge, Remmo had not been invited and was later sent away.

This very clarity makes the comparison with VPNK revealing.

In the Remmo complex, the message is: not invited, no desired connection, clear distance.

In the case of VPNK, the Neukölln district association itself documented months of exchanges, joint demonstrations and full trust in the representatives involved.

The facts are different. Nevertheless, the political yardstick can be compared: How quickly and how clearly does a party draw boundaries when problematic contacts or positions become known?

In the Remmo complex, the distancing came immediately. In the case of VPNK, the district association had already expressly defended the cooperation beforehand.

The debate over hatred of Israel becomes a coalition issue

Since the election victory, this debate has reached directly into the potential formation of a government.

The SPD federal leadership publicly held the Left to account. Antisemitic slogans had no place either in society or in politics. The Left would be judged by whether it allowed no room within its own ranks for antisemitism and links to criminal milieus.

Green co-leader Felix Banaszak likewise made clear that talks could fail. A written commitment to Israel’s right to exist would not be sufficient if party members held antisemitic positions. He demanded clarity and sanctions.

In initial exploratory talks, the Left and the Greens agreed to discuss security, the protection of Jewish and queer life, and the fight against antisemitism and racism first. The Greens describe resolving these issues as a prerequisite for regular exploratory talks.

The Central Council of Jews goes even further. Its president, Josef Schuster, expressly warned the SPD and Greens against opening the way to Berlin’s Red City Hall for the Left. He sees a structural problem in parts of the Berlin state association in these developments.

There is also Jewish opposition to this assessment. In an open letter from 150 Jewish Berliners there is a warning against politically instrumentalizing accusations of antisemitism against the Left and against equating criticism of Israeli policy wholesale with antisemitism.

The concrete finding for the formation of a government remains: The SPD and Greens do not treat the issue as a settled campaign dispute. For the Greens, resolving it is explicitly part of the beginning of any possible exploratory talks.

Today, this becomes a government question

The Left is the strongest force in the new House of Representatives. Eralp wants to become Governing Mayor. Today, September 25, the state party conference decides, whether the SPD and Greens will officially be invited to exploratory talks.

If the vote is positive, exploratory talks could begin as early as next week. These would not yet be coalition negotiations. First, it is to be clarified whether there are sufficient political commonalities for such negotiations.

This also changes the standard applied to Eralp. Distancing statements can be demanded from a lead candidate. From a possible head of government, one must additionally expect announced political consequences to become discernible within her own sphere of responsibility.

Political responsibility does not begin with a private chat history

There is no documented evidence that Eralp knew about Koçak’s Remmo chat in advance or was informed about every individual statement by Ibrahim. Nor is this necessary for the core political question.

A possible Governing Mayor is not judged by whether she personally read every message sent by her party colleagues. She is judged by how she deals with publicly known structures in her own political environment, whether announced consequences actually follow, and whether political boundaries are merely commented on or also enforced within her own party.

The debate over hatred of Israel goes beyond individual cases

Dahabflex had been invited. No consequences initially followed. In the case of VPNK, the Left’s Neukölln branch itself documented its cooperation. Ibrahim had a publicly known political history long before the election party. The LAG Palestine Solidarity is an intra-party structure. Eralp and Koçak had organized together in LINKS*KANAX since 2019. Koçak’s contact with Firas Remmo and the request to circulate his Bundestag speech are confirmed.

These developments are not identical and do not prove one another. Taken together, however, they explain why the political debate now goes beyond individual incidents.

Eralp has repeatedly expressed clear distancing. After the election victory, however, it is no longer only what the possible Governing Mayor condemns that counts. What will be decisive is which consequences her party actually draws. Anyone who wants to lead Berlin need not have known every message sent by their party colleagues. But they must be able to show how their party deals with publicly known transgressions and problematic structures within its own ranks.

The Left is the strongest force and is deciding today whether to enter exploratory talks with the SPD and Greens. As a result, the debate over antisemitism and anti-Israel positions is no longer at the margins of the election campaign. The SPD and Greens themselves have made resolving these issues an important point in any possible talks.