Debate about Ferat Koçak: That's not enough

Was that supposed to be it? If Heidi Reichinnek and Sören Pellmann, the parliamentary group leaders of the Left, have their way, apparently yes. After Bundestag member Ferat Koçak told an adventurous story about his affair with the Remmo family in Die Zeit and on his own channels, the parliamentary group leadership wants to let the matter rest. The fact that he is giving up his place on the Interior Committee is considered sufficient by the group leadership and announces that he will continue his “dedicated work” elsewhere in the future. Finally, Koçak “ensured transparency as announced”. I'm sorry, what?

Even after Koçak's new statements, many questions remain unanswered: Koçak claims that he only realized late that he was dealing with representatives of organized crime. Afterwards, he did not break off contact with Firas Remmo, but rather used it to spread his speech. He didn’t “manage” a hard distancing. So Koçak was either naive and weak, or he is dishonest. Both would be a problem. The Remmos have proven that they can put Koçak under pressure.

Koçak's handling of the accusation that he is close to people and organizations that glorify terror against Israel is even more opaque. Koçak did not convincingly explain what relationship he has with the activist Ibrahim Ibrahim, with whom he appeared at demonstrations.

As the most prominent member of the Left in Berlin-Neukölln, Koçak bears a responsibility. How does he assess that his district association organized an event with Ibrahim's Hamas-affiliated organization? How does Koçak assess that an activist who was expelled from the party for trivializing terrorism is still “warmly welcome” in his district association, as the district association spokeswoman says?

These questions have not been answered, Koçak has not ensured transparency. Nevertheless, he is allowed to remain spokesman for anti-racism and anti-fascism in his group - even though he no longer sits on the Interior Committee. Koçak's predecessors in the role were known as meticulous researchers, providing the public with information about Nazi groups and monitoring interior ministers. Koçak, on the other hand, is a political influencer; he missed every second roll-call vote in the Bundestag. It is unclear how he plans to continue his work as spokesman if he is no longer part of the Interior Committee.

The fact that the party leadership is satisfied with Koçak's poor explanation is an example of how weak and hesitant it is acting in this crisis. After each new incident, you distance yourself and hope to be able to muddle through.

In fact, the left is in a dilemma. Ferat Koçak won the first direct mandate in the West. It is also thanks to people like him and activism for Palestine that the party is so successful. The fear that part of the party base and voters would rebel if the left took more decisive action against Koçak, but also against the Neukölln district association or the LAG Palestine Solidarity, is justified.

At the same time, this reticence on the part of the party leadership has led to some members apparently believing that the balanced party decisions on the Middle East conflict mean little to them.

Next week, the LAG Palestine Solidarity of the Berlin Left is calling for a demonstration in solidarity with all “those affected by the incitement”. For them, this also includes the terrorist glorifier Ibrahim Ibrahim. If the left does not act against members who want to harm it out of fear of its base, it will not get the problem under control. And ultimately endangers a possible left-wing government in Berlin.