Showing posts sorted by date for query CHRISTIAN NATIONALISM. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query CHRISTIAN NATIONALISM. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Tuesday, October 06, 2026

When is the right time to compare US politics to the Nazi era? This expert on Christian nationalism says: now

David Smith in Washington
Sat, October 3, 2026 
THE GUARDIAN


Donald Trump delivers the keynote address at the Faith & Freedom Coalition's Road to Majority Policy Conference on 22 June 2024 in Washington DC.Photograph: Samuel Corum/Getty Images

The lawyer Mike Godwin famously came up with the "law" that, as an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one (or 100%).

Robert P Jones thought long and hard about whether to go there in his latest book. But the more he studied US demographic numbers, considered the rise of Christian nationalism and heard Donald Trump use the language of racial purity, he found the conclusion inescapable. "This is our 1933," he writes.

So it is that Backslide: Reclaiming a Faith and a Nation After the Christian Turn Against Democracy begins with the rise of the Nazi party and the complicity of the German people, including German Christians and churches.

Jones cites Martin Niemöller, a Lutheran pastor imprisoned for opposing Hitler, remembered for the poem First They Came. But for the first four years of Hitler's reign, he notes, Niemöller did not fully oppose the Nazis. He later regretted that he and the Protestant German church did not speak out sooner.

Backslide returns to the analogy in its epilogue. He writes: "Just as God asked Niemoller where he was between 1933 and 1937, God will ask us where we were between 2025 and 2028. Just as Germans who backed Hitler and the Nazi Party after 1933 were fully aware of what they were joining, so Christians who have backed Trump and the MAGA movement a second time know and bear responsibility for what they are now endorsing."

Sitting in his downtown Washington office, the president and founder of the Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) contends that US democracy is experiencing a severe "backslide" that is directly aided and abetted by an "apostate" white Christianity, including Trump's language on the campaign trail.

"This dehumanising language, talking about immigrants as vermin, and this racial purity language, like they're 'poisoning the blood of our country'. What does that mean? If they're poisoning the blood, what's the pure blood? We know where that story goes," he said.

Trump has repeatedly used the concept of genetic inheritance. In 2020, addressing a mostly white crowd in Minnesota, he declared: "You have good genes, you know that, right? You have good genes. A lot of it is about the genes, isn't it, don't you believe? The racehorse theory, you think we're so different? You have good genes in Minnesota."

Normalisation is a perennial danger.

"If don't want to live in a place where we have a thuggish police force that's kidnapping people off the street in masks and killing US citizens in the streets, now's the time to speak up," Jones said.

Backslide cites historian and philosopher Hannah Arendt's 1950 The Aftermath of Nazi Rule report for Commentary magazine based on interviews with postwar Berliners: "A great number of Germans, especially among the more educated, apparently are no longer capable of telling the truth even if they want to."

Jones grew up a Southern Baptist in Jackson, Mississippi, went to church five times a week and earned a master of divinity degree. His previous books include The End of White Christian America in 2016, White Too Long in 2020 and The Hidden Roots of White Supremacy and the Path to a Shared American Future in 2023. He called this one Backslide very deliberately.

Related: The Hidden Roots of White Supremacy review: necessary chronicle of US racist history

In international political science, "democratic backsliding" has become the established academic term for the systematic erosion of democratic norms, judicial independence and voting rights. Yet Jones recognises that the term carries an even older resonance.

"In the evangelical world I grew up in, backslide was a word we heard all the time – a theological word about the fear of falling away from the faith," he says, tracing the word's history back through the Oxford English Dictionary to the 16th-century Protestant reformer John Knox.

In Jones's diagnosis, white American Christianity has committed a profound act of apostasy by trading its spiritual core for political dominance. By endorsing anti-democratic tactics, white Christian institutions have become the primary engine behind the country's autocratic slide.

To understand how a major religious tradition arrived at this moral impasse, Jones turns to the arithmetic of demographics. When Barack Obama was elected president in 2008, white Christian Americans still constituted 54% of the US population. By 2014, that figure had dropped to 47%. Today, white Christians account for 41% of the country.

The decline among white evangelicals, long considered a bedrock of conservative politics, is even steeper. At the turn of the 21st century, white evangelicals represented a quarter of all Americans; today, they make up barely 13%. The Southern Baptist Convention, the country's biggest evangelical denomination, has lost more than 3 million members since its 2006 peak.

Faced with shrinking numbers and cultural marginalisation, white evangelicalism embraced not spiritual renewal, but existential panic – creating fertile ground for Trump's demagoguery.

"Trump loves to talk about the art of the deal and, in many ways, there's been a massive quid pro quo deal struck between a declining white evangelical population and Trump," Jones observes. "His big appeal to them was less about policy and more anti-immigrant: I'm going to restore an America that looks like you, and I'm going to restore power to the Christian churches.

"He was literally saying on the campaign trail: this is a quid pro quo deal. Give me your votes and you won't even have to vote again. I'll fix it so you don't have to vote again.'"

This transactional alliance marks a complete departure from the religious right of the late 20th century, which wrapped its political ambitions in the language of morality.

"You don't hear those words any more," says Jones, contrasting today's movement with Jerry Falwell's Moral Majority or the "Values Voters" summits of the George W Bush era. "What we have now is an overtly anti-democratic Christian nationalism flying under the banner of: 'We believe this country belongs to us, and we're going to use the power we can to claim it.'"

This Faustian bargain relies purely on power rather than shared theology – a dynamic starkly highlighted by the contrast between Trump and his running mate, JD Vance. While Vance recently discussed the End Times with 22-year-old evangelical podcaster Bryce Crawford, awkwardly reflecting on his evangelical upbringing and subsequent conversion to Catholicism, Trump operates largely without theological pretence.

Jones continues: "He makes straight appeals to self-interest: if you're for me, I'll be for you. Evangelicals are willing to forgive a whole host of sins for the idea that he is going to bring them back into power as their numbers are dwindling."

The real world manifestation of this transaction plays out every Sunday across thousands of congregations. While high-profile megachurches such as First Baptist church in Dallas make their political allegiance explicit, Jones contends that overt political sermonising is rarely needed.

"Once you have churches that are largely segregated by race and increasingly segregated by partisanship, all you really have to do is keep out any critique. It's reinforced by Fox News, Christian radio and going home to people of like mind. You don't have to overtly teach Christian nationalism; you just keep it from being critiqued."

PRRI's extensive empirical data undermines the widespread belief that religious attendance automatically fosters civic tolerance or democratic values.

Jones says: "Particularly among white evangelicals, on several measures around Christian nationalism, anti-immigrant views, anti-Black views, and anti-Muslim views, going to church actually makes your views more extreme. It's not the case that more church is the answer to democracy."

The dangerous potential of this theological radicalisation materialised dramatically during the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol. Christian symbols were displayed prominently throughout the insurrection, including wooden crosses set up on Capitol grounds and rioters holding "Jesus Saves" banners alongside Confederate flags.

Yet official investigations largely overlooked this central element, influenced in part by political figures like Congresswoman Liz Cheney on the House select committee. "I was stunned to see very little of it in the House select committee report," Jones recalls. "It was a huge loss and a huge skewing of public perception that we didn't take those Christian symbols at the riot seriously."

Today, this blend of Christian nationalism and military authority reaches into the upper echelons of the national security apparatus. The defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, sports tattoos featuring Crusader iconography – including the medieval battle cry Deus Vult ("God wills it") next to a Jerusalem cross – while renaming the Department of Defense as the "Department of War". Hegseth has welcomed vocal Christian nationalists such as Pastor Doug Wilson to lead a worship service at the Pentagon.

Jones comments: "I can't imagine much more dangerous than somebody who thinks, 'I am the instrument of God, I alone understand how the forces of good and evil are aligned,' while holding the power to deploy the most powerful military force the world has ever seen. While George W Bush took care after 9/11 to explicitly state that the US was not at war with Islam, today we are making radicalisation propaganda films for extremists by presenting ourselves as a Christian nation at war with Islam."

Behind the public spectacle of rallies and political theatre, ideologues such as Russell Vought, a key architect of Project 2025 and advocate of the "unitary executive" theory, are laying the groundwork for a government rooted in Christian nationalist principles. "They are building an apparatus designed to institutionalise this worldview across the federal government," Jones warns. "It is an intentional, long-term project to reshape American democracy in their own image."

Despite the alarming trajectory detailed in Backslide, Jones resists total pessimism. The central message of his book is that "backsliding is not irreversible" and that national recovery remains possible through honest confrontation with history and sincere repentance.

Across the country, alternative Christian voices are beginning to organise against Christian nationalism. Figures such as James Talarico, a Presbyterian seminarian running for the US Senate in Texas, and Methodist pastor Adam Hamilton in Kansas are offering a pro-democracy theological vision.

"For a long time, mainline Protestants were taught propriety and politeness, leading to a reticence to speak out," Jones notes. "If we don't want the public and future face of Christianity to be only Christian nationalism, we have to present a public version of Christianity that is compatible with democracy – one that leans into care for the orphan, the widow and the immigrant."

Ultimately, Jones argues, neither sacred texts nor historical precedents will dictate the future of US democracy. He hopes his book will make white Christians realise they face a decision similar to the one that confronted the establishment Christian church in Nazi Germany in 1933.

"It's a wake-up call to see the bright lines that are being crossed, to be clear-eyed about how dangerous that is, and for those readers who are Christian – particularly white and Christian – to realise we have a particular responsibility to offer a different version of faith. Because it is our faith that's been hijacked and used to legitimise this illiberal, anti-democratic, authoritarian movement that's running rampant and taking over in the US."






















Thursday, October 01, 2026

7 takeaways from Hegseth’s address to officers: Warfare’s future, faith and a new base

CHRISTIAN NATIONALISM AND KILLER ROBOTS 

WHAT COULD GO WRONG?!



Filip Timotija
Wed, September 30, 2026
THE /HILL

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth made a flurry of announcements during a wide-ranging speech to active-duty officers Wednesday.

At the beginning of the address, the Pentagon chief stuck to his bread and butter: culture-war grievances, stripping the "woke" out of the Department of Defense (DOD), bashing the news media for its coverage of the Iran war, and proclaiming the "warrior ethos" has been revived and the U.S. military has been "rebuilt."

But the Defense secretary made several newsy announcements that lean into Hegseth's elevation of faith, create a combatant command, partner the Pentagon with different universities and tease a new domestic military base for which governors will compete.

Here are the takeaways from Hegseth's 52-minute speech at Marine Corps Base Quantico in Virginia:

New combatant command focused on autonomous warfare


Hegseth announced the formation of a new four-star combatant command focused on developing autonomous warfare like drones and defense robotics.

The Defense secretary said it would have "service-like authorities built to scale autonomous and robotic capabilities across the joint force in the fastest peacetime shift in modern military history," with the aim of being operational by Oct. 1 next year.

The Autonomous Warfare Command, or "AutoWarCom," will be initially led by Owen West, a former Marine who is now the director of the Pentagon's Defense Innovation Unit, and Max Strasiser, a Navy SEAL senior chief. Later, a four-star military leader will be announced.

"This command will possess directed manpower, budget, acquisition authorities and create dedicated military career pathways for Officers and Enlisted personnel," Hegseth said in a Wednesday memo.

The new command will test equipment and force designs with "realistic opposition" in exercises and rugged environments to figure out what works on the battlefield, the Defense secretary said in the memo.

Project Meridian and warfare's future

Hegseth revealed that SpaceXAI CEO Elon Musk, Anduril co-founder Palmer Luckey and former Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) will lead a new Pentagon effort to study the future of warfare, dubbed Project Meridian.


The Pentagon chief said the project is meant to harness America's innovators, senior leaders and technologists to look decades into the future and "forecast the creative solution for tomorrow's conflicts."

"It is futuristic on purpose," he said of the project, which he clarified was not meant to develop new strategies or policies.

"We should have the humility to recognize that the best forecasters of future conflict do not solely reside inside the Pentagon," Hegseth said. "There are obvious biases and risks to asking ourselves to both ask the questions and answer them."

Hegseth said Musk, Luckey and Gingrich, under the leadership of Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering Emil Michael, "will be focused on discovering, developing, and fielding the weapons and systems that our children and our grandchildren will need in their lifetimes, without any creative limitations or restrictions, on any future battlefield, from under the Earth to beyond the moon."

All three men were in attendance at the Pentagon as Hegseth made his announcement, and the Pentagon chief said their first meeting on Project Meridian would happen immediately following the event in a sensitive compartmented information facility in the building.

States invited to bid for 'next great American' base


Hegseth invited governors to bid for their state to be the home of the "next great American" base.

"We're calling on every governor in the country and adjutant general, every tag across this great republic, to step up to the plate and bring us their best sales pitch," the Defense secretary said.

"If your state wants the honor of hosting 15,000 to 25,000 of America's great troops, show us why and how you're going to do it, cutting through the red tape, offering up the land and rolling out the red carpet for our military families," he said during the speech.

Naval Station Everett in Washington state was the most recent base built inside the U.S., opening in the 1990s. The base is home to several guided-missile destroyers and Coast Guard ships.

Hegseth said the new base will not be a "soulless government installation," arguing the Pentagon will "plan out and chart out a dynamic, self-sustaining power projection platform."

The Pentagon said the base will be off the commercial grid, featuring independent power generation, autonomous systems and advanced air defenses.

"We're talking hundreds of thousands of acres with organic power generation, modern air defenses, and cutting-edge technology, think a fortress," the secretary said. Service members will have "first-class barracks, world-class training facilities, and thriving communities with top-tier housing, school, childcare and healthcare for families."

Hegseth directed Dale R. Marks, who is assistant secretary of Defense for energy, installations and environment, to lead the Pentagon's effort to identify, evaluate, select and prepare an optimal site for the base.

"Rapid advancements in disruptive technologies, growing strategic alignment among peer adversaries, and persistent, sophisticated cyber intrusions against critical defense and homeland infrastructure necessitate a modernized, resilient posture," the Defense secretary said in a Wednesday memo.

'Fortress America' takes bases off civilian grid


Another new initiative revealed Wednesday is "Fortress America," which Hegseth claimed will be "a national insurance policy for the American homeland.

Under Fortress, which stands for "Federal Operations for Resilience, Troop Resources, Energy Supply and Survivability," every major military installation in America would generate its own power independent of the civilian grid, according to Hegseth.

"If an adversary takes down the grid by cyberattack, by sabotage, or by any means, our bases stay lit. Our aircraft keep flying. Our command centers never go dark," he said.

The effort also is meant to bring critical supply chains home, including rare earth minerals, specialty metals, semiconductors and propellants "mined in America, refined in America, built in America by American workers."

In addition, the Pentagon would build up strategic reserves of such critical needs as munitions, fuel, medicine and blood "deep enough that if the world's supply lines break — and in a real war, they're going to break — America keeps fighting anyway," Hegseth said.

To accomplish this, Hegseth said the U.S. military is "hardening every installation on American soil against cyber intrusion, sabotage and drones, and we're securing the high ground and the airwaves, our satellites, our spectrum," claiming that the DOD "will be the insurance policy for the entire nation."

New non-Ivy League partnerships for cadets


The Defense secretary also said the Pentagon will partner with five more colleges to broaden the corps of cadets.

The military training program, called "America's Corps of Cadets," will include Louisiana State University, Liberty University, Tuskegee University, Mississippi State University and Hillsdale College.

"We need more officers from academic institutions like our military academies and senior military colleges, and today we're going to make that happen," Hegseth said.

Each school will be a "distinguished military college" and will be expected to "maintain exceptionally high standards of cadet discipline, tactical instruction and military organization," the Pentagon chief said.

Military academies like West Point, Naval Academy and Air Force Academy commission most of the officers into the U.S. armed forces, followed by senior military colleges like Texas A&M and the Citadel.

Hegseth's office will begin implementation within 30 days, and within four months, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Anthony Tata will transition to become the primary office responsible for the program, according to a Wednesday Pentagon memo.

"From the Ivy Leagues to the most liberal arts colleges, our colleges and universities have become anti-American DEI [diversity, equity and inclusion] worshipping woke factories. Qualities like grit and courage replaced with political correctness and social justice," Hegseth said. "God and country traded for Che Guevara and critical theory."

Creates Office of Religious Affairs


In his last proclamation, Hegseth declared he will establish the Office of Religious Affairs at the Pentagon that "will report straight to the top."

"Cutting-edge technology ... new basing and bases ... and a better educational pipeline are still incomplete without the most essential component of our republic: faith," he told the assembled service members.

He said the Defense Department has "a sacred duty" to provide troops with "first-class religious support" wherever they're sent, bashing past administrations for treating the topic as an afterthought.

"Political correctness and secular humanism got a vote. Chaplains did not. Budgets were cut. Resourcing and manpower needs were ignored. Base chapels fell apart," Hegseth claimed. "Decisions about faith and religion were made by secular careerists in cubicles and lawyers running around with red tape."


Starting Wednesday, the Office of Religious Affairs will have "a direct line to the secretary" and will "protect budgets, demand infrastructure, and strengthen religious support," he said.


Hegseth frequently invokes his faith and has declared service members' spiritual health as "equally important" as their physical and mental health.

Earlier this year he revamped the U.S. military's Chaplain Corps, announcing that the officers will no longer wear their rank insignia, instead displaying insignia that reflects their religious affiliation — part of two major changes to the group.


Hegseth defends officer cuts


At the start of his speech, Hegseth defended his plan to cut 20 percent of generals and admirals at the Pentagon, arguing the major shake-up was long overdue at the department.

"Now the media calls that a purge. I call it accountability and long overdue, and frankly, the bare minimum. As usual, what the media levels as an accusation, I wear as an accomplishment," Hegseth said.

"You see, you can't change a culture with the same people who enabled it," he said. "Personnel is policy at every single level."

The move will impact senior leadership positions across the Army, Navy and the Air Force, coming a year after Hegseth oversaw a 10 percent reduction of general officers.

The move comes as he has already fired or pushed out more than two dozen senior military officers across the service branches, personnel changes that have unnerved congressional lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.

"You see, last year's speech was not for those generals," Hegseth said during the speech. "It was for you, the backbone of our force, the current and future leaders on the front lines."

Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. 


Wednesday, September 23, 2026

China rare earth exports to US drop before Xi-Trump meet


US President Donald J. Trump meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping in China on May 14, 2026. Credit: The White House | X

China’s exports of rare-earth magnets to the US fell last month, underscoring concerns in the Trump administration that Beijing is still squeezing flows of the critical minerals despite last year’s trade truce.

Shipments of magnets to the US dropped 21% in August to 512 tons from the month before, according to Chinese customs data released on Sunday. The industrial components — along with other types of rare-earth products — became Beijing’s greatest point of leverage over Washington in trade negotiations last year.

President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping are due to meet in the US capital on Thursday to flesh out their approach to topics ranging from trade to artificial intelligence. Ahead of that, top US negotiators signaled rare earth flows were a sticking point and may mean that the truce — which expires November — may be extended only by three to six months.

“I think a lot of it is because China has created this uncertainty,” US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said in a Monday interview with Bloomberg Television after talks in New York with his Chinese counterparts. “They have limited rare earths exports. They control them, we monitor them, and I think just saying we have full confidence and trust with each other at this point is a little naive.”

China imposed controls on exports of rare-earth magnets — used in everything from cars to consumer goods and weaponry — in April 2025, although they were subsequently eased. The industry is keenly waiting for the outcome of the Xi-Trump talks as they come before the expiration of a US-China trade truce, which includes commitments by Beijing to maintain flows of critical minerals by issuing more generous export licenses.

China hopes to offer more licenses for rare earth exports as a bargaining chip in talks, people with familiar with the matter said, without disclosing what Beijing would demand in return.

“Washington needs stability with Beijing to keep these critical inputs moving,” Chris Kennedy, lead for economic statecraft at Bloomberg Economics, said in a note. “Yet periods of calm that restore access to lower-cost Chinese material weaken the urgency for the US to break its dependence on China.”

Shipments slumped in May last year, but quickly recovered. They’re running at an average of about 504 tons a month this year, although that’s still below 621 tons in 2024 before the curbs. Chinese customs data shows that direct exports of rare earths including yttrium, dysprosium and terbium — subject to export controls — have also dropped compared with previous years.

In May, Greer gave Beijing a “passing grade” for its performance in keeping flows of critical minerals going. US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in July that China should “fully meet its commitments.” Bessent and China’s Vice Premier He Lifeng are holding talks in New York ahead of the leaders’ meeting.

Beijing Tightens Rare Earth Flow Ahead Of Washington Summit With Trump

  • China's rare earth shipments to the US fell 21% in August to 512 tons, new customs data show, days before Trump and Xi sit down in Washington.

  • Trump and Xi meet Thursday, with rare earths, tariffs and AI safety on the table after Bessent and He Lifeng held preliminary talks.

  • Barclays says Beijing will control global critical mineral mining and refining through at least 2030, keeping the leverage in China's hands.

Chinese President Xi Jinping and President Donald Trump are scheduled to meet in Washington on Thursday. UBS analysts quoted chief China economist Yu Song as saying the meeting between the leaders of the two global superpowers is largely about strategic stability and modest progress on tariffs, rare earths, and AI safety.

Political risk analyst Marcus Bischoff expects no major breakthrough but says the most realistic outcome is continuity in US-China relations as the most likely outcome. He sees cautious grounds for higher expectations following discussions between US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng ahead of the Trump-Xi summit.

Over the weekend, a Reuters report said that Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng were set to discuss advanced AI bots and the global adoption of the technology, as well as rare earths.

As Christian Keller, Barclays' global head of economics research, recently described, China's near-total control of more than 95% of critical material refining has been used as leverage against the US. Whether magnets, tungsten, germanium, gallium, or other critical materials, China has restricted their flows over the last year and a half, forcing the US into a mad sprint to secure conflict-free supplies.

Bloomberg reported the latest details on China's resource nationalism and the weaponization of critical material supply chains overnight, citing customs data released Sunday that showed rare earth shipments from China to the US plunged sharply in August.

Shipments dropped 21% from July to 512 tons, according to the new trade data. The decline leaves US supplies of components used in cars, consumer goods, and weapons as a key talking point, whether in discussions between Bessent and his Chinese counterparts or between Trump and Xi.

Bloomberg Economics' Chris Kennedy said, "Washington needs stability with Beijing to keep these critical inputs moving," adding, "Yet periods of calm that restore access to lower-cost Chinese material weaken the urgency for the US to break its dependence on China."

The latest trade data shows China's quasi-monopolistic control of critical materials can be used as geopolitical leverage.

One major problem for the US is that Barclays' Keller shows Beijing will control mineral mining and global refining of these materials through at least 2030.

Breaking Beijing's quasi-monopolistic grip has been an emerging theme of ours that includes finding producing miners with conflict-free supply chains that can deliver to the West. Those miners will be the early winners because these critical materials are the building blocks of the West's pursuit of reindustrialization, the AI data center buildout, power grid upgrades, and, of course, the incoming rearmament cycle.

By Zerohedge.com


World’s top rare earth magnet maker gives Xi leverage over US


Baotou City: Epicentre of China’s rare earth industry. Image by Matthew Stinson Creative Commons CC BY-NC 2.0

Baotou, an industrial city near the Gobi Desert, is the Silicon Valley of rare earths. Off Rare Earth Street, research institutes sit alongside a museum devoted to the minerals. Nearby, JL Mag Rare Earth Co., the world’s top maker of high-performance magnets, is building its largest plant yet — an expansion that offers a glimpse of how China plans to defend its commanding position in the supply chain.

Over the past year, the US and its allies have pledged billions of dollars to develop new sources of rare earths outside China. Indispensable to everything from missiles to electric vehicles, the minerals are a potent source of Beijing’s economic leverage. As President Xi Jinping arrives in Washington this week, rare earths are at the top of the trade agenda, with China weighing whether to expand export curbs this fall.

But as the US and others attempt to replicate China’s supply chain, Beijing is trying to redefine it. The country already dominates magnet production, and companies like JL Mag are now expanding into increasingly sophisticated components that incorporate them.

That creates a moving target. Mining rare earths is only the first step. The minerals must be separated and refined, turned into high-performance magnets and then manufactured into usable parts. Even if countries outside China secure enough dysprosium or terbium from new mines in places like Brazil, for example, they could still depend on Chinese companies — and their technology, patents and manufacturing scale — to supply fast-growing industries like robotics.

China’s rare earth magnet exports to the US fell last month, and Beijing hopes to offer additional export licenses as a bargaining chip at the summit, Bloomberg News reported.

JL Mag is Exhibit A. Just a few years ago, the company was best known for making rare earth magnets for air conditioners and wind turbines. Today, it has more than 10 times the current production capacity of its closest US competitor and has emerged as a major supplier to the EV industry, with analysts linking it to customers including Tesla Inc. and Volkswagen.

A review of JL Mag’s corporate filings and interviews with magnet makers in Asia and North America, as well as those familiar with the company’s operations, found that the scale and scope of its expansion far eclipse the nascent projects underway in the West. Little known outside the industry, the company is extending its reach from Baotou to as far away as Monterrey, Mexico, where it wants to shift some processing closer to US clients.

“JL Mag can meet the needs of its customers in a way that US competitors just can’t,” said David Abraham, principal at Materium Strata, a critical minerals advisory and market intelligence firm. “Customers can just give them their specs, and JL Mag basically presses a few buttons on their machines and out comes the product. Catching up to that is incredibly hard.”

Estimates put JL Mag’s share of the global rare earth magnet market at 10% to 20%, with its products used across the world’s top 10 new-energy vehicle brands. By 2028, it plans to add as much as 20,000 tons of annual capacity in Baotou, a 50% increase that would extend its lead in an industry where its three closest rivals are also Chinese.

The expansion is already visible. JL Mag’s Baotou site sits on the block next to Rare Earth Park, where Chinese scientists are carved into a granite wall and stainless-steel cubes embossed with chemical symbols dot the flower beds. At the factory, a recruitment flyer hangs on the front gate. The plant takes more than half an hour to walk around.

Robotics shows where JL Mag wants to go next. Last year, the company launched a business unit dedicated to humanoid robots that reports directly to its chief executive, with plans to expand its presence in the sector. Daiwa Securities has identified the firm as the sole supplier of motor rotors for Tesla’s Optimus robots. Another analyst estimates that JL Mag supplies about 80% of the magnets used in Tesla vehicles.

“They came out of nowhere,” said Constantine Karayannopoulos, the former chief executive officer of Neo Performance Materials Inc., which also operates a magnet plant in China. “To me, there is JL and then there is everybody else. They are a juggernaut. They can take business at any price.”

JL Mag referred questions about its operations and expansion plans to its exchange filings.

The company has long been on Beijing’s radar. In May 2019, Xi stopped at some of JL Mag’s facilities in southern China, touring production lines and inspecting the furnaces used to make rare earth magnets. The visit was celebrated in state media and JL Mag’s publications. To remain “undefeated in fierce competition,” Xi said, according to state media, “we must firmly grasp technological innovation as a strategic foundation.” China’s top trade negotiator, Liu He, stood at his side.

The timing and choice of venue were provocative then and prescient in hindsight. Just 10 days earlier, US President Donald Trump had hiked tariffs on Chinese goods, escalating a trade war that would punctuate his first term in office.

It would take until last year — just after Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs — for Xi to pull the trigger. China imposed export controls on rare earths, choking off supplies and threatening swaths of US manufacturing before helping force a trade truce with Washington.

Yet JL Mag has been largely unfazed. US efforts to diversify rare earth flows still face “numerous challenges,” the company said in its latest annual report. Chinese magnet makers will remain the “dominant players.”

In 2024, China accounted for about 94% of global rare earth permanent magnet manufacturing — far exceeding its share of mining — according to the International Energy Agency. That same year, JL Mag says it became the world’s largest magnet producer by both output and sales. Between Xi’s visit in 2019 and 2025, the company’s annual capacity more than quadrupled, according to its historical reports. By next year, it wants to boost that by another 50%, to 60,000 tons.

That advantage is reinforced by clusters like Baotou, where processors, magnet makers and research institutes sit just a few hours by train from the giant Bayan Obo mine. The proximity cuts logistics costs and makes it easier to share suppliers, recruit specialized workers and tap decades of expertise.

By comparison, MP Materials Corp., which operates the only rare earth mine and processing facility in the US, started producing rare earths magnets from its plant in Fort Worth, Texas, last year. After the Trump administration invested $400 million in the company, for a roughly 15% equity stake, MP unveiled plans to spend more than $1.25 billion on a much bigger magnet-making plant in Northlake, Texas, that would eventually bring its production to about 10,000 tons a year. 

That expansion would equal about a third of JL Mag’s production in 2025, without factoring in the Chinese firm’s plans to expand. 

Other US companies have made similar pledges to build magnet facilities but have little experience and capital to show for it. 

Demand, meanwhile, is surging, benefiting JL Mag and Chinese rivals such as Ningbo Yunsheng Co. Ltd. Consumption of rare earths used in permanent magnets has doubled since 2015 and is projected to rise another third by 2030, according to the IEA. Outside China, demand is expected to climb 50% by 2035, with existing and planned magnet projects meeting less than a fifth of it.

“The Western companies are still developing their technology, doing everything from scratch,” said Derek Zhang, a Daiwa Securities analyst. “The Chinese companies can ramp up capacity very easily and the cost is maybe about 1/10th.”

JL Mag was founded by industry outsiders. Two decades ago, Cai Baogui was hunting for his next business opportunity. He grew up in Jiangxi province, the southern heartland of China’s rare earths sector, but had spent his career elsewhere — first as a university lecturer and later as a senior executive overseeing plastics manufacturing operations in Dongguan.

Renewable energy caught his attention after he met the chairman of emerging wind-turbine maker Goldwind, according to a rare interview Cai gave to a Chinese news outlet in 2020. Soon after, he teamed up with two friends, Hu Zhibin and Li Xinnong, to explore making rare earth magnets needed for such machines.

In 2008, the trio launched JL Mag by uniting opposite ends of the supply chain. Ganzhou Rare Earth provided a link to raw materials, while Goldwind became an important early customer. The idea was to move beyond the mining, separation and smelting that dominated the city of Ganzhou’s rare earth industry and capture more value by turning those resources into the magnets that make technologies actually work. JL Mag’s founding philosophy, Cai said, was “long-termism.”

Success was hardly assured. Rare earth prices surged more than tenfold in a matter of months in 2011 before collapsing, according to Cai, who remains the firm’s chief executive officer. If raw materials became too expensive, he said, it would be like having “flour more expensive than bread.”

By 2013 and 2014, Cai recalled, employees were leaving and he faced a choice over whether to abandon the industry.

But by the time Xi visited in 2019 — a moment Cai said “greatly boosted our confidence” — JL Mag had emerged from the downturn with a growing business supplying magnets for wind turbines, ACs and EVs. It had also gone public in Shenzhen the previous year.

Four years later, JL Mag raised about HK$4.2 billion ($540 million) in Hong Kong, giving it access to more capital as it embarked on a massive expansion.

In the years since, government support has accompanied JL Mag’s rapid expansion. The company received tens of millions of dollars in subsidies recognized over the past three years, while local authorities have repeatedly designated its factories as major projects.

Some describe JL Mag as unusually well-positioned to weather even the stormiest stretches in relations with Washington. When Beijing’s rare earth controls disrupted manufacturers abroad last year, JL Mag was among the first Chinese companies granted a general export license. Its US sales revenue rose 40%.

The firm has for years been one of the government’s “favorite sons,” said John Ebert, the longtime US representative for magnet producer Ningbo Yunsheng, which he left this year. “That’s why JL Mag grew so quickly from almost nothing into something.”

For potentially huge new markets like robotics, the company is going all-in.

JL Mag named humanoid robots as its next major growth pillar in its latest annual report. Their joints rely on magnet-powered motors that effectively act as muscles, allowing for precise, agile movement. JL Mag is pushing beyond simply supplying these magnets to making finished components, adding another layer of the supply chain for Western competitors to replicate.

“Moving forward the company will continue to increase its investment in research and development of magnetic components for humanoid robots,” JL Mag said.

China is already an early leader in humanoid robotics, accounting for 97% of global shipments in the first half of 2026, according to one survey.

The potential is substantial. Nomura says humanoids use significantly more rare earth material per motor than EVs. JL Mag expects China to remain dominant, telling Citigroup analysts it will likely still produce 80% of the world’s magnets in 2030.

“Even if Western projects materialize, management believes they may solve the ‘availability’ issue, but are unlikely to compete with China on costs, scale, quality and customization,” Citigroup said in a February report, summarizing JL Mag’s views.

That helps explain another US strategy for reducing China’s leverage: eliminating rare earths from magnets altogether.

Niron Magnetics, a Minnesota-based manufacturer, is pursuing that approach with magnets made from iron and nitrogen. The Pentagon is backing the company as it develops factories capable of eventually producing as much as 11,500 tons annually. Looming restrictions are also helping create a market for alternatives: Starting Jan. 1, the Pentagon will stop procuring certain defense technology containing Chinese rare earth magnets.

But the economics remain daunting. Niron has seen a “massive” influx of inquiries from prospective defense customers ahead of the deadline, said Tom Grainger, its vice president of commercial and corporate development. Demand has already overwhelmed the relatively small company — before it has even begun targeting robotics.

“If you take major economic buckets like labor, or government support, you just can’t compete with China,” Grainger said.


Sunday, September 20, 2026

  

Projections: Merz's conservatives set to crash out of state parliament

20.09.2026

Photo: Bernd von Jutrczenka/dpa

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz's conservative Christian Democrats (CDU) are on the brink of crashing out of the parliament in the north-eastern state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern after latest projections showed the party falling under the 5% threshold needed to win seats. 

Broadcasters ZDF and ARD both projected the CDU to win 4.9%, down from 13.3% in the last election in 2021. The result would be a nightmare scenario for Merz, whose political future has been the source of intense speculation as his approval ratings have plummeted in recent months. 

Long the largest party in post-war Germany, the CDU has never previously failed to hit the 5% threshold in any state, European or federal election. Its record low of 9% was set in Bremen in 1951. 

Even with initial projections showing the party above the 5% mark, Merz called the situation in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern a "disaster," while continuing to insist on the need to implement his government's unpopular reform agenda. 

But falling out of the state parliament would represent a massive shock for the chancellor's party, raising fresh doubts over Merz's position after the debacle in nearby Saxony-Anhalt two weeks ago. 

Sunday's election was won by the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) on around 38% of the vote, narrowly ahead of the centre-left Social Democrats (SPD) on 35.5%. 

The CDU was not the only party hanging close to the 5% threshold: the populist Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW) was also on 4.9% in the latest projections, while the Greens were on around 5.5%.

The Left - which also defeated the CDU to win the state election in Berlin on Sunday - was on 6.5% according to the latest projections.

German far-right AfD wins second state election in major blow to Merz

21.09.2026, DPA

Photo: Michael Kappeler/dpa

The far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) won the state election in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, its second state victory in just two weeks, while German Chancellor Friedrich Merz's conservative party suffered its worst-ever showing in its 81-year history, according to preliminary results.

Merz's Christian Democrats (CDU) crashed out of the parliament in the north-eastern state with just 4.9% of the vote, down from 13.3% in the last election in 2021 and just short of the 5% threshold required to win seats.

The AfD earned around 38.2% of the vote, ahead of the centre-left Social Democrats (SPD) on 35.5%, according to the election commission.

The populist Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW) also missed parliament, with 4.8%, while the Greens garnered 5.7% of the vote.

The Left - which also defeated the CDU to win the state election in Berlin on Sunday - was on 6.5%. 

The result is a nightmare scenario for Merz, whose political future has been the source of intense speculation as his approval ratings have plummeted in recent months. 

Long the largest party in post-war Germany, the CDU has never previously failed to hit the 5% threshold in any state, European or federal election. Its previous record low of 9% was set in Bremen in 1951. 

Merz admitted the result was a "disaster" but insisted he would push forward with his government's unpopular economic and social reform package, signalling he does not intend to resign.

He conceded that it was not possible to "sugar-coat" Sunday's result, but vowed "to prepare our country for the future."

"What needs to be done now requires backbone, steadfastness and patience. I will muster these qualities - as chairman of the CDU and, above all, as chancellor of our country."

Leif-Erik Holm, the AfD's candidate for state premier, hailed a "wonderful evening" on election night, saying his party would offer to hold talks with all other factions.

Tense Berlin election finale: who is to emerge strongest in the capital?

Campaign posters of the leading candidates from the CDU, SPD and Greens for the Berlin House of Representatives election, Berlin, 15 September 2026.
Copyright AP Photo/Markus Schreiber

By Johanna Urbancik
Published on

The Left and the CDU are vying for first place, with the AfD and the Greens trailing and the SPD suffering heavy losses. An overview of parties, leading candidates, key issues and possible coalitions.

On Sunday, Berliners will vote to elect a new state parliament, the Abgeordnetenhaus, alongside the regional vote in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania. The race is wide open: the Left party and the CDU are neck and neck in the latest polls, both at around 20-23%, with the AfD at 18% and the Greens at 16% close behind. The SPD, with 10-12%, is now clearly below its 2023 result.

That means it is also unclear what the political landscape will look like after the vote.

According to recent surveys, the current black-red coalition of the CDU and SPD would no longer have a majority. The CDU’s campaign has also shifted: instead of incumbent Governing Mayor Kai Wegner, finance and culture senator Stefan Evers is running as lead candidate. Wegner announced in the summer, after months of criticism of his handling of the January power outage, that he would not run again as the party’s frontrunner.

On policy, the CDU is focusing on law and order, a more capable state and economic growth. To that end, both the police and the judiciary are to be strengthened, approval procedures accelerated, and public administration digitised.

Based on current polls, several coalition options are on the table, including a government of the Left, Greens, and SPD, or a CDU-Green-SPD alliance. Whether such constellations materialise will also depend on which parties ultimately make it into the Abgeordnetenhaus.

In the latest ZDF projection (source in German) published on 11 September, the Left stands at 23%, the CDU at 21%, the AfD at 17%, the Greens at 16%, and the SPD at 10%. On that basis, both a Left-Green-SPD alliance and a CDU-Green-SPD coalition would have a numerical majority. The current BerlinTREND (source in German) survey by Infratest dimap paints a similar picture: the Left at 21%, CDU at 20%, AfD at 18%, Greens at 16%, and SPD at 12%.

SPD fighting to stay in government

The Social Democrats have now slipped to between 10 and 12% in the polls. In 2023, they were still at 18.4%. Their lead candidate is Berlin SPD co-chair Steffen Krach from Lower Saxony, who is under investigation by the Hanover public prosecutor over allegations linked to a donation of 9,900 euros to the Berlin SPD. Krach rejects the accusations and is continuing his campaign under the slogan "Wieder Berlin" – "Berlin again" – despite them.

Substantively, the SPD, like most other parties, is focusing on affordable housing, investment and a functioning infrastructure. In its manifesto, it promises 100,000 new homes over the next legislative period and aims to increase the share of social housing in new-build projects from 30% to 50%. It also plans to invest in roads and bridges, schools, hospitals, and public transport.

Rents, housing shortages and new-build projects are among the top issues in Berlin’s 2026 election campaign Copyright AP. All rights reserved.

Affordable housing is also a central campaign issue for the other parties. According to Berlin’s Senate Department for Urban Development, Building and Housing, more than 100,000 new homes are missing in the capital. On top of that comes demand for additional housing for the roughly 200,000 people expected to move to Berlin by 2040. This translates into an average need for around 20,000 new homes per year in the coming years.

The CDU is relying above all on faster construction and more homeownership. The Greens place greater emphasis on housing oriented towards the common good. The Left, by contrast, is calling for large housing portfolios to be brought into public ownership. The AfD and FDP reject this approach and likewise want to prioritise private construction and less regulation.

The Left eyes the Red Town Hall

The Left has gained significant support since the 2023 election. At the time, it stood at 12.2%; in current polls, it is around 21-23% and is now one of the two strongest parties in the race.

Lead candidate Elif Eralp is campaigning primarily on rents and social policy. The Left is calling, among other things, for the socialisation of large housing stocks and stronger tenant protections. In public transport, social benefits and climate policy, the party also wants the state to play a bigger role.

Campaign poster of the Left’s lead candidate, Elif Eralp Euronews

The Berlin Left’s campaign is, however, overshadowed by a debate over how the party deals with antisemitism and the Middle East conflict. One trigger was a performance by rapper Dahabflex at a campaign event organised by the Neukölln district branch of the Left at the end of August, where he chanted "Yalla Yalla Intifada, Westbank, Palestine, Gaza" and "Death to the IDF" (death to the Israeli armed forces).

CDU lead candidate Evers accused Eralp of not acting decisively enough against antisemitic tendencies in her party. Eralp rejects that and stresses her commitment to combating antisemitism and protecting Jewish life. The Berlin Left has also adopted its own guidelines on dealing with antisemitism and says it wants to protect Jewish life in the city. As T-Online reports, the party’s Berlin executive invited the Neukölln district spokespeople to an extraordinary meeting at which "a unanimous decision was taken that Dahabflex’s performance was a mistake and that we reject all forms of violence", according to Eralp.

AfD also on course to double its vote in Berlin?

The AfD has also made strong gains in Berlin. In the 2023 repeat election, it took 9.1%; it now stands at 17-18% in most polls. In the latest BerlinTREND survey by Infratest dimap, it reached 18%, making it the third-strongest force behind the Left and the CDU. Compared with 2023, it has almost doubled its share of the vote.

AfD lead candidate Kristin Brinker Euronews


The party is once again led by Kristin Brinker, who is running as the AfD's top candidate for the third time. As with the Greens, however, Brinker is not widely known. In the current Infratest dimap poll (source in German), around two-thirds of respondents say they do not know Brinker, or do not know her well enough to judge her. The picture is similar to the Greens’ Werner Graf.

In the campaign, the AfD is focusing above all on migration and internal security. The party wants a halt to the admission of asylum seekers in Berlin and the "immediate deportation of all of the up to 20,000 people in Berlin who are required to leave the country".

For subsidised and state-owned housing, the AfD wants to allocate it using a points system so that it primarily benefits Berliners who have lived in the city for a long time and work in "system-relevant professions" such as the police, fire service, health care, or refuse collection. Otherwise, building should be encouraged by scrapping the property transfer tax or speeding up planning approvals.

Despite its high poll ratings, the party remains excluded from any role in government: CDU, SPD, Greens and Left all rule out forming a coalition with the AfD.

Will the Greens be the kingmakers?

The Greens are currently polling at around 16

5, clearly below their 2023 result of 18.4%. Nevertheless, they could play a crucial role in forming a government: both a Left-Green-SPD alliance and a CDU-Green-SPD coalition would have a mathematical majority in current projections.

Lead candidate Werner Graf is trying to present the Greens in a less confrontational way during the campaign. He wants to avoid the major rows of recent years, such as the dispute over Friedrichstrasse. Graf himself told rbb that the Greens "have learned from that". Instead of sharply polarising demands, he is adopting a more pragmatic tone and presenting himself as someone who can bring different parties together.

In the election arena, shortly before polling day, both the Left's lead candidate, Eralp, and the SPD frontrunner, Krach, explicitly courted cooperation with the Greens. Graf signalled openness to an alliance and called for a "progressive government". He rules out any cooperation with the AfD.

Volt, FDP and BSW battling to enter parliament

Alongside the larger parties, Volt, the FDP and the BSW are also competing to enter the Abgeordnetenhaus. For all three, the five% threshold is the decisive hurdle. Volt is standing in a Berlin Abgeordnetenhaus election for the first time and is focusing above all on digitalisation, administrative reform and faster housing construction.

The FDP wants to return to the state parliament with its lead candidate, Christoph Meyer, and is campaigning for less regulation, more private investment, and homeownership. In the final stretch, Meyer is also backed by party chairman Wolfgang Kubicki, who has appeared with him in Berlin on several occasions. 

Campaign posters for BSW, Volt and the FDP in Berlin Euronews

The Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW) is polling at 3-4% and therefore has to fight to clear the threshold for the Abgeordnetenhaus. The party is running in a Berlin Abgeordnetenhaus election for the first time and is led by Alexander King and Michael Lüders.

In this campaign, foreign and peace policies are playing an unusually prominent role for a state election. King is calling for an end to sanctions against Russia and for negotiations with Moscow. BSW also wants to improve relations with Russia and is targeting Russian-speaking Berliners. The party, moreover, wants to prevent the Russian House on Friedrichstrasse, operated by Russia, from being closed.

Vandalism: campaign posters damaged

During the current election campaign in Berlin, the police have recorded more than 1,300 incidents of damaged campaign posters between 2 August and 16 September.

Election posters in Berlin: AfD posters particularly often affected by vandalism Euronews


Posters belonging to the AfD are particularly frequently affected, according to Bild, which asked the Berlin police for figures: across the city, 801 cases of criminal damage to AfD posters have been recorded so far. Next come the CDU with 148 cases, independent candidates or lists with 102, the Left with 95, the SPD with 88, Alliance 90/The Greens with 37, the FDP with 30, BSW with 16, Volt with 13 and the ÖDP with two cases.




INTERVIEW


As far right gains ground in Germany, Berlin election tests Europe's centre


Berliners go to the polls on Sunday to elect the city-state’s parliament and district councils, in a vote taking place just two weeks after the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) secured a historic victory in the eastern state of Saxony-Anhalt. The implications could extend beyond Germany.


Issued on: 19/09/2026 - RFI

An election poster for the far-right, anti-immigration party Alternative for Germany (AfD), reading "It's time for free opinion", in Magdeburg, 7 February 2025. © Ebrahim Noroozi / AP




The AfD won 43.8 percent of the vote in Saxony-Anhalt on 6 September, falling three seats short of an absolute majority in the state parliament.

The result has intensified debate about the strength of the democratic centre in Germany and beyond.

The AfD has received support from figures associated with United States President Donald Trump, including alt-right billionaire Elon Musk, while also positioning itself alongside Hungary’s former leader Viktor Orban and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

In France, Marine Le Pen is leading in polling ahead of the 2027 presidential election, with recent surveys giving her between 29 and 36 percent in the first round.

Against this backdrop, what does the AfD’s breakthrough mean for Germany, Europe and the future of the political right?

RFI spoke to Bernd Hüttemann, secretary-general of the German chapter of the European Movement, a non-partisan civil society organisation that promotes European integration.

Bernd Hüttemann, secretary-general of the European Movement Germany, interviewed in Paris, 12 September 2026. © RFI/Jan van der Made

RFI: Berlin’s elections are taking place shortly after the AfD’s historic victory in Saxony-Anhalt. What does that result mean for German politics?

Bernd Hüttemann: It is something very dark, because it has really started a new era in Germany. For the first time, there is a right-wing extremist party that could potentially take power at state level.

Saxony-Anhalt is a small state, but the Länder [federal states] are powerful in Germany. They are responsible for areas such as education, policing, security and a large part of public administration. So the result will change things at that level.

It will not necessarily change the balance of power at federal level, because Saxony-Anhalt has relatively few votes in the Bundesrat [upper house of the German parliament]. But if the democratic majority becomes nervous and starts following extremist ideas, that can become very dangerous.

AfD candidate Ulrich Siegmund speaks in front of a poster reading "It starts here" at a rally after the Saxony-Anhalt regional elections in Magdeburg, eastern Germany, 6 September 2026. @ AP Photo/Matthias Schrader

Merz ‘deeply shocked’ as far-right victory tests Germany’s political firewall

RFI: If you look at the map of the 2025 election results, it appears that AfD is most popular in former East Germany. How do you explain people who lived under an authoritarian communist system now voting for an extreme-right party?

BH: There was always an East-West divide. As a young West German in the 1980s, I saw a great deal of propaganda saying that East Germans were different from us. They were portrayed as living under a very bad social system and an undemocratic regime.

After the Berlin Wall came down, the divide became more complicated. Around one-third of East Germans moved to the West, particularly young people, women, skilled workers and liberal-minded citizens.

At the same time, many West Germans moved east and took senior positions. Judges, professors and many other professionals came from the West. It is not pleasant for people in the east to feel that there is a ruling class imposed from outside.

East German workers build up a section of the Berlin wall, on 15 August 1961. @ AFP

That does not mean that all of these voters are anti-democratic. But many people have little experience of taking social responsibility outside the state. They do not want to join political parties or associations. They simply want an easier life, especially after the hardship they experienced before the Wall fell.

So this is not only about an East-West divide. It is about whether authoritarian ideas can find fertile ground. That is certainly more likely in eastern Germany.

RFI: Do you believe Germany’s political diversity can act as a safeguard?

BH: Yes. Germany is a very diverse country. It contains Catholic, Protestant, atheist, Muslim and East German traditions, among many others. Its political system is also complex: it is federal, decentralised and based on cooperation with many social forces.

That makes Germany complicated and slow, but it also makes it more resilient. I would not be excessively concerned. The important thing now is for democratic movements and parties to stay together.


Map of the 2025 German election results, with the Christian Democrats (CDU, in grey) dominating in former West Germany and the Alternative for Germany (AfD, shown in blue) dominating in what was communist East Germany. © Image generated via Perplexity

RFI: How much influence do Trump-style populist politics and US-based propaganda have on the AfD and German politics more broadly?

BH: The AfD has a problem here. Particularly in eastern Germany, there is not a strong appetite for American influence. On the other hand, the party has very few friends. It has Vladimir Putin. Viktor Orban congratulated the party. There are links with MAGA supporters and with Elon Musk.

The party’s psychology is perhaps this: nobody likes us, the public rejects us and everybody is trying to exclude us. So we align ourselves with people who are even more extreme.

But it could backfire. People in western Germany, as well as many liberals in the east, do not necessarily like this association.


US billionaire Elon Musk attends the AfD's election campaign kickoff in Halle via video link, on 25 January 2025. @ AP - Sebastian Willnow

RFI: Marine Le Pen is leading polls ahead of France’s 2027 presidential election. Could the AfD’s breakthrough influence the discourse here?

BH: The fear of Germany that existed during my childhood is not as widespread as it once was. But now there is a kind of flashback. People are asking: Germany was one of the most liberal countries in Europe in recent decades, including on issues such as refugees. Is it now showing its ugly face again?

That may also explain Marine Le Pen’s efforts to distance herself strategically from the AfD in the European Parliament. There was a well-known meeting in Paris with Alice Weidel, the AfD leader, where Weidel reportedly entered through a back door to avoid being photographed with Le Pen.

If France, a proud nation, moves towards the right, it will want to draw a clear line between itself and German extremism.

But that is not good for Europe, because we do not need a return to nationalism. We do not need national answers to nationalist movements in Germany. We need European answers – particularly when it comes to war, China and the United States. Europe has to remain united, and it is also developing closer links with Canada.