“Let’s start implementing this with the withdrawal of US troops from Germany,” he told supporters in Saxony.
Nearly 40,000 American troops are stationed in the country, which hosts more than a dozen major US military installations, including its European Command headquarters.
Mr Chrupalla’s comments put him at odds with the Trump administration, particularly over whether America should be able to use German bases for its military activities in the future.
Praising Spain’s decision to block its bases from being used by the US to attack Iran, Mr Chrupalla said: “That’s exactly the right thing to do. Spain is not interfering in this war.”
Germany’s Ramstein Air Base is being used by US forces as a hub to co-ordinate drone and missile strikes against Iran, attracting criticism from opposition politicians who fear the country could be targeted in retaliation.
The AfD’s response rests on a clear insistence that this is not Germany’s war. In a recent speech at the party conference in Saxony, co-chair Tino Chrupalla argued that Berlin must not allow itself to be drawn into foreign conflicts.
Increasingly AfD leaders say that Germany does not benefit from the “protection” afforded by the United States. The latest war underscores the point. Germany does not determine the course of events, yet it will inevitably absorb the fallout. Party leader Alice Weidel has warned that a prolonged conflict could have devastating economic consequences, driving inflation, raising energy costs, and further weakening an already strained industrial base. These risks are no longer theoretical. Energy prices in Europe have surged dramatically, placing direct pressure on German households and industry through higher fuel and heating costs.
For some Germans, political responsibility appears to be ambiguous, but for AfD the current crisis reflects a broader issue: Germany’s political class has become more responsive to international expectations than to the needs of its own citizens, strengthening the appeal of the AfD’s position.
The consequences for Germany of the Iran war are not simply imported from abroad but result from deliberate policy choices that have left the country vulnerable to precisely this kind of external shock. Years of energy policy decisions have weakened the industrial base, reducing resilience and increasing dependence on volatile global markets. These pressures are not temporary disruptions, but long-standing vulnerabilities now exposed under geopolitical stress. Reliable and affordable energy sources have been replaced by more expensive and politically dependent alternatives, including liquefied natural gas from the United States and the Gulf region. If the war sparks a refugee crisis, Germany’s porous borders could allow unvetted outsiders to enter.
What is required instead is a fundamental reorientation. Lower energy taxes, the removal of carbon pricing mechanisms, and a reassessment of sanctions that restrict supply would provide immediate relief and improve long-term stability. Without such changes, the risk is not only temporary economic hardship, but a sustained erosion of Germany’s industrial base.
I assume those are the sanction imposed upon Russia.
AfD appears to be in support of a Germany First policy. Less meddling in other countries and less meddling in German affairs by foreign nations.
BERLIN/NEW YORK, Oct 30 (Reuters) - Germany’s far-right AfD party, long shunned at home, is courting support in Washington, leveraging ties to M AGA personalities who have risen to senior roles in the Trump administration.
The Alternative for Germany (AfD), classified as extremist by Germany’s domestic intelligence service and ostracised by mainstream parties, has held meetings with senior U.S. State Department officials in recent months — a rare move for a far-right opposition party in an allied country, according to a current and a former U.S. official and a German government source.
Elon Musk speaks at Germany’s AfD campaign launch as thousands protest the far-right party
The USA is the ONLY country to invoke Article 5. Meaning we’ve BENEFITED from NATO from a defense standpoint. It also gives us forward bases across Europe. It has helped maintain peace in Europe, a kinda big deal seeing as how twice in the 20th century we got pulled into large, big wars on that continent. It has created a stable environment for trade, finance and investment. It allows us to influence, in a peaceful manner, a continent to our whims.
The US leaving NATO would be a GIFT to Russia and Putin. Possibly China.