The Left Berlin News & Comment

This is the archive template

Category: Articles

19 December 2018: Revolution in Sudan

This week in working class history


16/12/2025

On 19 December 2018, the Sudanese government announced that the price of a loaf of bread would triple, from one Sudanese pound to three. Similar price rises followed for other basic goods, on the recommendation of the IMF. The subsequent protests were not merely economic, but a revolt against the 30-year rule of the dictator Omar al-Bashir. In Atbara—a marginal town but historically a centre of militant rail workers—protesters burned down the offices of Bashir’s National Congress Party.

The Atbara protests quickly spread to several cities, including the capital, Khartoum. The main organising force was the Sudanese Professionals Association (SPA), a coalition of members from 17 banned trade unions, including teachers, doctors, engineers, pharmacists and other white-collar workers. The SPA was supported by youth and women’s organisations. On 25 December, it mobilised thousands for a march on the presidential palace in Khartoum. The march was met with tear gas, rubber bullets and live ammunition.

In April 2019, protesters began an indefinite sit-in around military headquarters. On 11 April, Bashir was removed from power. The army dissolved parliament and attempted to retain control, announcing that a Transitional Military Council would rule during a so-called “transitional” period. Protesters again took to the streets, forcing the council’s leader, Awad Ibn Auf, to resign. The movement continued, culminating in a general strike on 28–29 May, followed by another strike two weeks later.

On 3 June, in what became known as the Khartoum massacre, government forces killed over 100 protesters at the sit-in in Khartoum, raped men and women, and threw dozens of bodies into the River Nile. Yet the protests persisted. In August, opposition leaders negotiated a rotten power-sharing agreement with the military council. On 25 October 2021, a military coup dissolved the transitional government and abducted civilian ministers and revolutionary leaders.

The success of the counter-revolution led to war between the Rapid Support Forces—successors to Bashir-backed Janjaweed militias—and the Russian-backed Sudanese Armed Forces. Neither faction represents the revolutionary moment of 2018. That legacy survives instead in the neighbourhood-based resistance committees that emerged after a split within the SPA. Initially organising mutual aid during Covid, these committees are now developing an independent political programme. The Sudanese revolution is not over.

Apartheid cemented in the shadow of genocide

The overlooked front of the war: the judicial system


15/12/2025

The opening of the winter session of the Knesset of Israel on October 28, 2024.

As the genocide in Gaza rages on, Israel’s ultra-right government is using the chaos of war to further entrench the apartheid regime both in Israel proper and in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. Since October 2023, more than 30 new laws have been passed that deeply infringe on fundamental rights, criminalise Palestinian life, and shift Israel’s legal order decisively toward an authoritarian ethnonationalist regime. 

Over the past two years, the extremist Netanyahu government has dramatically expanded the institutionalised apartheid against the Palestinian people. From October 2023 to July 2025, the Knesset passed more than 30 laws targeting the basic freedoms of Palestinians and subjecting millions to collective punishment. This is the conclusion of a new report published by the Israeli human-rights organisation Adalah, which focuses on legal protection for Palestinians. The “cumulative effect” of this flood of racist laws is “to further entrench and deepen Israel’s regime of apartheid and repression over all Palestinians under its control—both in Israel and in the Occupied Palestinian Territory”, Adalah writes.

Collective punishment: Deportations by ministerial decree

This barrage of racist and discriminatory laws joins dozens that came before it, through which successive governments since the founding of the state have degraded Palestinians to second-, third- and fourth-class citizens—now numbering over 100 in total. The cluster of apartheid laws rushed through since the start of the genocide covers a wide range of political and social domains. “Beyond criminalizing legitimate political, social, and cultural expression,” Adalah writes, the new laws authorise the state to carry out streamlined deportations, further restrict Palestinian marriages or family reunifications, withdraw funding from schools, cut social-security benefits, lower the threshold for detentions, and restrict access to critical media.

The “Deportation of Families of Terrorists Law”, passed in November 2024, allows the government to deport family members of persons deemed “terrorists” by the state—even if they are merely suspected of “terrorism”. Such deportation orders can remain in place for decades. It is obvious that the principle of individual culpability, fundamental to any bourgeois legal system, is being replaced by the concept of collective guilt: what matters is not a person’s own actions but who their family are. And it is not the courts—already under political fire—that decide, but the interior minister by a mere administrative decree: an increasing concentration of executive powers as befits an increasingly authoritarian state. During the reading of the bill, it was made explicitly clear that no one should assume that the families of Jewish “terrorists” would ever be targeted—for example, the relatives of the fascist who murdered Yitzhak Rabin: No, this criminal deportation law applies exclusively to Palestinians.

Orwell’s thought police

Freedom of expression and press freedom—already severely eroded—have been further mutilated: “The only democracy in the Middle East” now draws freely from Orwell’s thought police. A new law criminalises the “denial of the events of October 7, 2023”. Yet, to this day, the Netanyahu government refuses to appoint an official commission of inquiry or publish an “official narrative” of the events of that day, Adalah notes. The far-right government also blocks a UN investigation into allegations of sexualised violence allegedly committed by Hamas and other groups on that day. More than two years after the attack, it remains unclear to what extent the Israeli military implemented the “Hannibal Directive” on October 7—and thus how many of the deaths that day were caused by Israeli forces deliberately bombing their own people to prevent their capture.

The law criminalises a vague “denial” without clarifying what the object of this denial even is—arbitrariness and abuse are built in by design. “The law is designed to cultivate fear, stifle public debate, and suppress discussion on a matter of public concern,” Adalah concludes. Mere expressions of opinion or questioning of the executive’s nebulous narratives are criminalised. A special task force imprisoned hundreds of Palestinians inside Israel in the first weeks after the attacks for “likes” and posts on social media.

Shielding the public from reality

Another extremely dangerous law criminalises the consumption of certain media that the Israeli state dislikes. Anyone who indulges in the “systematic and continuous consumption of publications of a terrorist organization” faces up to one year in prison. Such consumption, the law claims, may “create a process of indoctrination—a form of self-inflicted ‘brainwashing’”, ultimately increasing “the desire and motivation to commit an act of terror to a very high level of readiness”. Again, everything is deliberately left vague, nothing is specified, leaving room for anything—and everything.

It is obvious that the targets here are not the fascists and demagogues on Channel 14—the home channel of Netanyahu’s Likud party—or other genocide-aligned outlets in the Israeli media landscape. It is Al Jazeera and similar platforms, which show a more realistic picture of the often-indescribable crimes committed by their government to those who are willing to see, and which have already been heavily criminalised. In May 2024, all Al Jazeera operations were banned inside Israel, and even their reporting in the occupied territories was prohibited. Netanyahu thus aligns himself squarely with notorious despots, mass murderers, and war criminals such as Egypt’s torturer-in-chief el-Sisi, Saudi Arabia’s butcher MbS, or his Emirati partner-in-crime MbZ. Under the current circumstances, the government is aggressively attempting to extend the Al Jazeera ban to other international media organisations; even the Israeli liberal daily Haaretz is being attacked wherever possible.

Multi-front war: Palestinians as targets

Other aspects of the more than 30 new apartheid laws include, among others, the intensification of discriminatory allocation of state resources and social benefits, the systematic denial of fair trials, violations of prisoners’ rights, and the firing of teachers or the defunding of Arab schools on the grounds of their alleged “terror support”. In November, the Knesset passed a first reading of a bill introducing the death penalty exclusively for Palestinians. The fascist Israeli police minister Itamar Ben-Gvir appeared at a committee meeting on this bill wearing a pin on his lapel—a modified version of the yellow ribbon for the hostages: in this case, showcasing a yellow noose. “A legal system organized along ethnic lines that denies fundamental rights to a racial group constitutes a crime under the 1973 Apartheid Convention,” Adalah concludes soberly. With the recent wave of apartheid legislation, “the Knesset has and continues to ingrain recognition of Jewish citizens as the sole collective entitled to the full spectrum of individual and collective rights, and to further codify in Israeli law a regime of Jewish ethno-national supremacy”.

Since the ultra-right government took office in December 2022—a coalition that includes self-described fascists—everyday anti-Palestinian racism in Israeli society has exploded, fuelled and encouraged by the government itself. The escalating discrimination against Palestinians has also served to unite deeply fractured political parties: several of the new apartheid laws were passed with the support of opposition parties.

Israel is waging a multi-front war against Palestinians with tailor-made weapons for each front: In Gaza, the population is being physically annihilated by means of genocide. In the West Bank, containment, displacement, disenfranchisement, and apartheid are the tools of choice, in close collaboration with settler fascists whose pogroms and raids contribute to ethnic cleansing. Inside Israel-proper, the fight, by now, largely takes the form of lawfare—the political weaponisation of the bourgeois legal system. The fourth front is outsourced territorially and is gratefully embraced by Israel’s allied right-wing governments in the West, above all in the USA, Germany, the United Kingdom, and France. They use the opportunity to sharpen their own authoritarian profiles, attacking Palestinians in the diaspora with batons, tear gas, and prison cells.

Emboldened, equipped, and shielded by its last allies—collaborators—in the West, the Israeli state is escalating its brutal violence against Palestinians on all fronts. What remains is an utterly unrestrained government whose frenzy against an enemy marked for destruction pushes the boundaries of the conceivable every single day.

“161” or how we should think of anti-fascism

Approaches to anti-fascism


14/12/2025

Antifa graffiti on a brick wall

161. AFA. anti-fascism.

Nowadays we are on the verge of collapse—collapse of everything we know about political activism, peace, and the seemingly stable system of international relations. We are closer than ever to the moment where new forms of fascism and feudalism will appear and the only way we can prevent this is by moving.

At first it sounds strange but in order to escape the cage of this new-wave, right uprising we have to move towards the revival of Antifa movements around the world and talk about the troubles around such uprisings. The far-right is on the rise and we have to worry about it, because at the same time the left is far from its glory.  But what exactly is anti-fascism and how do we understand it?

For some reason or another, it’s not easy to answer this question. To make it easier we have to start from some theory of anti-fascism as a concept. And for that, Simone Weil is a useful starting point. But first, I should offer a brief biographical overview of Weil to better understand her ideas. Weil is a French philosopher, university tutor, revolutionary, Marxist and last but not least, a well-known antifascist, who lived until the early 1940s.

 The only great spirit of our time, as Camus called Weil, states that “The relative security we enjoy in this age, thanks to a technology which gives us a measure of control over nature, is more cancelled out by the damages of destruction and massacre in conflicts between groups of men.” This is applicable to our current epoch and is a perfect example for the repetitiveness in human history.

Today we think we govern ourselves, others, and nature justly, but the reality doesn’t show the same. There is a significant alienation from labor, thought, and reason that fuels xenophobia, racism, fascism, and hatred. This alienation is accompanied by an intellectual decadence, which makes this issue even harder to solve. By admitting this, we are forced to confess that we have no other choice—we have to fight.

As Hannah Arendt argues in her concept of the banality of evil, fascism does not always emerge through monstrous figures but through ordinary individuals who stop thinking critically. This transforms anti-fascism into an ethical duty—an active refusal to become passive instruments of oppression.

HOWEVER, anti-fascism is not an absolute solution. It is not a panacea; rather it is more of a proto-concept. It does not give a solution to any of the described difficulties—though it is an exemplary first step, it won’t be enough. And proof for such a controversial statement can be found in Weil’s work. She states that anti-fascism in the popular narrative stands for “anything rather than fascism; anything including fascism, so long as it is labelled communism.” If we need to objectify Weil’s definition, we can illustrate anti-fascism as an ouroboros—a snake eating its own tail.  

Herbert Marcus helps us understand this confusion through his idea of “repressive tolerance.”  He points out that tolerant societies allow intolerant ideologies to flourish until they destroy democracy from within. anti-fascism thus becomes a protective boundary—a sui generis dedication not to extend tolerance to the utmost.

Fast forward to today we can see that fascism is not dead, it is here, but in new forms. Raging Zionism, neo-fascism, and different far-right ideologies are here to stay.

As Walter Benjamin noted, fascism turns politics into aesthetic spectacle, using symbols, images and myth-making to seduce the masses, to look more attractive to them. Today’s far right weaponizes digital culture and social media the same way. Through performative  violence, visual propaganda, and viral narratives. Effective anti-fascism has to therefore dismantle not only the ideology, but also the spectacle that sustains it.

We might say that anti-fascism itself is not the solution in its current form. We have to decide whether or not we want a better future. Fighting for new Antifa movements is the only way we can manage the crisis.

In order to make a difference we have to develop this ornate conception. We have to give it form and content. Trump’s witch hunt against Antifa, the lessons from working and stable antifascist movements such as Greece’s, and, last but not least, rethinking the ideas of political theorists like Emma Goldman, Simone Weil, Gramsci, and Ernest Barker can all serve as catalysts.

Antonio Gramsci in particular provides a pivotal framework. His theory of “cultural hegemony” reveals that fascism thrives when dominant groups shape the norms of society. Fascism becomes possible when cultural and intellectual spaces surrender. anti-fascism must operate not only in the streets, but in classrooms, media, literature, and collective imagination. It must build counter-hegemony—alternative structures of meaning that are based on solidarity, equality, and critical thought. This involves creating institutions, networks, and cultural practices that challenge the ideological rise of this neo-fascist wave. Without this cultural struggle, political resistance will always be incomplete.

Jean-Paul Sartre deepens this by reminding us that in moments of moral crisis refusing to act is itself a choice, a choice that supports the oppressor. Anti-fascism therefore, I think, becomes a form of responsibility; a form of commitment.

Only through continuing the fight can we keep ourselves, our societies, and our rights. We fight; therefore we are. Conceptualize, create, unite.

Propaganda, absolute evil, and cultural imperialism

In the West, fantasy triumphs over reality


Today, Hitler symbolises absolute evil: evil without moral restraint, a force capable of perpetrating the most unthinkable crimes, and which can only be defeated by brute force: war. Many politicians and leaders have been compared to Hitler. This comparator is recurrent when denouncing cruelty or authoritarianism. The idea that Putin is the new Hitler of our time has a special appeal and makes sense to many fed by the Western propaganda machine. This identification is with absolute evil. Another great ‘teaching’ from the indoctrination industry of Hollywood: evil is not negotiated with, it is fought. This is the hegemonic narrative that we hear repeated daily in the Western media, supposedly to justify excessive militarism in Europe. 

The brainwashing machine of the Western press feeds this idea that we live in a world of heroes and villains. They decide who the villains are and who the heroes. And from this perspective, the ‘West’ and its political leaders are the good guys in this story. And mind you, they are not just ‘good guys’ and ‘well-intentioned’, but ‘heroes’ – who oppose the real-world villains represented by „autocrats“ and dictators, such as Putin, Maduro, and Xi Jinping. We can definitely discuss how democratic the societies are in which these leaders rule. Still, this tendency to permanently recall the evil that drives those leaders is like equating reality with a fantasy. It is another sign of the infantilisation of Western politics, which paints a picture of good versus evil, like a Hollywood script. In this script, interests do not drive international politics; there are no nuances, no grey areas. The evil leaders want to destroy the Europeans who so vigorously defend morality and human rights in the world. It is heroic Europe that defends itself against the Russian invader, or so they claim.

Upholding the idea of absolute evil represented by Putin and the leaders of the „other side“ goes hand in hand with the supposed moral superiority of the West. Similarly, militarisation, surveillance, and repression against the internal enemy are justified and necessary to control forces threatening European integrity.  

One side note, the idea of evil represented in a person or group of people is a fantasy, or at least a distorted projection (See Hannah Arendt’s banality of evil). In analysing the Nazi bureaucracy, Arendt showed that this banality and cruelty are expressed in less spectacular ways. Cruelty becomes part of everyday life, in the bureaucratisation of crime, and the routinisation of murder. The Nazis perfectly embodied this type of regime.  It was not so necessary for its officials to fiercely hate Jews (or anyone they considered ‘worthless’). Instead, they had to perform their duties well, follow orders, and demonstrate obedience to the system. Crime is not only driven by hatred, but by obedience and silent complicity.

 In an irony of history today, the trivialisation of evil, the systematisation of crime, and the routinisation of murder are unambiguously expressed in Israel’s genocidal policies against the Palestinian population. Israeli State terror is expressed in its rampant army that exposes its crimes on social media; in its legal system that maintains apartheid and surveillance in the occupied Palestinian territories; in the legalisation of violence and rape against Palestinian prisoners; in the fanatical settlers who attack Palestinians in the West Bank daily. All these and many other examples show the routinisation of state-led violence. Without a doubt, fascism reigns in that country and is accepted by a large part of its population. It is, they say, a necessary path to ‘resolve’ the Palestinian question and build ‘Greater Israel’.

But the „evil“ that the Western ‘free world’ is fighting is Putin. Meanwhile, Netanyahu is assured impunity. This is typical Western hypocrisy, to which we are sadly accustomed. Despite the apparent brutality of the Israeli regime, Western elites have done their utmost to ignore the genocide in Gaza, while presenting leaders like Putin as the absolute evil.

But this narrative in the West presents problems. Where does Donald Trump fit in? The liberal progressive view is that he is considered a dangerous ally of these ‘other’ autocratic leaders. His attempts to end this conflict may have momentarily saved Europe from a major conflagration with Russia  (doomsday clock). Trump’s decision to dismantling USAID shows one big difference between Democrats and Republicans when it comes to the projection of imperial power. Trump reveals the true face of a decadent, indebted, and financialised empire that has opted for threats, brute force, and military force as a method of negotiation and persuasion. The best example of this shift is the just-released National Security Strategy, which outlines new pathways to global hegemony and a renewed Monroe Doctrine.

Europe, clings to the kind of soft power that Trump wiped out in one fell swoop. European leaders have never had any problems with the imperialist policies of their great master. They were willing to go to war in the name of ‘freedom’ and ‘democracy’,  with a few exceptions such as Iraq. Europe has been a trustworthy partner for US hegemony. Europe’s eagerness for war, not only makes it indistinguishable from the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) but also ensures the continuity of its position as a loyal subject of the empire. European leaders are confused and resent having lost their great ally. While Trump shows his true face as the ‘great master,’ relentless and cruel to his allies and lackeys. In fact, Trump and his administration’s contempt for Europe is undeniable.

But Europe could still save itself if it chose more wisely with whom to ally in this new multipolar order. Perhaps now is the time to rethink its relationship with the master and pursue its own goals. Those may not necessarily align with Washington’s interests, but do align with those of its own citizens. Perhaps a little rebellion against ‘Daddy’ Trump would even restore some dignity to this bunch of obedient children.

But Europe remains stubbornly stuck in its fantasy world. Instead of learning the lesson that, in geopolitics, it’s all about interests — and not morality, as the Germans love to think — they prefer to portray Trump as an idiot manipulated by the superior intelligence of Putin and Xi. But despite their criticism of Trump for his attempts to end the war in Ukraine, they remain obedient buyers of everything the American military-industrial complex has to offer—new war toys for when Russia supposedly invades Europe in 2029.

Unmasking American cultural imperialism

The general public, especially in Europe, needs to understand how American cultural imperialism operates in the world. This colonisation of the mind is manifested in the crude distinctions between good and evil that permeate Western politics today, which requires the continued demonisation of Russia and China.

Meanwhile, the United States projects a heroic image of defending superior values as the German sociologist Bernd Hamm writes:

“The US has successfully managed to implant into the brains of perhaps the majority of human beings a self-portrait of brave heroes fighting fiercely for freedom, democracy, and the rule of law wherever there is a need to fight. Reality, however, cannot be further away from that. In fact, and certainly after the nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, it has been the most ruthless, most egomaniacal, most brutal actor, the real rogue state.”

(Hamm, Cultural imperialism. 2005: p.20).                 

Cultural Imperialism is an expression of soft power. And we know and should have in mind all the images of heroism, kindness, and goodness that the empire projects through its propaganda machine while destroying whole societies in the name of “freedom” and “democracy”. 

I write these lines from a Latin American standpoint, with only a minimum of historical memory, knowing what the empire has done in the past and what to expect from it. Latin America has always suffered intimidation, harassment, and attempts to destabilise its economies and provoke ‘regime changes’ – a euphemism for military coups followed by cruel dictatorships. For that, there will always be local leaders willing to do “that” job, pursuing the empire’s interests. Today’s ‘sons of bitches’ of the West, the Netanyahus, Al Jolani’s, Corina Machado’s, and Selenesky’s, will be protected by Washington and its allies until they are no longer of use to them.

In Europe, the brainwashing of the cultural imperialism industry also involves the complicity of its elites. This ensured them juicy profits when a new market was opened by force, at gunpoint. The entry of Chinese capital into Latin America has exasperated the European political elite. One effect of multipolarity seems to be that the so-called “developing” world no longer looks to Europe as its great example. In fact, many will ask themselves – What is wrong with Europeans? Have they not realised that the world has changed? 

I know it is a little unfair to talk about “Europe” as a homogeneous bloc, as we must differentiate between the political elite and its citizens. Its political elite, which is desperately trying to drag Europe into another war, is very unpopular. At least in Germany, we slowly see public resistance to preparations for war. But given the intensity of NATO propaganda to lead Europe into a direct confrontation with Russia, it is not enough. Especially compared to other historical moments, such as the „eighties“, when the peace movement was strong and loud.

Within this propaganda war, politics goes hand in hand with the mainstream media. While in the West, the media claim to report ‘facts’ and ‘truth’, while accusing their enemies of the opposite. That is, the Russians and the Chinese spread misinformation, manipulate, distort, and lie. Supposedly, the Chinese feed us algorithms through TikTok that expose the crimes of the Israelis in Gaza and the West Bank, or show that Russia is winning the war. But we should ask why European leaders are so desperate to silence independent journalists, podcasters, and uncomfortable interviewers. Europe has a problem with the freedom of opinion it claims to uphold. There is a brutal contrast between what Social Media exposes and what the so-called Western media tells us. To control the narrative in the West, political powers seek to control digital platforms such as Telegram or TikTok.  As these images do not align with the narrative being peddled in Europe, Brussels’ desperation to control it is already palpable (see the Chatcontrol project).  

We must not forget that the goal of Western propaganda is to demonise and dehumanise the “enemy”.  It seeks to prove that a war against Russia is necessary, even if it destroys Europe once again. To counter this, we must unmask these attempts to portray Russians as ‘barbarian hordes’, Chinese as the ‘growing eastern threat’, migrants as ‘eternal foreigners’, Palestinians as ‘the usual terrorists’, and the left as the ‘internal enemy’. Let’s begin by not falling into that trap. 

Germany vs. the Ulm 5

Five activists face harsh pre-trial detention for opposing Germany’s complicity in Israel’s genocide


12/12/2025

Ulm5

On 8 September 2025, five people of various nationalities entered the premises of Elbit Systems in the city of Ulm, in southern Germany. While filming themselves with their faces uncovered, they carried out a non-violent action aimed at preventing the continuation of the genocide in Gaza. In subsequent videos, they clearly explained their demands and why they chose the German location of the Israeli weapons manufacturer Elbit Systems—a company responsible for a significant proportion of the weapons and technology used in the genocide in Gaza, as documented in this UN report. They waited to be arrested by the police without resisting or attempting to flee. Since then, these five Irish, British, German, and Argentinian-Spanish individuals have been held in pre-trial detention.

This direct action—involving alleged non-violent destruction of property—highlighted not only the inaction of the German government, a signatory to the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, but also its active participation in the genocide through diplomatic support, arms exports to Israel, and the production on German soil of weapons directly used in the genocide of the Palestinian people. Germany, which faces several legal proceedings both domestically and at the International Court of Justice in The Hague for its complicity, has responded with the full force of its institutional repression against these five individuals.

Since their arrest on the same day—when they were read their rights, including the statement, “you may make a phone call to a lawyer and a family member or friend”—the detained activists, their lawyers, and their support networks have reported repeated abuses and denials of basic rights:

  • Being forced to undress and held in cells for hours wearing only underwear (no bras).
  • Being detained for 30 hours without adequate food.
  • One of the five being prescribed medication by a doctor and then denied access to it by police for 20 hours.
  • Being interrogated by police without a lawyer present.
  • All five individuals being denied access to lawyers until minutes before their first hearing, despite repeated requests and repeated attempts by lawyers to reach them.
  • At least one activist being denied access to their lawyer for two weeks.
  • At least one activist being denied any contact with family or friends for a month.
  • Being separated from one another after the hearing and held in separate prisons across five different cities.
  • Several activists being held in solitary confinement, locked in their cells for 23 hours a day.
  • Severe restrictions on visits from family and friends, with some allowed only one hour per month.
  • Restrictions on phone calls, limited exclusively to contact with lawyers.
  • Denial of release on bail despite no criminal record and no risk to public safety.
  • Incoming letters being withheld for four weeks or longer before delivery.
  • Being subjected to strict surveillance of all communications.

The German state is treating these five activists as dangerous criminals and is seeking to charge them under Section 129 of the German Criminal Code—forming or belonging to a criminal organisation—an offence carrying a potential sentence of up to five years in prison. Given the lack of evidence, prosecutors are struggling to substantiate this charge, resulting in prolonged pre-trial detention under the harsh conditions described above.

Defence lawyers argue that there have already been multiple procedural irregularities in both the investigation and bail process. This strongly suggests political pressure and motivation, consistent with the German state’s recent treatment of the pro-Palestinian movement.

Accusations under Section 129 have previously been used against climate activists, for which Germany has been reprimanded by the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights defenders. In response, the German government issued a pathetic and revealing letter acknowledging surveillance of activists, albeit without the use of infiltrators.

The blatant abuse of power and intimidation by the German state has led the lawyers representing the Ulm 5 to publish the letter below. In it, they demand not only the immediate release of their clients from pre-trial detention, but also an investigation into Elbit Systems Deutschland for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed worldwide, particularly in Palestine.

It is essential that these five activists receive fair treatment and a fair trial. To that end, national and international attention must be drawn to this case, which risks becoming yet another blow to Germany’s already weakened rule of law.

In recent years, fuelled by Germany’s aiding and abetting of the genocide in Gaza, the rule of law has been profoundly politicised through the doctrine of Staatsräson. The German state’s unconditional—and legally actionable—support for Israel has translated into the systematic criminalisation and persecution of anti-genocide activists. Given the movement’s strength, persistence, and moral clarity, the pro-Palestinian movement has become the most socially, politically, and judicially persecuted movement in Germany since reunification.

In the future, when it is too late, it will be clear that the genocide of the Palestinian people was not stopped in the courts, but in the streets—through direct actions that struck at the heart of the international genocidal network.


Press release – 26th November 2025

Defence team for the “Ulm 5” calls for investigation into Elbit Systems Deutschland’s possible involvement in war crimes committed by the Israeli army in Gaza

The Ulm 5 – who include an Irish citizen and two from the UK – have been accused of breaking into the site of the German subsidiary of Israeli arms manufacturer Elbit Systems, in Ulm, south-west Germany, on 8th September 2025, and of damaging property.

As their defence lawyers we call on the Stuttgart Public Prosecutor’s Office also to investigate the potential involvement of Elbit Systems Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG in war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in Gaza.

Our clients’ motivation was to prevent such crimes. Elbit Systems Deutschland GmbH und Co KG is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Israeli company Elbit Systems Ltd. Elbit Systems Ltd profits considerably from the war in Gaza and supplies a large proportion of the drones used there. Elbit Systems Deutschland must therefore also account for its shared responsibility for war crimes in Gaza. Yet more than two months after the incident, the Stuttgart Public Prosecutor’s Office has not conducted any investigations in this regard.

The actions of the Ulm 5 were clearly aimed at a legitimate goal, namely, to end the killing of civilians in Gaza. Only property damage was caused; no persons were injured.

The defence demands that our clients be released immediately from pre-trial detention, which is being enforced with heightened restrictions, such as strict surveillance of phone calls, post, and visits. Some of the accused are on 23-hour lock-in with access to books and activities denied.

Not only is the enforcement of pre-trial detention disproportionate to the alleged offence, but furthermore there is no compelling reason for pre-trial detention at all. An assumption of flight risk is absurd, given the circumstances: our clients recorded themselves during the action and then permitted themselves to be arrested by the police without resistance. A video of the action was posted online publicly. Clearly, their intention was not to evade proceedings, but rather to face them, so they can explain the reasons for their actions.

The members of the defence team undersigned are available to answer any questions.

Dr. Maja Beisenherz, München   info@beisenherz.eu, 0177 / 70 95 812

Mathes Breuer, München   breuer@kanzlei-abe.de, 0175 / 52 46 963

Benjamin Düsberg, Berlin  mail@rechtsanwalt-duesberg.de, 0157 / 30 30 8383

Rosa Mayer-Eschenbach, München   eschenbach@kanzlei-abe.de, 0176 / 65 35 9443

Christina Mucha, Memmingen   info@kanzlei-mucha.de, 08331 / 69 08 136

Matthias Schuster, Berlin   mail@anwalt-schuster.de, 0176 / 24 75 8230

Martina Sulzberger, Augsburg   kanzlei@anwaeltin-sulzberger.de, 0821 / 50 87 3850