> AfD leaders frequently take positions favorable to the Kremlin, favoring a renewal of economic ties and gas imports and a cease of weapons aid for Ukraine. Their political opponents, however, have frequently accused them of acting not from conviction alone — but at the behest of Moscow. Greens lawmaker Irene Mihalic, for instance, last month called the party Russian President Vladimir Putin’s “trojan horse” in Germany.
If Politico has a an article calling the Green party's opposition to nuclear power a "position favorable to the Kremlin", I couldn't find it.
> Why would you expect to find that? It doesn't make sense.
Can you explain why it doesn't make sense? Closing nuclear plants, which forces replacing them with fossil fuels, which come from Russia, seems quite plain to me, and was entirely predictable (and was in fact predicted) ahead of time. Can you point out where I am making an error?
> AfD leaders frequently take positions favorable to the Kremlin, favoring a renewal of economic ties and gas imports and a cease of weapons aid for Ukraine. Their political opponents, however, have frequently accused them of acting not from conviction alone — but at the behest of Moscow. Greens lawmaker Irene Mihalic, for instance, last month called the party Russian President Vladimir Putin’s “trojan horse” in Germany.
If Politico has a an article calling the Green party's opposition to nuclear power a "position favorable to the Kremlin", I couldn't find it.
Why would you expect to find that? It doesn't make sense.
And accusing Politico, an Axel Springer brand, of being biased for the German green party is quite ironic.
> Why would you expect to find that? It doesn't make sense.
Can you explain why it doesn't make sense? Closing nuclear plants, which forces replacing them with fossil fuels, which come from Russia, seems quite plain to me, and was entirely predictable (and was in fact predicted) ahead of time. Can you point out where I am making an error?