“De-escalation now has absolute priority”

There the climate protection package Fit-for-55-Package, but also central questions about displacement, asylum and the rule of law in Europe are discussed. “The AfD, which questions the EU, would certainly not have been in good hands in this committee.”

Read the whole interview here:

Ms. Dröge, the number of corona cases has been falling slightly for days. Is the fourth wave under control?
In my opinion, three reasons are decisive for the lower number of cases. On the one hand, the recently decided measures and, above all, the 2G rule. On the other hand, the increasing number of booster vaccinations – and especially that people behave cautiously. But it is still far too early to give the all-clear. The Omikron variant presents us with a new situation. The proportion of the new variant in the number of cases in Germany is not yet high. However, countries like Great Britain show that this can change very quickly.

Will stricter measures be necessary by the turn of the year?
It is now important that the measures decided last week are implemented very quickly and closely monitored and that pharmacists and dentists can now also vaccinate. Anyone who wants to can get vaccinated. We have also introduced compulsory vaccinations, for example in nursing homes and clinics, with which we can better protect people at a particularly high risk of developing a serious disease. If necessary, however, we will adapt the measures at short notice if necessary.

What measures do you mean?
We will make this dependent on the course of development. We will also wait for the meeting of the Expert Council and discuss the results in the group. The pandemic teaches us that there is no point in ruling out action.

Would it be wrong to abolish the obligation to test for those who have been boosted?
In principle, I think it is understandable to set incentives for booster vaccinations. Nevertheless, I think rapid tests also make sense after the booster vaccination in order to be able to continue to protect vulnerable groups well.

The conflict between Russia and Ukraine are coming to a head. How likely do you think a military invasion is?
We look at Russia’s actions with great concern. Foreign Minister Baerbock also made this clear at the G7 foreign ministers’ meeting. If Russia continues to violate Ukraine’s territorial integrity, there must be consequences.

For example?
We in the EU will have to think about tough economic sanctions if Russia continues to crack down on Ukraine. The discussion about the exclusion of Russia from the Swift financial network is pending when nothing else works. The most important thing, however, is that we have to try diplomatic channels to relax the situation.

Do we need arms deliveries to Ukraine?
We stand by Ukraine’s side in solidarity. Discussions about de-escalation are now absolute priority. Arms deliveries do not contribute to this.

And can that be maintained? The threat to Ukraine is obvious.
We rely on diplomacy and economic sanctions to defuse the conflict. We should be careful not to intensify conflicts in scenarios and thus contribute to an escalation, but do everything we can to calm the situation down.

If the conflict with Russia and Ukraine worsens, is it an option not to let the Nord Stream 2 Baltic Sea pipeline go online?
If the situation on Russia’s part continues to escalate, this would have severe economic consequences. In doing so, we will of course take a look at Nord Stream 2, especially since an agreement between Germany and the USA provides for just that. It would be the wrong signal to want to put the pipeline into operation. Apart from that, Nord Stream 2 does not currently meet the requirements of European law at all.

In addition to the corona and Russian crises, there is another dominant topic: climate change. Will the traffic light manage to accelerate here?
Absolutely. We are going to take a turn. The coalition agreement makes it possible to get into the turbo when it comes to climate protection: for example, by expanding renewables to a share of 80 percent of electricity generation by 2030, area targets for wind energy, and an early phase-out of coal.

Is it a mistake to do without the traffic and construction departments? Both are ministries that are crucial in containing the climate crisis.
For us Greens, the expansion of renewable energies is one of the core issues of this legislative period – the Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Protection is therefore a very central key department. Without the expansion of renewable energies, which this department under the direction of Robert Habeck will take care of, we will not make progress in the other sectors either. E-cars also need clean electricity, and industry needs it anyway.

Do you have an immediate program?
The parliamentary group will go through the implementation of the coalition agreement in all areas and will provide feedback to the government and ministries as to which measures must be tackled as a priority.

Until when does this happen?
We’ll do that at the beginning of the year. Our working groups are currently being constituted, but the first meetings are due to take place at the beginning of 2022 and we can start working on specific draft laws.

Why did the traffic light allow the Interior Committee to go to the AfD? The Greens preferred to pull the European Committee.
The European Committee is a very central committee for the next legislative period. The Fit-for-55 climate protection package is being negotiated, which incidentally is a strong anchor in our coalition agreement. Central issues relating to flight, asylum and the rule of law in Europe are decided in this committee, which is why this committee was a high priority for us. The AfD, which questions the EU, would certainly not have been in good hands in this committee.

More: How the Greens are repositioning themselves in the Bundestag – and what criticism there is