AfD and the Alliance Sahra Wagenknecht (BSW) plan to use Saxony-Anhalt’s parliament to demand a new diesel deal with Russia. The motion cannot reopen Germany’s energy trade or lift European sanctions, but it could turn a state-level debate into a national challenge to Berlin’s Russia policy.
Reports published on 11 October 2026 said the two parties would bring the proposal before the Landtag on 14 October. They want the German federal government to negotiate an agreement for diesel supplies with Moscow, modelled on a recently reported arrangement between Russia and the United States.
The initiative is built around a claim advanced by both parties: that European Union sanctions against Russia have failed and are damaging the economies of EU member states. That is their political argument, rather than something established by the proposed resolution itself.
A state parliament with no power to deliver the demand
Even if the Landtag backs the motion, it cannot order the resumption of Russian fuel imports. Foreign policy, international agreements and the broad direction of Germany’s relations with Moscow fall under the authority of the federal government in Berlin. A regional legislature also cannot suspend or bypass the EU sanctions framework through its own vote.
The constitutional limitation is not a side issue. It defines what the resolution can and cannot do. It would be an appeal to the federal government, not an instruction with the force to authorise diesel deliveries or compel negotiations with Russia.
That does not make the proposal politically irrelevant. A state parliament can give a national dispute a formal setting, draw media attention and require the federal government to answer. AfD and BSW can then point to the debate as evidence that opposition to sanctions extends beyond their own parliamentary groups, even though the measure has no direct route to implementation.
For Berlin, the choice is equally clear. It can dismiss the motion as outside the Landtag’s competence while addressing the economic case put forward by its sponsors. Or it can allow the debate to develop into a wider argument about energy prices, industrial costs and whether Germany should restore links with Russia.
A narrow alliance across Germany’s political divide
AfD and BSW normally occupy opposing positions in Germany’s political landscape. The AfD is a right-wing populist party, while BSW, led by Sahra Wagenknecht, emerged from the radical left. Their cooperation here does not amount to a general alliance. It reflects a specific overlap on sanctions and on the question of renewed economic cooperation with Russia.
That overlap gives both parties a useful platform. The AfD can present the proposal as an attack on the federal government’s economic and foreign-policy choices. BSW can frame it as opposition to what it portrays as a costly policy imposed without sufficient regard for households and businesses. Their broader programmes remain different, but the diesel proposal allows them to share a parliamentary stage.
The parties’ wording also shifts the centre of the debate. Instead of beginning with the purpose of sanctions or the wider European policy towards Russia, it begins with fuel supplies and the alleged economic damage caused by restrictions. That framing can make a question of foreign policy appear to be a practical dispute over prices and competitiveness.
Whether sanctions are effective is a matter of political and economic debate. The planned motion does not resolve that question. Its purpose is to use the claim of failure as a reason to press for a bilateral energy arrangement, despite the fact that Germany’s sanctions policy is tied to decisions taken with European partners.
Berlin rejects the proposed precedent
A representative of the German government said, while commenting on the recently reported diesel arrangement between Russia and the United States, that Germany would not remove its existing sanctions against Russia. Berlin has therefore indicated that it does not intend to copy the reported agreement.
That response leaves the resolution with little prospect of producing the policy it requests in the short term. The federal government can rely on its authority over foreign affairs and its stated commitment to maintaining the sanctions. AfD and BSW can use the same impasse to accuse Berlin of refusing to reconsider a policy they say is harming the German economy.
The likely value of the motion lies in that confrontation. A measure that cannot change the law or authorise imports can still create a record of dissent, force a response from the federal government and help two otherwise competing parties present themselves as challengers to the established Russia policy.
It also tests the boundary between regional representation and federal decision-making. Saxony-Anhalt can host the dispute, but it cannot settle it. The decisive question is whether the debate remains a symbolic gesture in the Landtag or becomes part of a broader campaign for renewed German energy ties with Russia.
The report on the planned resolution is available at t.me/dwglavnoe/69526.
