I imagine you remember Tim Schramm, a young German man who joined the Ukrainian army and whom I interviewed for La Voce del Patriota nine months ago. Schramm is a member of the AfD, Alternative for Germany, a party that has taken a stance against Ukraine and in favor of the Kremlin’s narratives, so his service on Ukraine’s behalf literally caused quite a stir. After his return from the front lines, party officials demanded that he sign a document in which he resigned from all his party positions and pledged not to run in any elections until September 30, 2026. He was also ordered not to give interviews or make public statements about the war in Ukraine. But Schramm refused, stating that he had fought for what he believed in and that he had no regrets.
His refusal led to expulsion proceedings initiated, among others, by MEP Hans Neuhoff, a pro-Russian politician who has justified Russia’s aggression as a “defensive act against NATO.” However, Schramm also received support, such as that of Bundestag member Rainer Kraft, who stated that his service in Ukraine deserved “respect.” Contrary to what many had assumed, the expulsion process failed, and Schramm was elected as an AfD city councilor in his hometown of Wuppertal on September 14. But it seems that what some pro-Russian members of his party failed to achieve, the German prosecutor’s office might be able to accomplish.
Last December, Chay Bowes, a pro-Russian Irishman based in Moscow who works for Russia Today, shared an image on X of soldiers from the Azov Brigade holding torches and described Ukraine as “a greater threat to Europe than Russia will ever be.” Schramm, who regularly clashes with pro-Russian propagandists on social media, shared Bowes’s image with the following caption: “Photo-based. We Germans can learn a lot from the Ukrainian national movement.” This trivial incident was reported to the German police. Upon his return from a humanitarian trip to Ukraine, Schramm received a court summons.
The reason for the complaint was that, by sharing the photo from Bowes’s original post, he had shared the Azov Brigade symbol, which was visible on a Ukrainian soldier’s shoulder patch. The Azov emblem resembles the German “Wolfsangel,” a symbol that is banned in Germany if used in the context of the Third Reich, but which is much older and permitted in its traditional forms; in fact, it is used as a border mark in Lower Saxony and is part of the heraldic emblem of the state and of the Hirschmann Hunters’ Association, dedicated to the breeding and training of Hanoverian hounds. The most absurd thing about this whole affair—aside from the fact that Germany is providing weapons and funding to the Ukrainian army and that Azov is its most renowned elite unit—is that, in mid-May 2025, members of the German Green Party and other political groups welcomed a delegation from the Azov Brigade to the Bundestag. The Ukrainian unit has also met with the German military, the Bundeswehr, and is authorized to hold recruitment events in Germany.
The police concluded that it was not necessary to open an investigation because Azov is not banned in Germany and its symbol is only punishable when there is a direct connection to Nazism, which is not the case with the Ukrainian army’s elite unit. “The display of the Wolfsangel is not directly linked to a far-right organization in Germany. Therefore, whether its use constitutes a crime here is questionable,” the report states. However, the public prosecutor’s office, which is under the government’s authority, disagreed and determined that the connection to the Third Reich was that the soldiers were carrying torches, a common sight at SS or SA rallies. Following that “logic,” one must assume that the sharp-witted officials at the German prosecutor’s office haven’t seen the footage of the farewell military parade in honor of Angela Merkel; otherwise, they would have arrested the former chancellor.
Ignoring the police and common sense, the prosecution sought a conviction for “glorifying Nazism.” Schramm was not given the opportunity to defend himself in court because the judge simply handed down a sentence based on the prosecutor’s request and fined him 1,200 euros. In addition to the financial penalty, Schramm risks losing his job and his position as an elected city council member in Wuppertal, and he is now listed in the “Bundeszentralregister” (Federal Central Register) as a convicted felon, which could jeopardize his humanitarian work in Ukraine.
Schramm has decided not to pay the fine and has filed an appeal against the ruling; if the prosecution proceeds with the case, he will appeal to a higher court. “This case really has nothing to do with Azov or Ukraine, but rather with where German politicians place their priorities. The most important thing is to persecute and undermine political opponents,” says Schramm, who is certain that this would not have happened if he were a Green Party council member.
What is the point of the German government supporting Ukraine in the face of the invasion and trying to raise public awareness of the need to join the military to defend Germany against future attacks, only to then persecute those who have had the courage to defend Ukraine on the ground? What sense does it make to insist on the threat Russia poses to all of Europe, only to then lend credibility to Russian propaganda? It makes no sense at all, and it is also deeply immoral. As Schramm points out, his case is proof that many German politicians prioritize attacking their political rivals over the values they claim to defend.
