Historian Revisits 1970s Left-Wing Antisemitism and Unsolved Arson Case in Munich

Historian Wolfgang Kraushaar spoke at an event in Hanover on Thursday about left-wing antisemitism and unsolved crimes from the 1970s. The discussion, organized by Against Forgetting—For Democracy, focused on when criticism of Israel becomes antisemitic. Kraushaar, a former researcher at the Hamburg Institute for Social Research, presented findings from his long-standing work on the subject.

Kraushaar revisited claims from his 2005 book The Bomb in the Jewish Community Center, naming Dieter Kunzelmann as the main perpetrator of the 1970 Munich arson attack. He also identified Peter Urbach as an arms supplier and police informant. According to his research, Gudrun Ensslin, a member of the Red Army Faction (RAF), hinted at Irmgard Möller's involvement, while Ulrich Enzensberger allegedly drove a getaway car.

The Federal Public Prosecutor's Office took over the case in 2013, suspecting a link to an earlier attack on a Munich judge. A witness had confessed in 2012 and named key figures, leading investigators to treat the arson as an antisemitic act targeting Jews collectively. Kraushaar, however, did not address a recent Der Spiegel report tying the attack to a known neo-Nazi.

During his talk, he also highlighted Henryk M. Broder's role in exposing left-wing antisemitism in the 1970s. Kraushaar suggested psychological factors might explain why some left-wing activists held antisemitic views. He admitted feeling isolated in 2005 when he first presented his findings at a conference hosted by Germany's domestic intelligence agency.

Criticism of his work has persisted. The neues deutschland newspaper accused him of fabricating quotes and defaming Enzensberger. Kraushaar stood by his claims, arguing that police had failed to arrest the suspected arsonist.

The event in Hanover brought renewed attention to unresolved questions about the 1970 Munich attack. Kraushaar's research continues to spark debate, particularly over the roles of left-wing extremists and the handling of the case. His arguments remain contested, with critics challenging both his methods and conclusions.