A day of drama in the Bundestag

RARELY HAS the Bundestag known such drama. On January 29th, to scenes of uproar, a tiny majority of German mps backed a five-point plan to curb irregular immigration. The non-binding motion was introduced by Friedrich Merz, head of the centre-right Christian Democrats (cdu) and the favourite to take over as chancellor after the election on February 23rd. Among other matters, it proposed permanent controls on Germany’s borders and a “de facto entry ban”: the rejection of any immigrants lacking papers, including asylum-seekers.

That was controversial enough. The Social Democrats (spd) and Greens, who rule in a minority coalition, said the proposals violated eu and German law. What tipped the row into pandemonium was that the motion passed only with backing from the hard-right Alternative for Germany (afd)—even though the cdu had packed the text with poison pills painting the party as a Putin-loving threat to democracy.

Olaf Scholz, the spd chancellor, compared Mr Merz to Viktor Orban, Hungary’s strongman, and called his decision to accept afd support “unforgivable”. The Greens’ Robert Habeck spoke of a “steep path to the abyss”. Mr Merz said he “regretted” the fact that the afd was needed, but blamed the governing parties for refusing to support him. Only one party was satisfied. Alice Weidel, the afd’s co-leader, hailed “a great day for democracy”.

The backdrop to the drama was the murder last week in Aschaffenburg, a town in Bavaria, of two people by an Afghan who should have been deported. Similar incidents in recent months have jangled Germans’ nerves, after years in which annual asylum claims have exceeded 200,000, overwhelming local authorities.

Following the attack, Mr Merz said he would impose his entry ban on “day one” of his government, adding that coalition partners would have to agree. A flurry of political machinations and bitter debates ensued. After Mr Merz said he would not let afd support dissuade him, tens of thousands took to the streets in protest.

Nor is this chapter over. On January 31st the Bundestag will vote on a further cdu motion, this one legally binding, to expand police powers and restrict the rights of some migrants to bring family to Germany. It also looks set to pass with afd votes.

Whether all this constitutes a violation of the anti-afd “firewall” that binds Germany’s mainstream parties is doubtful. Mr Merz did not co-ordinate with the afd, and retains his commitment to veto coalitions with the party. This week’s spectacle was made possible only because the collapse of Germany’s coalition in November left a majority of seats in opposition hands.

Yet two questions hang over the man seeking Germany’s highest office. The first is on his political judgment. Mr Merz’s team insist that the only way to undermine the afd is to hang tough on illegal immigration. But most analysts think inflaming the migration debate will help the afd. It may also put off centrist cdu voters, 73% of whom reject working with the afd. “This is fatal for the cdu,” says Peter Matuschek of Forsa, a pollster. Nor will the votes change policy. Even if it passes the Bundestag the cdu amendment will fail in the Bundesrat, the upper house.

The gambit could also snarl up coalition talks. As The Economist’s new election model suggests, Mr Merz will probably have to negotiate with the spd or Greens (or possibly both). Neither is likely to agree to rewriting Germany’s constitutional right to claim asylum. By defining his proposals as non-negotiable, Mr Merz risks having to eat his words even before taking office. That would only confirm many observers’ fears that he is too impulsive for the job. “He knows this is a high-risk strategy,” says an aide.

The second question is on Mr Merz’s ideas. His pledges to restore Germany’s position at the heart of Europe are hard to square with a unilateral vow to close its borders. (Austria’s chancellor has already cried foul.) The cdu claims eu law allows governments to supersede European rules in “emergency” situations. But, notes Svenja Niederfranke, a migration expert at the German Council on Foreign Relations, European judges have always rejected bids to pull this lever—and in Germany’s case, illegal entries have anyway been falling.

Mr Merz is not wrong that most Germans want a tougher approach to illegal immigration. But he now faces charges of proposing bad ideas with no prospect of passing that risk damaging his party while weakening a crucial political taboo. With three weeks to go, Mr Merz’s big polling lead has left it his election to lose. Some in his ranks may now be getting nervous. ■

To stay on top of the biggest European stories, sign up to Café Europa, our weekly subscriber-only newsletter.