Olaf Scholz meets country heads: The next historical chapter is rather thin

It took a long time, but that’s just how history is written. He does believe, said a bed-ready but no less self-confident Chancellor Olaf Scholz at half past two in the morning, “that this is a very historic moment.”

The federal and state governments had undertaken hard political work to agree on a tightening of migration policy; their negotiations lasted a total of 17 hours. At the end of November 7, 2023, there were a number of individual measures, such as a payment card for asylum seekers or accelerated returns of people without the right to remain. And a satisfied Chancellor: all levels of the state had come together, the head of government rejoiced.

Their next meeting on migration is this Wednesday, but a “very historic moment” is not in sight. Instead, Prime Ministers who are still at odds and a Federal Chancellor who considers his part of the agreement to have been fulfilled. Will there be another fight over what to do next?

Olaf Scholz sees the states as having a duty

The possible showdown will take place in the Hessian state representation in Berlin, at the invitation of Prime Minister Boris Rhein, CDU, who has chaired the Prime Minister’s Conference since October. Chancellor Scholz also joins the country leaders’ deliberations for two hours to talk about migration policy. In view of the loudly expressed expectations in the run-up to the meeting, especially from the Union-led countries, the schedule seems ambitious.

Too little, too slow, too ineffective: that’s roughly how the Christian Democrats’ lament can be summarized. It was sung by host Boris Rhein, among others. The Hessian head of government wants to see concrete results and “make every effort to limit irregular migration,” he told “Bild am Sonntag”. The measures taken so far are apparently not enough for him. Also on Sunday, Bavaria’s Prime Minister Markus Söder repeatedly called for an “integration limit” that would make it clear “up to what level” integration could be afforded. Otherwise there is a risk of parallel societies. The public statements are obviously intended to increase the pressure on Chancellor Scholz in migration policy.

And the Chancellor? Lets the demands, which are also motivated by party politics, roll off. On Monday, deputy government spokesman Wolfang Büchner said bluntly: “From the Chancellor’s perspective, all points for which the federal government is responsible have been initiated.” The Chancellor would be happy “if the federal states now follow suit.” Büchner could “like to list a little more” about what has already been done.

Translated, this means: There is no need for further resolutions. It’s not the fault of the instrument box, but rather the users – i.e. the federal states.

Not surprisingly, they see it a little differently. But how exactly? According to reports, the so-called A states (led by the SPD, including left-wing Thuringia) and B states (Union and green Baden-Württemberg) are still at odds about what specific demands they have on the federal government. In any case, there were several draft resolutions in circulation on Tuesday, but no unified paper yet. This is not unusual; position papers develop as dynamically as the meetings themselves. An example:

In a draft resolution dated March 4th, the star exists, it is called for “further measures to be consistently implemented if necessary” in order to sustainably limit irregular migration. If necessary, further measures: This reads much less aggressively than an earlier draft resolution from state circles. In a paper dated February 26th, a number of additional measures were spelled out that needed to be implemented. Among other things, the list of safe countries of origin should be expanded to include Algeria, Armenia, India, Morocco and Tunisia. This point no longer appears in Monday’s version.

Which doesn’t mean that the point won’t come up in the discussions or could find its way back into a final document, possibly as a note in the minutes. Basically, nothing is set in stone, nor is it whether there will be a consensual decision at the end of the discussions.

On Tuesday, the countries’ different expectations of the meeting emerged. Representatives of the SPD in particular are less bold than the Union-led states and strike a much more conciliatory tone. Ultimately, the comrades have no interest in making their own chancellor appear inactive.

“Always marking hard lines only helps the populists”

A lot has progressed since the last meeting, praised Lower Saxony’s Prime Minister Stephan Weil. “However, some decisions still have to be implemented or have yet to take effect,” said the SPD politician to the German Press Agency. As a result, Weil also sees a certain amount of catching up to do, especially when it comes to securing the EU’s external borders. However, polarizing discussions “about new demands before the impact of the ones made can even be estimated” would not help. This can be seen as a hint to the Union to slow down.

Thuringia’s Interior Minister Georg Maier, SPD, also calls for more objectivity. Since the Prime Minister’s Conference in November, a lot of progress has been made in migration policy, Maier told the star. For example, further migration agreements have been concluded and internal border controls have been introduced. “On the other hand, focusing solely on more returns, as the CDU countries in particular are doing, doesn’t help us.”

It is just as important that the reform of the EU asylum system finally comes into force or that asylum seekers get work quickly. “I advise everyone involved to discuss migration policy as objectively as possible,” said Maier. “Always marking hard lines instead of presenting solutions only helps the populists.”

The real conflict lies in how the states position themselves in relation to the federal government in migration policy. Which measures have proven to be effective and where do improvements need to be made? As can be heard, the Prime Ministers of all parties largely agree on the success of internal border controls.

However, the question of whether asylum procedures can be carried out in transit or third countries in the future could be a source of conflict. The Union is in favor of it, the SPD is very skeptical. The topic had already caused serious disruptions to operations at the November meeting. The presentation of the joint country position had to be postponed by several hours. Finally, it was agreed that the federal government would examine corresponding procedures – but no result is expected this Wednesday.

A sign of a “historic moment” like the one Chancellor Scholz claims to have experienced at the last federal-state meeting on migration? Rather not. A benighted head of government is also not to be expected.

The meeting of the Prime Ministers was originally supposed to take place on Thursday without the Chancellor. Due to the rescheduling, Scholz now comes to the conference table, but only for the agenda item “Discussion between the heads of government of the federal states and the Federal Chancellor on refugee policy”. For two hours. The next joint federal-state meeting is scheduled for June.