Election campaign
Who wants what about migration and how should that match?
“Humanity and Order” in migration policy, the parties of the democratic center are striving to all of them. However, there are differences. This is clearly evident in these days.
In addition to economic doldrums and inflation, migration policy has become one of the most important campaign issues. If you look at the concepts of the parties on border protection, refugees and family reunification, there should be difficult coalition negotiations after the election date on February 23. The FDP, which has to worry about their re -entry into the Bundestag, gets a conversation as a bridge builder.
What is it all about?
The Union wants even more people to be rejected at the German borders – even those who want to apply for asylum. In addition, according to the ideas of the CDU and CSU, the federal police, for example at train stations – can provide for deportation in their area of responsibility – for example at train stations.
According to the Union, people with subsidiary protection status should only be allowed to bring family members to Germany in exceptional cases. That would affect up to 12,000 people a year. Because there is currently a contingent regulation for this group, according to which a maximum of 1,000 relatives are allowed to move to people with subsidiary protection. This restricted protection applies to people who are not recognized as refugees, but provide valid reasons why they face serious damage when they return to the country of origin – for example through civil war.
Germans are always allowed to bring their close relatives to themselves. In principle, knowledge of the German language is required for spouses. The rules for EU citizens are also relatively generous. Foreigners from non-EU countries who live with a settlement permit in Germany must ensure living space, health insurance and the livelihood of their close relatives. Recognized refugees and entitled to asylum do not have to meet these conditions if they want to bring relatives to them.
SPD, the Union’s Greens and Leftists rejected suggestions from the Union on migration issues in the Bundestag last week. BSW and AfD voted for it. There were different opinions among the FDP MPs.
The SPD and Greens have their own legal proposals for migration policy, for which there was no longer a majority in the Bundestag after the traffic light coalition partner FDP has left. This includes suggestions on how Germany should convert the reform of the common European asylum system (GEAS) into national law.
What should the GeAS reform change and why was it decided?
States at the EU external borders such as Greece and Italy have been particularly affected by irregular migration for years. This also applies to states such as Germany and France, where a particularly large number of asylum seekers want to find admission – for example because they hope for better care or job opportunities there, or because relatives or friends already live there. The so-called Dublin procedure actually clarifies which EU state is responsible for the search for protection of a certain asylum seeker. In practice, however, the returns to the respective EU country do not work.
This is also why a reform was negotiated for years to replace the existing system. Among other things, the reform package provides for an obligation to control identity in the event of incoming. Asylum seekers from countries of origin with an EU-wide protective rate of less than 20 percent should be passed through their procedure at the EU’s external border and, if possible, will also be deported from there if possible.
Has anything changed?
No. The reform came into force in June 2024. The EU member states have two years to implement the regulations. By June 2026, the previous rules still apply across Europe.
Why does Rot-Green want to quickly decide on the GEAS changes in the Bundestag?
In a state with a federal structure like Germany, the implementation of a comprehensive reform is complex. The sooner you prepare, the better it should be possible.
At the EU level, however, negotiations are still being made about a point. It is about whether the so -called connection element should be deleted from the concept of the safe third country contained in the reform. The Greens in particular reject this. So far, according to GEAS reform, asylum seekers may only be sent to third countries to which they have a personal connection – for example because they used to live there.
What does the Union claim have to do with it for general rejections?
In 2024, the federal police found 83,572 unauthorized entry. 47,487 people who had traveled were rejected or pushed back.
Returns are only possible if the police check directly on the border. Federal Interior Minister Nancy Faeser (SPD) has now ordered inpatient controls for all German land borders, although this is actually not intended in the Schengen area. However, Germany is not the only Member State that has taken this measure.
The Union does not want to wait for the implementation of the GEAS reform, but ensure that until further notice, people who want to apply for asylum in Germany are rejected. That is not the case at the moment.
What does the FDP propose now?
The Free Democrats want the SPD and Greens with the Union and FDP to vote in the Bundestag for the “Union Limitation Act”, which had not found a majority last Friday despite the votes of AfD, BSW and parts of the FDP. In return, one would then help to organize a majority for the GEAS changes in the Bundestag.
These changes had been decided on November 6, a few hours before the traffic light coalition was broken down in the Federal Cabinet. Last Thursday, they were treated in the Bundestag without debate and sent to the committees for further consultations. In theory, they could be adopted before the Bundestag election – provided the committees come together to meet special meetings and the agenda of the last Bundestag meeting before the election on February 11th will be changed accordingly.
Does such a compromise still have a chance at the last minute?
Theoretically it would be feasible. However, according to the blame of the past few days and in the middle of the election campaign, such an agreement is difficult. Although it should not necessarily be easier after the election. The dispute over family reunification to people with limited protection was also one of the reasons why the explorations for a Jamaica coalition (Union, Greens and FDP) had failed in 2017.
dpa
Source: Stern
I have been working in the news industry for over 6 years, first as a reporter and now as an editor. I have covered politics extensively, and my work has appeared in major newspapers and online news outlets around the world. In addition to my writing, I also contribute regularly to 24 Hours World.
