Germany expands border patrols as part of immigration plan – DW – 05/17/2025
In the Bavarian town of Kiefersfelden, on the border with Austria in the foothills of the Alps, new Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt stood in the rain as he discussed the government's immigration policy. Dobrindt, of the conservative Christian Social Union (CSU), had stepped up border controls a week earlier.
Germany's conservative Christian Democrats (CDU) and its Bavarian sister party the CSU declared war on unauthorized immigration during the federal election campaign earlier this year, and now they want to deliver. Unlike in the past, asylum-seekers will also be turned back at the border. Only "vulnerable" individuals, such as pregnant women and children, will not be refused.
For years, anyone who made it to Germany, by whatever means, and declared that they wanted to apply for asylum were allowed to enter the country while their application was processed. Now, things are different.
When asked by DW what would now change in concrete terms, Dobrindt replied: "I want to say to all those who think they can make money from people's suffering by trying to smuggle people into another country that we are doing everything we can to stop these criminal activities."
German police conduct expanded border checks
To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
The CSU politician added, almost proudly, that since the new coalition government of the CDU/CSU and the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD) under Chancellor Friedrich Merz took office in early May, 739 attempts to enter the country illegally had been thwarted by Thursday, an increase of 45% on the previous week. This was only possible, said Dobrindt, because an additional 3,000 federal police officers had been assigned to duty at the border, with the numbers up from 11,000 to 14,000.
Reckoning with Merkel's open asylum policy
Time and time again, Dobrindt has used the vocabulary of criminal people smugglers and illegal migration. The new crackdown on immigration is also a final reckoning with the policies of former Chancellor Angela Merkel. In 2015 and 2016 in particular, her government allowed many hundreds of thousands of refugees from Syria, Afghanistan and other African countries into the country and coined the phrase "We can do this!".
In his government statement earlier this week, Merz emphasized almost reassuringly that Germany would remain a country of immigration.
Speaking from the Austro-German border on Thursday, Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (center) said more attention would now be paid to 'order' Image: Peter Kneffel/dpa/picture alliance
But with regard to the police officers, Dobrindt put it in somewhat more complicated terms in Kiefersfelden, saying that officers would now ensure that in the "combination of humanity and order," more attention would now be paid to "order." To this end, more drones, more thermal imaging cameras and helicopters are now being used.
During the election campaign, Merz promised that he would change the immigration policy on his first day in office. This is also certainly because of the electoral successes of the far-right, anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD).
Merz immigration plans ruffling feathers of EU neighbors
However, the new German tone on immigration is not going down well everywhere. Right at the start of his term of office, Merz learned during his visit to Polish President Donald Tusk in Warsaw that his eastern neighbor wants to combat illegal immigration on the EU's external borders, not the German-Polish border.
Tusk told Merz directly that Poland would not take in any refugees from Germany. "The AfD, that's your problem, Mr. Chancellor," Tusk added. To which Merz replied: "We want to continue to develop European immigration and asylum policy together and we will also carry out border controls in a way that is acceptable to our neighbors."
During the election campaign, Merz announced that he wanted to limit the number of refugees to 100,000 people per year.
Last year, 229,751 people applied for asylum in Germany for the first time — significantly fewer than in 2015, when around 1 million people came to Germany. But still, that's almost two and a half times as many as Merz would like in future.
This article was originally written in German.
While you're here: Every Tuesday, DW editors round up what is happening in German politics and society. You can sign up here for the weekly email newsletter Berlin Briefing.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
DW
4 hours ago
- DW
Nuclear negotiations with Iran: What can we expect? – DW – 07/24/2025
On Friday, Germany, France and the UK will negotiate with Iran in Istanbul about the future of its nuclear program. The stakes are high for Iran. There is much at stake when representatives from Germany, France and the United Kingdom meet their counterparts from Iran in Istanbul on Friday to negotiate the future of Iran's nuclear program. If the talks fail, Iran risks a new wave of sanctions. Questions remain about the technical status of Iran's nuclear program after the attacks by Israel and the US on Iranian nuclear facilities in June. Or whether Iran can continue its program at all. The limited information available does not appear to support claims by US President Donald Trump that Iran's nuclear facilities and nuclear program have been "totally obliterated," said Hamidreza Azizi, an Iran expert at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP). In his view, Iran would likely be able to resume its enrichment program to a certain extent in the short to medium term. He estimates that the country still has much of the highly enriched uranium it stockpiled over the past few years. "Iran has not been deprived of its ability to enrich uranium," Azizi told DW. "So far, there has been no indication that Iran has actively taken steps to restart its program, but such a move would be more a matter of political decision-making, as well as military and security considerations, rather than technical capability." Michael Brzoska, a political scientist at the Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg, took a slightly different stance. He said it is likely to have become technically much more difficult for Iran to continnue enriching the uranium that is still available to a level suitable to make nuclear weapons. The centrifuges required for enrichment have probably been damaged to such an extent that they can no longer be used, Brzoska said. "Although it cannot be ruled out that there could be hidden centrifuges in other locations, there is currently no information on this." In order to exert pressure on Iran, Germany, France and the UK agreed with the US in mid-July this year to set Iran a deadline for reaching a nuclear agreement. This expires at the end of August. If no agreement is reached by then, the European partners plan to automatically reinstate previous UN sanctions against Tehran. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video It is entirely possible that the Iranian leadership is reconsidering its current strategy, Brzoska believes. Iran has repeatedly denied that it wants to use its nuclear program for military purposes. "But its behavior, especially the high-level enrichment of uranium, has brought it ever closer to this possibility," the expert pointed out. "And it has thus sparked fear among other states."Iran is currently sending out "mixed signals," Azizi told DW, explaining that Iranian officials, including the president and foreign minister, continue to insist that Iran remains open to diplomatic engagement. At the same time, he sees no indication that Iran is willing to soften its positions on other contentious issues, such as domestic uranium enrichment or its support for non-state actors in the region. "The leadership seems to be trying to buy time and avoid a renewed escalation until they determine how to address the various problems at hand," Azizi said. However, Iran's time is limited due to the end-of-August deadline jointly set by Germany, France, the UK and the US. After this date, the UN sanctions, which were lifted in 2016 as part of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), better known as the nuclear agreement, could once again be imposed. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video The agreement contains a mechanism known as the "snapback," which entitles each of the states the signed at the time — the US, the UK, France, China, Russia, Germany and the EU — to launch a procedure that would automatically lead to the reintroduction of all UN sanctions against Iran after 30 days. The US withdrew from the agreement in 2018, under Trump's first administration, so it cannot initiate this mechanism. However, talks in mid-July show that the three European states have been coordinating closely with Washington. The US, meanwhile, has imposed its own sanctions against Iran. These target specific sectors of the economy, such as oil exports and banking transactions, and also include sanctions against third countries and companies that do business with Iran. In this respect, the outcome of the upcoming talks is highly important for Iran, said Brzoska. "Sanctions imposed by the US will ultimately be more important from an Iranian perspective. However, the snapback mechanism is likely to prompt a whole series of states to impose economic restrictions on Iran." These restrictions would affect oil exports, for example, as well as the transfer of so-called dual-use technologies, that is, technology that can also be used for military purposes. "Iran is therefore likely to work towards ensuring that the Europeans do not reapply this mechanism," Brzoska said. Beyond the possibility of not activating the snapback agreement, however, the three European states have no other incentives, or carrots, to offer Iran, said Azizi. This could make reaching an agreement more difficult, he believes. "The best we can realistically expect from the upcoming talks is that both sides might agree to extend the deadline for triggering the snapback mechanism, allowing more time for diplomacy and a potential diplomatic resolution."
DW
4 hours ago
- DW
Thai-Cambodian border dispute: What you need to know – DW – 07/24/2025
Tensions along the disputed Thai-Cambodian border are flaring once again, with both sides exchanging blame for the escalation. The decades-old conflict reaches back to the colonial era. On Thursday morning, deadly fighting broke out between Thai and Cambodian troops along their disputed border. Authorities have confirmed that at least 12 people, most of them Thai civilians, were killed in the crossfire. Thailand has blamed Cambodia for killing Thai citizens, while Cambodia has blamed Thailand for bombing Cambodian targets with fighter jets. Neither claim could be independently verified at the time this article as published. Videos circulating online show explosions and gunfire in the disputed area. Many who live along the contested border have sought shelter. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video While it's still unclear what tipped the scales in this most recent escalation, tensions between both nations have been rising noticeably in recent months. In late May, Thai armed forces killed a Cambodian soldier in an exchange of fire that ensued as his unit was digging trenches along the disputed border. Since then, both counties have sent reinforcements to the area On Wednesday, Thailand said it was withdrawing its ambassador from Phnom Penh and expelling Cambodia's ambassador. The kingdom also closed multiple border crossings to Cambodia. This came after land mines reportedly wounded a series of Thai soldiers in several incidents along the contested border region. Thai authorities claimed the mines had been newly laid along paths that were supposed to be safe. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video The border dispute between Thailand and Cambodia is decades old. Both countries share a 800-kilometer (500-mile) border which stretches across regions that are sparsely inhabited. It is difficult to access in parts, and has been insufficiently charted in the past. Many demarcations are remnants from colonial times. France occupied Cambodia from 1863 until the nation gained its independence in 1953, while Thailand has remained an independent kingdom. During this near-century of French occupation, Cambodia and Thailand mutually ceded territory multiple times, changing the boundary line. And in 1907, France pressured Thailand, then Siam, to sign a treaty adjusting its border. Thailand later went on to contest this treaty. There are also several temples near the Thai-Cambodian border to which both countries lay claim — most notably, the historic Preah Vihear temple, a 1,000-year-old Hindu site built by the Khmer Empire. The temple lies in the so-called Emerald Triangle. Both Cambodia and Thailand claimed ownership and the case went to court, where in 1962, the International Court of Justice in The Hague ruled that the temple was on Cambodian territory. In 2008, as UNESCO was moving to declare it a World Heritage Site, the old dispute over the temple reignited. Several people were killed as fire was exchanged at the border. When Cambodia turned to the IJC once more in 2011, the ruling was again in Cambodia's favor. In 2000, Thailand and Cambodia formed a Joint Border Commission to peacefully resolve border disputes. But the body has not registered much success to date. In February, Cambodia turned to the ICJ for a third time in a letter "requesting adjudication of the long-standing border disputes" with Thailand. Meanwhile, Thailand appears to prefer bilateral solutions — which, given recent escalations, appear far away for now. "Cambodia wants to bring the current case before the ICJ, because in the past, its appeals to the court were successful," Zachary Abuza, an expert on the region at the independent think tank Lowy Institute, told DW in June. "Thailand wants to use its economic might, and believes it has a significant economic advantage." Thailand is more industrialized that its southeastern neighbor, with a gross domestic product that is about 12 times as high. While Thailand exports electronics, automobiles and foodstuffs, Cambodia's industry relies mostly on the textile and agricultural industries. According to official statistics, some 500,000 Cambodian guest workers live in Thailand. "Both have a lot to lose," Tita Sanglee, a research fellow at Singapore's ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute, told DW. "Thailand is highly dependent on Cambodian laborers and exports a significant amount to Cambodia. Next to fuels, machines and drinks, many Thai exports are everyday necessities." She added that both nations also rely on income from tourism, which is expected to scale back drastically should the conflict drag on. The governments in Phnom Penh and Bangkok had actually kept close ties, not least thanks to good relations between former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra and Cambodia's former leader, Hun Sen. In Cambodia, Hun Sen's son, Hun Manet, took over the reins in 2023. But in Thailand, Thaksin Shinawatra's daughter, Paetongtarn Shinawatra, was recently suspended over political scandal involving a leaked phone conversation in which she addressed the former Cambodian leader as "uncle" and criticized her own military commanders with regards to the shared border conflict. Prior to this, conservative voices close to the military had sharply criticized Paetongtarn's plans to engage in discussions with Cambodia over jointly exploring oil and gas fields in a shared contested maritime area in the Gulf of Thailand. Thailand has also been struggling with a shrinking economy and high tariffs imposed by the US. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video The prime minister was suspended by Thailand's constitutional court in early July, and months could pass before a final ruling is handed down on the matter. Until then, Thailand's political stability is likely to remain fragile. The Thai military might be taking advantage of a situation in flux: In recent weeks, its rhetoric toward Cambodia has become noticeably sharper. And the English daily, , has already openly discussed fears from the tourism branch that another military coup might be on the horizon.
DW
8 hours ago
- DW
DR Congo: Little hope for robust truce with M23 rebel group – DW – 07/24/2025
The recent truce between the DRC government and the M23 rebel group — along with an earlier DRC-Rwanda peace deal — was expected to usher in new era of stability in the region. Yet even the signatories show little hope. The US, UN and the African Union (AU) were among the first to welcome the July 19 truce between the Democratic Republic of Congo and the M23 rebel group which had been championed by the US and Qatar. The Doha Declaration of Principles , building on a peace deal the DRC and Rwanda signed in Washington on June 27, was meant to serve as another "meaningful step toward advancing lasting peace and stability in the Great Lakes region," according to the US Department of State. Rwanda's willingness to sign, and its passive observation of, the Doha agreement was seen as tacit admittance to its role in the long-standing conflict, although Kigali continues to deny its support of the M23. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Just one day after the signing in Doha, the US updated its security advisory for the DRC and especially its capital Kinshasa, advising US nationals in the country to "exercise increased awareness, avoid large gatherings, and monitor local news and security updates." The list of recommended actions include the provision of "enough food and water should you need to stay home for several days" and having "essential items (clothing, medications, travel documents) packed in a bag that you can carry." The advisory resembles the kind of advice US authorities issue residents to prepare for major natural disasters. Reagan Miviri, a conflict analyst and lawyer working with the Congo Research Group in Kinshasa — an independent, non-profit research project — understands the importance of the US State Department's latest travel advisory. "The crisis in eastern Congo is also visible in Kinshasa in some ways," she told DW. "Actors in the US [who] are worried about what could happen in Kinshasa … probably know much more than we do, so perhaps they have other information we don't have." According to Lidewyde Berckmoes, an associate professor and senior researcher at the African Studies Center Leiden in The Netherlands, many parts of the DRC still actively remain under the control of the M23, which is unlikely to change despite this deal. "This region has seen many violent rebel movements, who have been there since the 1990s. There are many places where there's a lot of tension, and where authority is contested," Berkmoes, whose work is focused on Africa's Great Lakes region, told DW. On the ground, the reality of a state of war effectively continues to dictate daily lives in various parts of the country — especially eastern DRC's North and South Kivu provinces where mere days after the DRC-M23 truce was inked, fresh reports of M23 rebels seizing new ground surfaced. According to UN-backed Radio Okapi in the DRC, at least 19 civilians were killed by M23 fighters as part of that expansion, in particular around the village of Bukera. This latest escalation is in clear breach of the Doha ceasefire deal, which calls on all sides in the conflict stop efforts to expand their territorial gains — among various other stipulations. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Human rights activist Philemon Ruzinge believes that the Doha deal will ultimately be of little consequence, despite whatever concessions Kinshasa may make to keep the peace. "The agreement of principles is supposed to be … so important towards a lasting peace agreement," he told DW, adding that the ongoing actions of M23 rebels leave little hope for it to work in the long-run. According to Ruzinge, M23 leaders feel they can continue to enjoy free reign over northeastern DRC on account of the text of the agreement "containing no withdrawal clause" and deliberately being worded in an ambiguous manner. This view was only further solidified by the M23 itself, whose delegation leader at the signing in Doha, Benjamin Mbonimpa, reiterated that the group "will not retreat, not even by one meter." "We will stay where we are," Mbonimpa said. Berckmoes believes that Mbonimpa's attitude is indicative of the overall M23 position: "I don't think M23 will let themselves be sidelined. Rather, I expect that they are looking for ways to have an important say as part of the government." Miviri agrees: "M23 are saying that they are not leaving." She added that this should be taken at face value. "M23 will do whatever it pleases." That view is also shared by people in North Kivu province. Complaints by civil society groups about a lack of government intervention is mounting. In the province's beleaguered capital, Goma, democracy activist Justin Murutsi told DW: "The state has a security mandate for the population. But when there are killings like this and no word from the state, it shows that there's a serious institutional vacuum." "The signing of the Declaration of Principles gives us a little hope, because it clearly shows that the government has accepted the rebels' demands and conditions," said Julien, a resident of the city who believes that M23 will remain in control of large parts of the region. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Political scientist Christian Moleka in Kinshasa wondered whether the parties the conflict are interested in peace. "Do the various parties even have the will to achieve lasting peace?" he said in a DW interview. "Are the follow-up mechanisms really going to work better than in the past, to support the full implementation of these various provisions?" Berckmoes had similar reservations, stressing that there has been "series of agreements in the past, which have not been upheld." She added that for a sustainable peace plan to succeed, various parties and factions all have to be included in all negotiations — not just M23 but "all 160 groups" vying for control. To that end, Berckmoes believes "there's still a long way to go." Miviri took an even more sober stance: "Before speaking of a lasting peace agreement, it just has to first happen. And I'm not seeing it happen, even now." Amid skepticism, criticism, and the surge in violence since the Doha signing, there have also been a few hopeful voices — among them, the US Senior Advisor for Africa, Massad Boulous. According to DRC Interior Minister Jacquemain Shabani, significant progress has been made in recent weeks. He said he is convinced that, despite the ongoing volatile nature of the conflict, "we are close to peace." In the same statement, however, he stressed that "peace is a choice," which "requires work."
