Status: 10.11.2023, 19:48 PM
CommentsShare
On a promotional tour for migration agreements: Olaf Scholz next to Bola Tinubu, the President of Nigeria. © Michael Kappeler/dpa
The chancellor doesn't like the word "a matter for the boss", but it is true that the boss in the government takes the reins in his hands.
For a long time, the issue of migration seemed to have little significance for Olaf Scholz. There were plenty of other things, the Ukraine war, the energy crisis, the country in general. But that has changed fundamentally; this was also evident in the night from Monday to Tuesday with the Prime Ministers. However, it remains to be seen whether the chancellor will be able to get the situation under control.
Poor poll ratings for the traffic light, fierce reports on the situation from the municipalities, plus clear criticism from the SPD-led state governments – it took a while, but in the meantime Chancellor Olaf Scholz has made the issue of migration and refugees his own. The chancellor doesn't like the word "a matter for the boss", but it is true that the boss in the government takes the reins in his hands. Stephan Weil and Nancy Faeser also felt this in the night session with the Minister-Presidents. It is far from certain whether everything that has now been decided and announced will actually happen. Some of it sounds good, but may be difficult to achieve; others may still meet with the political protest of the political groups or the opposition of the courts.
Scholz made delicate promises with the state premiers during the night. This applies, among other things, to the amendments to the Asylum Seekers' Benefits Act. So far, asylum seekers have received money from this pot for a maximum of 18 months; after that, they slide to a 20 percent higher level. This analogous benefit corresponds to the classic citizen's allowance and is paid regardless of whether the procedure has already been completed. In the future, the 18 months will be doubled to 36. It was a demand of the Union in order to reduce the incentive for the refugees; Scholz explains that this will relieve the budgets of the federal states because they have to raise the money for the analogue power. In the end, however, there is one thing above all: that the asylum seekers receive less money. Especially since the number 18 is based on a ruling by the Federal Constitutional Court, which was based on the average duration of proceedings. So it can happen that the courts quickly block this path again.
How to receive the newsletter from Table.Media
This article is IPPEN. MEDIA as part of a cooperation with the Berlin.Table Professional Briefing – it was first published by Berlin.Table on November 08, 2023.
Get 30 days of free access to further exclusive information from the Table.Media Professional Briefings – the decisive factor for the decision-makers in business, science, politics, administration and NGOs.
There will be debates at the SPD party congress
This could still lead to fierce debates among the Greens. The majority of the Social Democrats, also under pressure from their local politicians, have already come closer to reality. Proof of this was the impulse paper by three members of the Parliamentary Left, who surprised a few days ago with the proposal to set up "migration centres" in safe third countries in order to issue long-term visas there, including "subsequent possibilities of regular and safe entry into the EU". Just a few months ago, such a proposal from the more left-wing party spectrum would have been hard to imagine. And yet, of course, there will be debates at the party congress at the beginning of December – about the prepaid card, repatriation agreements or cooperation with authoritarian regimes.
Especially since crucial questions remain unresolved. 80 percent of migrants currently come from countries such as Afghanistan, Syria, Eritrea or Somalia – countries to which they cannot be deported. And if a country like Rwanda were to be found to carry out asylum procedures under the supervision of the UNHCR, would German authorities accept the decisions without reservation? Hard to imagine in a country that sometimes finds it difficult to accept rulings by the European Court of Justice? But what if there is a complaint that too many visas are being issued? Above all, however, the higher the fences are drawn, the more in demand smugglers are again. Whose business was actually to be dried up.
Scholz ignores his comrades
Many unanswered questions. Which is why prominent SPD politicians such as Stephan Weil and Nancy Faeser also raised concerns during the night session in the Chancellery. Even if experts such as migration expert Gerald Knaus promote the idea of carrying out asylum procedures in third countries. Until now, Weil and Faeser considered such procedures to be possible and justifiable only in transit states such as Turkey. Scholz nevertheless ignored them during the night with the states and promised to examine the idea. The Chancellor could let the audit come to nothing, but the Union countries would quickly accuse him of this as a breach of the agreements. If he wants to avoid this accusation because of its effect on overburdened municipalities, he must have Faeser's Ministry of the Interior seriously examine the proposal for feasibility.
And this is where things get complicated for Scholz. On his recent trip to Africa at the latest, he had to learn how difficult it has become to reach agreements with countries such as Nigeria or Ghana, especially when you demand something from them without being able to offer them anything attractive at the same time. So far, this has mainly applied to attempts to conclude repatriation agreements with countries such as Tunisia and Morocco. Apart from money, there was not much that Berlin or Brussels could have offered them. As a result, not much has come of it to this day.
And it is reasonable to conclude that this will be even more difficult if states such as Ghana or Rwanda are to be persuaded to allow asylum procedures in their countries for the EU or for Germany. Carried out by the UNHCR, organized in foreign facilities, in front of which there may be long queues or even entire tent camps. This is one reason why the Chancellor also considered this undertaking to be unpromising.
In the meantime, however, he has decided to rely on so-called migration partnerships. In essence, they aim to ensure that states take back rejected asylum seekers on the one hand, and that Germany or the EU at the same time open up a legal path to Europe for people from these countries through the immigration of skilled workers. Scholz now firmly identifies with this idea, whether it is negotiations with Morocco and Tunisia or talks with Nigeria or Ghana. Therefore, there is every reason to associate the inspection order from the night with this idea. An entrance for skilled immigration here, an entrance for asylum procedures there.
Scholz and Merz – a rarely poison-free relationship
Scholz can imagine a lot at this point, presumably also to build a small bridge to the CDU and its chairman Friedrich Merz. For the "protection of social peace", as it is called in the Chancellery. At the same time, however, Scholz is glad that he does not need the CDU/CSU parliamentary group leader for the planned changes in the Bundestag. If it were otherwise, Scholz would run the risk that Merz would upset the precarious balance between the traffic light factions with too harsh demands or verbal attacks.
Scholz and Merz – since the beginning of this legislative period, this has been a highly complex, rarely completely poison-free relationship anyway. And that probably won't change now, because both would like to have the other a little, but definitely not right. The best example of this almost absurd back and forth was the appearance of the CDU leader on Tuesday and Scholz's reply on Wednesday. Within a few minutes, Merz had managed to bury the Germany Pact on Migration, only to stress shortly afterwards that his hand would of course remain outstretched. Scholz promptly had his deputy government spokeswoman say on Wednesday that the chancellor found this "a great pity". However, it is also clear that no one can be "forced to cooperate constructively". In any case, his hand remains outstretched.
The result: two outstretched hands that absolutely do not touch each other. By Stefan Braun and Horand Knaup