Immediate arrest, rejection at the border, departure centers – Söder’s tough migration plan

The Chancellery would prefer to focus on the topic of internal security and disaster protection at the federal-state meeting this Thursday in Berlin. One could leave it at declarations of intent. But the agenda for the Prime Ministers’ Conferences (MPK) is set by the federal states – and one issue in particular is burning under their fingernails: migration.

However, most state government leaders do not want to tackle the pressing problem of high levels of immigration in a really offensive manner. This is partly due to a lack of information: none of the measures discussed, such as third-country regulations, repatriation agreements or a deportation offensive, could be implemented quickly. Hardly any of the state premiers therefore expect a breakthrough at the meeting with the Chancellor and parts of the Cabinet.

Bavaria’s Prime Minister Markus Söder is not prepared to accept this. The day before the MPK, the CSU leader is pushing ahead with a five-point plan with the provocative title “Turning point now!”, which is quite something. And which is likely to influence the meeting. It includes:

1. Immediate arrest for criminals and dangerous individuals who are required to leave the country but cannot yet be deported. Deportations to Afghanistan and Syria should not be taboo. If necessary, negotiations should also be held with the Taliban and the Assad regime.

2. Immediate reduction of benefits to the so-called physical minimum subsistence level for criminals and asylum seekers who are required to leave the country. Only food, accommodation, heating, personal and health care would then be paid for. For a single adult asylum seeker receiving basic benefits, this would “specifically mean a reduction in monthly benefits from 460 euros to 228 euros,” is the proposal.

3. Abolition of the “subsidiary protection” status, which allows a person to stay in Germany even without proof of a justified reason for fleeing. Subsidiary protection applies when neither refugee protection nor asylum can be granted, but the person seeking protection is at risk of serious harm in their country of origin. A blanket grant of protection is the wrong approach, says the plan. What is needed are “new, differentiated solutions for dealing with international crises.”

4. Rejections of people who are clearly not entitled to asylum in Germany. They should be pushed back at the German internal borders, which means they should not be allowed to enter the country in the first place. The circumvention of the current Dublin regulations by other EU member states should no longer be tolerated without action. To date, rejections at the border by the Federal Police have been limited to people who do not submit an asylum application. This interpretation of the law by the Federal Government does not do justice to the current migration situation.

5. Establishment of so-called federal departure centers. Persons who are required to leave the country and who can be returned to their country of origin should be deported immediately from there. In Denmark, which now has a restrictive migration policy, there are corresponding facilities. According to Söder, the first federal departure center should be set up “as a powerful signal in the federal capital.”

The Bavarian plan is likely to cause heated discussions at the MPK among the state premiers and with the chancellor and his participating ministers. The proposed measures will not prevent the next large influx of migrants. But the proposals could be implemented in the short term – unlike, for example, the complex negotiation of repatriation agreements with the governments of other states or the highly complex third-country regulation, which provides for asylum procedures in countries outside the EU.

Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) is unlikely to get involved in such an agenda, also out of consideration for parts of his party and the Greens, who essentially reject measures to limit migration.

Söder had already left the MPK in March in anger. Unlike Prime Minister Boris Rhein (CDU), who is currently chairing the conference. After the meeting, Rhein spoke of progress and expressed his satisfaction. And this was to the general surprise and irritation in the Union camp. Because the group had not really agreed on anything to limit migration in March.

Bavaria and Saxony had stated in a joint statement that they considered the outcome of the meeting to be completely inadequate. “That is not enough: today’s MPK was again just an assessment of the situation and did not bring anything new,” Söder said at the time, demanding: “We finally need a fundamental change in migration policy in Germany.” States and municipalities are overwhelmed – and the traffic light coalition is doing too little to counteract this.

That is why Söder is presenting a plan. The federal government is clearly losing control of the migration situation. In the eyes of the population, the functionality of the German community is in question, the plan states. “The time of lip service and waiting must end here and now,” is the core demand.

Since 2022, a total of eight federal-state rounds have been held in vain to pressure the federal government and demand a change in migration policy. “To date, the federal government has failed to produce any notable results, and the numbers of influxes are not even beginning to decline to the required extent.”