–Analysis-
BERLIN — Friedrich Merz had hoped to become a foreign policy chancellor. He’d dreamed of spending his time playing a major role on the global stage rather than getting stuck in the details of domestic politics.
But now it is clear: Merz and his government are facing what could be the most difficult domestic situation since the founding of the republic. And one issue looms that may turn out to define his entire term, and could fundamentally reshape the character of German democracy: will he ban the AfD?
For the latest news & views from every corner of the world, Worldcrunch Today is the only truly international newsletter. Sign up here.
Germany’s domestic intelligence service is now fully convinced that the AfD is a right-wing extremist party. Merz himself has no illusions about the nature of this movement, something he has made clear both publicly and in private. Yes, the leader of the center-right CDU party is well aware of what has happened to his counterparts across Europe. He knows that the far right governs in Italy, Austria, Hungary, and the Netherlands once it gains power.
Still, the report released last Friday by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution presents Merz with a serious dilemma.
Fear of a ban
Since 1949, the Federal Constitutional Court has banned two fringe parties. But two attempts to outlaw the National Democratic Party (NPD), despite its marginal influence, failed.
Never before has there been an effort to ban the largest opposition party, one with 152 seats in the Bundestag and hundreds more in state and local legislatures. If Merz, as chancellor, were to take this step and bring the case before the Federal Constitutional Court, it would become his most consequential political act. It would echo far beyond his time in office and across national borders, regardless of how the judges ultimately rule.
The domestic intelligence agency now officially classifies the AfD as a right-wing extremist organization.
Merz, who as party leader repeatedly tied his fate to maintaining a strict firewall against the far right, often had to rein in his own party. Now, if he seeks a ban, he would suddenly take on the role of leading the liberal resistance against global authoritarianism.
But even if he wanted to do it, could Merz actually pull it off?
Toward the end of the last legislative term, members from across party lines joined together and submitted a group motion calling for the AfD to be banned. The proposal enjoyed strong support, especially from the Left and the Greens. It also found some backing within the SPD. At the time, Merz and most of his CDU colleagues opposed it, though there were exceptions.
What if extremism cannot simply be banned out of existence?
Their opposition came partly from the belief that extremism cannot simply be banned out of existence. It also came from concern over what might happen if the Constitutional Court refused to ban the AfD. And there was fear that the long legal process would energize the party, especially in eastern Germany, where the CDU had already been losing ground. Filing for a ban right before an election could have looked like manipulating the playing field. It would have only fed into the AfD’s narrative of victimhood.
That concern has only grown with the change in government. Even though Germany’s Constitution clearly states that the federal government, the Bundestag — where the CDU/CSU holds a majority — or the Bundesrat (body that oversees the regional states) can file to ban a party, the AfD is now the largest opposition group. Merz would face accusations that he was simply trying to silence a popular rival.
A protester’s sign asking for AfD to be banned. — Photo: Left via Facebook
Asymmetric competition
This problem doesn’t just apply to official efforts to ban the party. It also extends to any move Merz might make to use the chancellery as a platform to campaign loudly against the AfD. When does a necessary confrontation with a dangerous far-right party cross the line and turn into a full-blown power struggle between the government and the opposition?
The domestic intelligence service is warning of a direct threat. Doing nothing is not a real option.
And since the opposition is tasked with holding the government accountable and has the legal authority to do so, this is not a trivial concern. You do not have to be a supporter of the AfD to feel uneasy about this.
On the other hand, a chancellor cannot keep silent just to avoid a thorny situation, especially when the domestic intelligence service is warning of a direct threat to democracy. His oath of office, which Merz will take next Tuesday, leaves no room for that. Doing nothing is not a real option, even if Merz were to decide, at least for now, not to take legal action against the AfD.
After the intelligence report was released, the CDU headquarters issued a brief, three-line statement. It said: “This much remains clear: no cooperation with the AfD. The new federal government should focus on solving the country’s problems and restoring public trust.”
Worldcrunch 🗞 Extra!
Know more • U.S. Senator Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance sharply criticized Germany’s recent classification of the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) as a right-wing extremist party. Both Republicans took to X to frame the move as anti-democratic: Rubio called it “tyranny in disguise,” while Vance accused German “bureaucrats” of metaphorically rebuilding the Berlin Wall.
Germany’s Foreign Office directly replied to Rubio on social media, defending the decision as necessary to protect democracy and citing the country’s history with fascism. Earlier this year, tech billionaire and head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Elon Musk had already backed the AfD, hosting a 74-minute live interview on his X platform with party co-leader Alice Weidel. In the wide-ranging conversation, Musk endorsed the AfD for national elections and criticized German bureaucracy, climate policy, and political correctness. — Bertrand Hauger (read more about the Worldcrunch method here).
Internal tensions
There is a reason for this cautious approach. Merz is facing pressure within his own ranks. The number of voices inside his coalition partner, the SPD, calling for a ban on the AfD is unlikely to shrink. At the same time, the opposite trend is gaining traction in the CDU, as well as in the media and broader political landscape.
Jens Spahn, the likely new leader of the parliamentary group, has floated the idea that the AfD should be allowed to chair Bundestag committees as a matter of principle. Although Spahn added that, as a gay man, he knows perfectly well what kind of people are in the AfD, the tone has been set.
CDU leading thinker Andreas Rödder, until recently head of the party’s Basic Values Commission, has proposed replacing the firewall with what he calls a “conditional willingness to talk.”
In some conservative circles, opposition to anything perceived as leftist has morphed into a fantasy of a CDU minority government. That would essentially put the AfD in the position of providing a majority.
CDU slipping
Polls show the CDU slipping and the AfD gaining ground. The argument goes like this: when center-right parties adopt social democratic language, they lose support and end up helping the AfD. So why not accept that a mostly conservative state should have a conservative majority in the Bundestag? If the CDU loses major state elections next year, especially in Baden-Württemberg or Saxony-Anhalt, this debate is likely to intensify.
Ban or co-opt — those are the two poles of debate about how to handle the AfD under Merz’s leadership. And either choice is a shaky foundation for a chancellorship.
In short, the AfD question has the potential to paralyze the government. The domestic intelligence report was not the end of this conversation. It was just the beginning.
