A fierce political rift has emerged within the German government over the contentious issue of deportations to Syria, exposing deep divisions within the ruling coalition and drawing criticism from opposition parties. Following recent remarks by Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul highlighting the extensive destruction and ongoing instability in Syria, calls for a suspension of deportations have intensified, clashing with the position of Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt who insists on maintaining deportation agreements despite the deteriorating humanitarian situation.
Wadephul’s comments, acknowledging the devastating impact of the protracted civil war, have been interpreted by some as a tacit recognition that conditions in Syria remain unsuitable for safe returns. This has fueled accusations of an ideological battle over migration policy, with the Left Party vehemently condemning Dobrindt’s stance and demanding an immediate halt to all deportations. Cansu Özdemir, the Left Party’s spokesperson for foreign policy, accused Dobrindt of displaying a “dehumanizing worldview” by pursuing deportations while seemingly ignoring credible reports of state-sponsored violence and the suppression of human rights within Syria. She characterized any cooperation with the Syrian government as unacceptable, particularly given allegations of forced veiling and widespread persecution of women.
The Social Democratic Party (SPD), while upholding the coalition agreement that mandates the deportation of criminals and security threats to Syria, acknowledged the need for a case-by-case assessment based on the evolving circumstances on the ground. They emphasized that Wadephul’s concerns about the physical devastation were legitimate and should be factored into deportation decisions.
The far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) has seized on the dispute, branding Wadephul’s concerns as an attempt to perpetuate the legacy of his predecessor, Annalena Baerbock. They argue that Syria is now safe, demanding the revocation of asylum protections for all non-citizen Syrians and immediate cessation of residence permits and naturalizations. The AfD portrays asylum as a temporary measure, now obsolete due to the end of the Syrian civil war.
The Green Party echoed Wadephul’s assessment of the dire situation in Syria, while simultaneously criticizing Dobrindt’s focus on deportation policy, arguing he should prioritize “central security questions” like cybersecurity and infrastructure protection, accusing him of engaging in a distracting “symbolic” policy. The Union faction, however, defended Dobrindt, dismissing Wadephul’s remarks as taken “out of context” and insisting that the end of the civil war makes returns “possible and reasonable” for many. They advocate for encouraging voluntary repatriation and, subsequently, prioritizing the deportation of criminals and those subject to expulsion orders, in coordination with the Syrian government.
The core of the debate reveals a fundamental disagreement on the extent of humanitarian obligations and the political risks associated with forcibly returning vulnerable individuals to a nation struggling with ongoing instability and evidence of systemic abuse.