The public walkout during a Deutschlandstiftung Integration award ceremony has drawn sharp condemnation from Serap Güler, State Secretary in the Foreign Office and CDU Member of Parliament. Güler, who also chairs the CDU’s migration network, criticized the actions of several dozen scholarship recipients who abandoned the event as CDU leader Friedrich Merz, the evening’s scheduled speaker, took to the stage. The protesters held signs reading “We are the Cityscape” a direct reference to Merz’s controversial remarks regarding migration and urban landscapes.
Güler characterized the protest as “nothing to be proud of” and “extremely inappropriate and alienating” in an interview with “Der Spiegel”, expressing disappointment that students perceived as role models would resort to such a demonstrative form of dissent. She argued that productive criticism requires engagement and dialogue and that simply turning one’s back on those with whom one disagrees is an unproductive approach.
The incident underscores the ongoing sensitivities surrounding the integration debate in Germany. Merz’s initial comments, made on October 14th, suggested a need for increased deportations and alluded to an unresolved “problem” visible in the “cityscape” though he failed to specify the nature of this issue. His subsequent defense of the remarks, including a remark about concerns surfacing “with the onset of darkness” drew accusations of disrespect towards individuals with migrant backgrounds.
While Merz attempted to provide further clarification in a prepared statement on October 23rd, differentiating between long-term residents and individuals lacking permanent residency or adhering to societal norms, the initial outrage remains. Güler’s criticism emphasizes the importance of respecting the office of the Federal Chancellor, even when disagreements exist, a position that reflects a broader concern within the CDU regarding the tenor of political discourse and the perception of disrespect towards established institutions. The incident highlights the precarious balance between legitimate protest and the maintenance of decorum in public events, especially when those in positions of leadership are involved.