A recently released expert opinion from the German Bundestag’s Scientific Service has cast a critical light on the legal limitations and practical barriers surrounding the Bundeswehr’s (German armed forces) potential role in domestic drone defense. The assessment, reported by publications within the “Redaktionsnetzwerk Deutschland” media group, significantly curtails the scope of deployment envisioned by Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU).
Despite planned amendments to the Air Security Act (Luftsicherheitsgesetz), the report clarifies that the Bundeswehr can only authorize drone interception and destruction through armed force within Germany under the extreme circumstance of a declared state of disaster. The opinion stresses this is a fundamental constitutional prerequisite for domestic deployments of the armed forces, a provision that cannot be bypassed through ordinary legislation.
While the Bundeswehr can provide assistance to the police outside of a state of disaster – a mechanism termed “Amtshilfe” – this help is strictly limited to logistical support or non-authoritative assistance. Any action involving the interception or destruction of a drone through the use of force, particularly utilizing military equipment unavailable to the police, is deemed to exceed the bounds of permissible “Amtshilfe.
The threshold for declaring a state of disaster, a prerequisite for such military intervention, requires a “particularly severe accident”. Routine drone overflights for reconnaissance or espionage purposes are explicitly ruled out as sufficient justification. However, the assessment highlights a significantly different scenario: the deployment of a “kamikaze” or sabotage drone repurposed as a flying bomb and targeted against specific infrastructure, posing a credible threat to human life or critical infrastructure, “could” meet this threshold. This distinction underscores a deeply concerning shift in the perceived threat landscape and raises questions about the potential for escalation of force in response to even relatively minor drone incursions. The report’s conclusions implicitly challenge the government’s ability to effectively address the growing prevalence of drone activity without facing constitutional challenges and significantly limiting operational flexibility.