The World Mind

American University's Undergraduate Foreign Policy Magazine

Democracy

The AfD and New German Parliament

EuropeElla Rutman

Kay Nietfeld/Pool Image via Getty Images

In February, Germany held a snap national election to determine a new Bundestag, their national parliament. While its winners, the Christian Democratic Union of Germany (CDU)/Christian Social Union (CSU), were unsurprising to many observers, the real story lies in the breakthrough of the far-right political party, the Alternative for Germany (AfD). Coming up with 20.8% of the vote, this doubles their share of votes and seats from the last election in 2021.

Who are the AfD? Now led by Alice Weidel, the political party was formed as a Eurosceptic party in 2013 and has since grown in popularity for its anti-establishment attitude. Frequently, they endorse policies that are less mainstream across the continent, including opposing military aid to Ukraine. Moreover, the party has capitalized on the promotion of harsh anti-immigration policies, a stance that has grown increasingly popular in Germany and Europe writ large. 

While the AfD supports populist far-right beliefs that are rising in popularity around the world (including anti-“woke,” pro-fossil-fuel, and secure border protections), it had been kept on the fringe in post-World War II Germany. As Germany carries the weight of its Nazi past, international and domestic leaders have discouraged the extreme right from holding power in Europe’s largest economy. Marine Le Pen, France’s far-right opposition leader before being disqualified from running for office on embezzlement charges, has publicly distanced herself from the AfD, describing them as the “radical fringe.”  

Moreover, they are closely associated with their antisemitic and Islamophobic statements. They have a pattern of trivializing the Holocaust through the adoption of Nazi slogans (including Alles für Deutschland or “Everything for Germany”) and the promotion of the belief that anyone with migrant heritage is not “properly German.” Beyond that, they’ve focused their anti-immigration efforts on restricting the entry of Muslims into the country. Making matters worse, they are currently under investigation for purported extremism and anti-democratic practices. A German court in Münster ruled that there was reason to believe that they intended to promote a system of illegal discrimination towards those who have immigrated to the state. It is for these reasons that the political party’s rise to power is so monumental. Although they did not win a majority of seats, (an unlikely feat that has only happened once, in the parliamentary term 1957–1961, by the CDU) the systemic features of the German government still give them substantial power, the most that any far-right party has had since the Nazis.

Understanding the Bundestag

The Bundestag is made up of 630 seats, with the number of seats a party has depending on its share of the national vote. This means that because the AfD won 20.8% of the vote, they are allotted 152 seats. Following a federal election, the Bundestag votes to decide who will serve as Chancellor. To win, the candidate must form a coalition to achieve a parliamentary majority. This process is currently underway with CDU/CSU leader Friedrich Merz, and he hopes to have this secured by mid-April.  

With the AfD winning over 20% of the election, Merz must meet their demands if he wishes to secure their support. In the process of negotiations, he has promised to take steps to limit immigration and agreed to refuse all undocumented migrants (regardless of if they are asylum seekers) at the borders. As he works to form a coalition, he must balance the policy priorities of both the Social Democrats (SDP) and his partners, the Christian Social Union (CSU), to secure a majority without working with the AfD. 

Additionally, the new government plans to increase defense spending at a level of ambition not seen since the Second World War. The spending boost reflects the broader sentiment held by European leaders and their plan for increasing EU strategic autonomy. Instead of relying on other countries in important policy areas like defense and the economy, leaders in the EU are looking to increase state capacity to act independently. As the Trump administration continues to insult European leaders and has shown that an American defense is undependable, many leaders are turning to secure their own defense funds.

Making sense of this election

To understand how the AfD rose to a position of power, we can analyze both international and domestic points. Internationally, the party received support from SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who used his platform to amplify their message. In endorsing them on X, he has said that the AfD is the only party that can “save Germany.” With his support, they have been able to move their messaging from more obscure social media platforms, such as Gettr, Telegram, and VKontakte, to mainstream platforms like X. This mobility helped normalize and legitimize the AfD and its hard-right stances, no matter how extreme they may be. 

Writ large, the rise of the AfD and the outcome of the elections reflect the growing sense of domestic political, economic, and societal turmoil. First, the state’s deep political fractures have only worsened in the past few years. In November 2024, the three-party governing coalition of the Social Democrats (SDP), the Free Democratic Party (FDP), and the Greens led by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz collapsed due to disagreements over economic policy, plunging the already struggling German economy into further political chaos. 

Adding to this, Germany is in a period of serious economic recession and is facing the longest spell of economic stagnation since the end of the Second World War. While the coronavirus pandemic significantly diminished foreign trade and tourism, their industrial and manufacturing sectors were hit the hardest. This was especially significant because roughly a quarter of Germany’s GDP lies in industry. What was created was a vicious cycle in industrial production where decreases in production would decrease consumption, which, in turn, would further decrease production. The direct consequence is record-breaking unemployment, reaching its highest level in 10 years. This further exacerbates individuals’ economic anxieties and their fears towards immigration. 

Finally, deep societal divisions persist even a generation after Germany’s reunification. The East-West divide continues to define local and national politics and shape policy preferences to this day. Despite the attempts of the German government to integrate East Germany after the fall of the Berlin Wall, more and more it seems to create its own parallel political reality. Political leaders from East-Germany who were previously defined by intense far-left stances, like Sahra Wagenknecht, have forged new anti-establishment policy preferences that veer so far left they have become far-right. This ideology was coined by Wagenknecht as “left conservative,” deeming those on the left as the threat to democracy. She views the move towards clean energy as responsible for deindustrialization, advocates hard-right migration policies, and seeks close relations with Vladimir Putin to secure Russian natural gas. The former East Germany is a fertile ground for this ideology with historically high unemployment and slow economic growth in comparison to West Germany. Overcoming this polarization will require the government to address lingering systemic inequalities
Ultimately, the recent elections and the rise of the AfD mark a turning point in Germany’s postwar political development. The shift from traditional parties to support for anti-establishment far-right parties reflects the deep-seated frustrations toward domestic concerns and trends in the international order. Despite not being included within Merz’s coalition, Weidel and the AfD will continue to hold power and maintain influence over the Bundestag as the largest leading opposition force.

Hungarian Spy Scandal with the EU

EuropeOwen Garrett

Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán speaks at the European Parliament - EP/Flickr

Last month, the European Parliament reviewed concerns about illegal espionage conducted by Információs Hivatal (IH), Hungary’s civilian foreign intelligence service, on European Union (EU) officials between 2015 and 2017. This information was first revealed in an investigation by the Belgian daily newspaper De Tijd and the Hungarian NGO Direkt36 published last December. In their article, journalists Szabolcs Panyi and András Pethő detail how the Hungarian government initiated multiple espionage attempts against the EU’s Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF). This came at a time when the office was investigating the Hungarian Prime Minister's son-in-law’s company, Elios, on the suspension of corrupt tenders. The espionage included phone tapping and IH officers stalking the officers, with the latter activity eventually leading to their discovery, as they were unable to maintain their cover.

More recently, the Hungarian government has continued to spy on its own citizens. In a 2021 interview with the Committee to Protect Journalists, Panyi discussed how the IH used Pegasus spyware to surveil journalists, inhibiting their ability to conduct investigative journalism. Panyi, an outspoken critic of Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán and a member of one of the few remaining Hungarian news outlets insulated from government influence, was a top target for the attacks. In both instances (2015-17 and 2021), the Hungarian government has not denied their involvement in the espionage, instead maintaining that it was used legally to investigate “national security threats.”

This intrusion is yet another instance of Orbán’s broader crackdown on independent media in Hungary, and a symptom of the broader democratic backsliding that’s happening in the state.  This blatant violation of democratic norms fractures their trust with the EU and the other democratic members in the alliance. Despite these tendencies, as of February 11th, the EU has not taken any concrete action against Hungary in regards to their espionage or established any additional laws protecting against espionage. The EU’s hesitation likely stems from fears of further increasing tension with Hungary, , though the national security risk that this poses would seem to merit a swift and decisive action.

More broadly, as the war in Ukraine continues, and pressure from Russia and China intensifies, the EU needs to project unity to protect themselves from foreign interference. Without a firm condemnation of Hungary, they risk setting a dangerous precedent for other global powers or EU members to gather intelligence on the EU. This precedent could also lead to the erosion of the integrity of democratic norms, both in Hungary and other EU countries, as Hungary continues to spy on their citizens. Ultimately, this dispute exacerbates the already existing rift between the EU and Hungary, as Budapest has increasingly pushed back against the alliance (including recently threatening to withhold support for the EU’s prolongation of sanctions on Russia).

Retribution Returns to Washington

Trump, North AmericaVincent Iannuzzi-Sucich

Enrique Tarrio and other Proud Boys gather in Washington D.C. in December 2020. Tarrio, whose sentence was commuted by Trump, had been sentenced to 22 years in prison on seditious conspiracy charges related to the January 6th Capitol attack. Victor J. Blue for the New York Times

During the 2023 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), Donald Trump made a promise to his supporters: “I am your justice…I am your retribution.” At that time, Trump and his political movement were in exile, having made a disgraceful exit after an election loss that many of them believed had been caused by a nebulous “deep state” embedded inside the federal government. Now, Trump and his movement have returned to the halls of power, bringing justice for their friends and retribution for their enemies in equal measure. 

Soon after the inauguration, before cheering crowds at the Capital One arena, Trump signed his first wave of executive orders, presidential pardons, and commutations. The initial pardons and commutations went to over 1500 participants in the January 6th Capitol riot, including rioters convicted of violent felonies and militia leaders convicted of seditious conspiracy. Four days later, Trump pardoned 23 anti-abortion activists who had blocked the entrance of an abortion clinic and accosted patients and staff. The message was clear: in Trump’s America, the legal system, once the bane of his most radical supporters, will no longer restrict their activities. Former Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio, fresh out of prison, echoed the sentiment: “Now it’s our turn.”

Trump has also sought to render the federal government more pliable to his wishes. During his first term, a group of officials colloquially known as the “adults in the room” often tried to restrain what they saw as Trump’s worst impulses. Trump’s first executive actions seek to exact revenge against these and other former officials, and to prevent the rise of any successor movement by installing loyal functionaries throughout the federal bureaucracy. Trump has reinstated Schedule F, a classification developed at the end of his first term that makes it easier to fire certain kinds of federal employees and replace them with political appointees. Additionally, Trump has begun directly removing officials who he believes may exhibit an ideological bias against him or otherwise hinder his agenda, including Coast Guard commandant Admiral Linda Fagan, 17 inspectors general, and several high-level Justice Department officials. Trump’s efforts thus far have seemingly found success; as of yet, there is no talk of resistance from within the federal ranks. 

Trump’s animus is not limited to individuals currently serving in the government. Trump removed federal security protection from at least four former officials who served in his previous administration: former CDC director Dr. Anthony Fauci, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, former National Security Advisor John Bolton, and former Iran envoy Brian Hook. This comes despite evidence that Bolton, Pompeo, and Hook have been targeted for assassination by Iran. Additionally, Trump has stripped security clearances from dozens of former intelligence officials, including three ex-CIA directors, who signed an open letter warning that the Hunter Biden laptop story might be Russian disinformation. 

Less than a week into his presidency, Trump has already made an indelible mark. Enemies beware as a new elite, armed with the full power of the American state, pursues justice and retribution with vindictive urgency.