[Special Feature: Rethinking "Exclusionism"] Hideaki Sekinou: Germany Shaken by Immigrant Integration and Exclusionism

During the 2015 refugee crisis, considered the greatest humanitarian crisis of the 21st century, many refugees flowed into Europe, particularly Germany, triggered by the Arab Spring. Photos of the bodies of refugee children washed up on Turkish shores generated empathy and sympathy for refugees worldwide, and in Germany, the center of refugee reception in Europe, then-Federal Chancellor Merkel made the decision to accept many refugees. As one Green Party politician proudly stated that Germany was the "world champion of hospitality," this acceptance demonstrated Germany's tolerance and humanitarianism both inside and outside the country.

However, events that rolled back such tolerance occurred in succession thereafter. At the end of 2015, a few months after accepting the refugees, large-scale sexual assaults and robberies occurred mainly in the major city of Cologne, and the involvement of immigrants and refugees became an issue. Furthermore, at the end of 2016, a truck went on a rampage in the capital, Berlin, resulting in many casualties. The perpetrator of the incident, Anis Amri, was a Tunisian who had applied for asylum in Germany, and the link between immigration and crime was debated once again. Subsequent crimes by immigrants and refugees in Germany and neighboring France further strengthened skepticism and backlash against immigration.

Along with these events, forces advocating exclusionism began to exert a major influence on German society. The right-wing party Alternative for Germany (hereafter AfD) won many seats in the 2017 federal elections and entered national politics, and its influence has been increasing year by year.

This rising exclusionism in Europe is also having a significant impact on Japan. Specifically, there is the influence of the discourse that Germany's acceptance of immigrants ultimately failed because it led to an increased burden on the welfare state, worsening domestic security, and the rise of far-right parties, resulting in social chaos. In response to this situation in Germany, politicians and intellectuals in Japan often argue that Japan should not implement immigration policies. However, should we uncritically accept this rhetoric that "Germany's immigration policy has failed"? Has exclusionism become dominant in Germany, and has its immigration policy collapsed? This article examines the historical background and current status of how Germany has addressed the immigration issue and critically re-examines the discourse circulating in Japanese society.

In 2024, the coalition government of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), the Green Party, and the Free Democratic Party collapsed due to deepening internal conflicts, and federal elections were held in February 2025. In that election, the center-conservative Christian Democratic Union/Christian Social Union (CDU/CSU) returned as the largest party, replacing the SPD, and the AfD surged to become the second-largest party with approximately 21% of the vote.

The AfD was founded in 2013 as a party consisting of two groups: economic liberals and national conservatives. At its inception, the AfD was a party centered on people dissatisfied with the economic management of the Euro and the EU. However, since then, despite internal conflicts and successive defections, the AfD has put forward anti-liberal policy claims, including not only anti-EU and anti-Euro stances but also exclusionary nationalism, anti-Islam, and opposition to gender mainstreaming and liberal education.

The AfD emphasized its break from fascism and Nazism, developing arguments different from traditional far-right parties. Based on reflections on Nazism, Germany formed a democratic society with liberal values as its pillar after World War II and suppressed the expansion of exclusionist forces under "defensive democracy." Far-right parties such as the Socialist Reich Party (formed in 1949 by Nazi remnants but banned by the Federal Constitutional Court in 1952), the National Democratic Party of Germany (formed in 1964, which sought to expand by incorporating many neo-Nazis), and the German People's Union and the Republicans (which expanded in the 1990s) all succeeded in winning seats in state parliaments but failed to win seats at the federal level. Therefore, in Germany, where liberal values have taken root as a political consensus, the rise of the right-wing AfD at the national level was shocking.

Various factors can be cited as the background for the AfD's rise. First, people dissatisfied with political transformations—such as the SPD, which traditionally emphasized welfare redistribution, adopting neoliberal policies, or the CDU, from a culturally conservative position, formulating liberal policies—supported the AfD. Second, the AfD's support is particularly high in the former East Germany, which is said to be related to the sense of political alienation and social disparity felt by people in the former East due to the division of East and West Germany and the process of reunification. While I will not go into these issues here, thirdly, the impact of the immigrant and refugee issue cannot be ignored. The AfD points to the severity of socio-economic impacts, such as the lack of proper border management due to the government's open-border policy, leading to a rush of "poverty immigrants" from the Middle East and Africa into Germany, causing excessive fiscal burdens, worsening security, and serious impacts on the social security system and housing market. In addition to this welfare exclusionism, the AfD has gathered support by developing arguments for the exclusion of Muslims, claiming that Islam is incompatible with liberal Germany.

Criticism of Muslim immigrants in modern Europe differs from the logic of immigration criticism by traditional far-right forces. In modern society, categorizing groups based on biological or genetic characteristics and determining superiority or inferiority between groups has been completely rejected as racism without scientific basis. Therefore, the modern right wing excludes Muslim immigrants using liberal values that are the foundation of German society—such as democracy, human rights, the separation of church and state, and gender equality—as a pretext. In reality, many Muslim immigrants in Germany today have internalized liberal values and are adapting to German society. Despite this reality, due to media reports and statements by politicians, there is persistent criticism that Islam has backward cultures contrary to gender equality, such as the issue of wearing headscarves, forced marriages, and honor killings. The right wing excludes Muslim immigrants by claiming it is difficult for them to share the liberal values of German society. However, as mentioned earlier, the AfD opposes gender mainstreaming, is critical of feminism, and advocates the logic of traditional family values. In this respect, although the right-wing forces themselves are the group with anti-liberal values, they set aside the AfD's own anti-liberal claims to justify the exclusion of Muslims.

However, this issue of Muslim exclusion is not only a problem of the right wing. Criticisms have also emerged from liberal forces, characterizing Muslim immigrants as a group with deviant culture. Therefore, the question of how to counter the exclusion of Muslim immigrants is a challenge faced not only by the right wing but by liberal German society itself.

Thus, the influence of the AfD has become significant in Germany, and exclusionism against immigrants and refugees is becoming serious. However, it is premature to conclude that Germany as a whole has shifted to the right and that exclusionism has become dominant. In reality, there is a pragmatic and realistic attitude toward immigrants in German society, and in many cases, immigrant integration is supported.

Below, I will examine part of the current state of immigrant integration in Germany. In 2004, the Immigration Act was passed in Germany, and immigrant integration policies to support German language acquisition, education, and employment promotion began to be implemented. In Germany, in addition to foreigners, there are many Germans with foreign roots, such as those who hold German citizenship by birth. Together, foreigners and such Germans have been referred to as "people with a migration background" (hereafter referred to as immigrants)*1. Immigrants account for as much as 30% of the total population*2.

First, regarding integration policies, what about education in particular? For example, in 2020, the university/college enrollment rate for young immigrants was 30.8%, while the overall rate was 35%, meaning the enrollment rate for immigrants is lower than the overall average. However, compared to the enrollment rate for young immigrants in 2005, which was around 15%, the rate has improved.

Also, regarding the issue of welfare dependency among foreigners and immigrants, which is cited as an example of "failed integration policy," the unemployment rate for foreigners in 2023 was 14.7%, more than double the overall unemployment rate of 6%. Furthermore, the poverty rate in 2024 was 23.7% for immigrants compared to 11.8% for non-immigrants, which is also a gap of about double. In this regard, the reintegration of immigrants into the labor market and the improvement of high poverty rates remain challenges.

However, looking at the employment situation of immigrants, the number of immigrants in the working population is increasing year by year, and in 2023, immigrants accounted for about one-third of the total 43 million employed persons. Also, looking at the proportion of foreign workers, it was 16.1% at the end of 2024, a proportion that has doubled since 2010 due to the impact of the declining birthrate and aging population facing Germany. Most foreigners are employed in forms that require social security contributions. While many challenges are seen in immigrant integration, it is also a fact that immigrants contribute to the development of the domestic economy and have become an indispensable presence supporting the welfare state.

Data suggests that the German people also understand this current situation. According to a 2019 Bertelsmann Foundation research report dealing with people's views on the immigrant and refugee issue in German society after the refugee crisis, it points out that German people's views on immigrants are a mix of positive and negative. The report shows the results of approximately 2,000 survey subjects answering whether they agree with each of nine question items regarding the impact of immigrants on German society. According to the results, while about 70% of people agreed that the presence of immigrants leads to further burdens on the German welfare state or friction with local residents, the percentage of respondents who agreed that immigrants make life in Germany more attractive or are important for measures against the declining birthrate and aging population also reached 65%. Regarding the labor shortage that is a problem in Germany, a large percentage of people (65%) answered that attracting immigrants is important and that immigrants have a positive impact on the German economy, exceeding opinions such as utilizing domestic labor like women. Furthermore, while tightening the acceptance of refugees, there is a visible trend of supporting integration policies, suggesting that as long as immigrants and refugees are accepted, integration should be promoted promptly through measures such as promoting language acquisition and early work permits for refugees.

Friedrich Merz of the CDU, who was elected Federal Chancellor by the Bundestag in May 2025, stated in his policy speech upon taking office that Germany is and will continue to be an immigration country. Merz advocated for strict measures against refugees and irregular immigrants, such as strengthening measures against illegal immigration, promoting the deportation of those whose asylum applications were rejected, and restricting family reunification for refugees with subsidiary protection. On the other hand, he also advocated for attracting highly skilled immigrants to address labor shortages and promoting the integration of immigrants, showing that Germany's policy content is not necessarily solely focused on immigration restriction.

In contrast, how is the Japanese government responding? Echoing the claims of the Sanseito party, which surged in the 2025 House of Councillors election with the slogan "Japanese People First," the ruling Liberal Democratic Party is advocating for "Zero Illegal Foreigners." Even if the scale and situation of immigration issues in Germany and Japan differ greatly and cannot be simply compared, while the necessity of implementing strict immigration control policies such as measures against illegal immigration is argued, the response of promoting immigrant integration seen in Germany is hardly seen, and only the former arguments stand out.

Despite effectively allowing the influx of immigrants by default, Germany, like Japan which takes a non-immigration country stance, stubbornly refused to admit it was an immigration country for many years until the 21st century. While many foreign workers, such as those of Turkish descent accepted during the period of high economic growth, returned home, many others settled in Germany with their families. Despite recommendations for the necessity of immigrant integration policies in Germany in the late 1970s due to the increase in the settled foreign population, the federal government did not adopt those recommendations.

This divergence between the reality as an immigration country and the non-immigration country attitude led to serious exclusionism in Germany during the reunification period. During the collapse of the Cold War and the period of German reunification in 1990, many migrants flowed in from the East, and in 1992, asylum seekers reached 430,000 per year. Germany during the reunification period was already a de facto immigration country where the proportion of the foreign population exceeded 6% of the total population. Nevertheless, centered on far-right forces, violence against immigrants occurred frequently with slogans like "Germany is for Germans. Foreigners out!" There were successive attacks on refugee shelters, with local residents seen applauding the attacks. Furthermore, many immigrants and refugees became victims, such as the arson attack on the home of a Turkish family already settled in Germany, and German society became highly unstable. Faced with such exclusionism, the federal government at the time responded by amending laws to significantly restrict the influx of refugees, but even then, it did not implement comprehensive immigration policies to promote the acceptance and integration of immigrants.

Thinking about the situation at that time, the German government's non-immigration country attitude and the deepening of exclusionism are certainly not unrelated. Leading scholars of German immigration history such as Klaus Bade and leading German philosophers such as Jürgen Habermas criticized the government's response, arguing that what the German government should have done regarding the influx of refugees was not ad hoc restrictions on the influx, but admitting it was an immigration country and implementing comprehensive immigration policies. Through such bitter experiences, Germany passed the amended Nationality Act in 1999 to make it easier for foreigners to acquire citizenship, and further enacted the Immigration Act in 2004, beginning to seriously address immigrant integration policies. This was because a realistic recognition was shared that failing to recognize immigrants as citizens and socially excluding them despite their settlement would deepen cracks in German society and lead to social instability.

As pointed out at the beginning, in Japan, "the failure of Germany's immigration policy" and Germany's current situation are understood negatively, and there is a strong tendency to worry about the risks and costs of implementing immigration policies. However, if Japan is to learn from Germany, shouldn't it be to take into account the risks and costs generated by not implementing immigration policies despite being a de facto immigration country? Currently, the Japanese government is sending a message to the public that Japan does not adopt an immigration policy, even though it allows the influx of foreign workers from the perspective of labor shortages. Doesn't such a contradictory attitude only deepen the divergence from reality and bring further confusion to society? The current situation, where support for the settlement of immigrants—which requires a response in reality—is left to local governments and civil society, and where immigrant integration policies based on a long-term perspective are not being implemented, is what should be considered a problem. If Japan has no choice but to rely on foreign workers due to the declining birthrate, aging population, and labor shortages, and continues to allow the influx of workers, it is an urgent task to formulate comprehensive immigration policies including immigrant integration. In such a situation, it is time to calmly consider, based on Germany's journey so far, what kind of risks and costs are generated by not admitting to being an immigration country and not adopting an official immigration policy.

<Notes>