The German government has firmly stood by the decision to classify the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) as a right-wing extremist party. The move, led by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), has drawn sharp criticism from several U.S. politicians, but officials in Berlin insist the decision upholds democratic values.
“This is about protecting democracy, not silencing opposition,” stated Germany’s Foreign Office, responding directly to U.S. Senator Marco Rubio, who called the decision “tyranny in disguise.” The German ministry emphasized that the classification followed a careful and independent investigation and that legal options remain available to the AfD.
U.S. Conservatives Call Out Germany’s Decision
The decision has triggered backlash from prominent U.S. figures. Senator Rubio and Vice President JD Vance accused German officials of political suppression. Vance likened the move to “rebuilding the Berlin Wall,” claiming it marginalizes political opponents.
Both officials criticized Germany’s stance on the AfD on social media platform X (formerly Twitter). However, the German Foreign Office defended the action, stating: “This is democracy. We act based on our constitution and history.”
Intelligence Report Justifies Classification
Germany’s domestic intelligence agency, the Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz (BfV), recently expanded its extremist classification of the AfD from select regions to the national party. The agency determined that the AfD promotes policies based on ethnic descent and exclusion, which conflict with Germany’s constitutional values.
The BfV’s report specifically cited AfD rhetoric that labels immigrants from Muslim-majority countries as incompatible with German society. “These positions are not only discriminatory but also anti-constitutional,” the agency wrote in a summary of its findings.
AfD Leadership Denies Extremism Allegations
AfD co-leaders Alice Weidel and Tino Chrupalla have strongly denied the charges. They argue that the label is politically motivated and part of a larger effort to silence dissenting voices. “This is a misuse of government power against a legal party,” Chrupalla said at a recent press event.
Beatrix von Storch, the party’s deputy parliamentary leader, echoed these concerns. In an international TV interview, she compared Germany’s decision to tactics used by authoritarian regimes. “Labeling opposition as dangerous is not democracy,” she stated.
Expanded Powers for German Security Services
As a result of the extremist classification, security services can now take broader measures against the AfD. These include phone surveillance, informant deployment, and covert observation. German officials insist these steps are legal and necessary.
Senator Rubio voiced strong objections, claiming the tools resemble those used by authoritarian governments. However, German legal experts affirm that such measures are grounded in constitutional law and subject to judicial review.
Germany’s Past Shapes Current Action
Germany’s decision is rooted in its historical experience. Officials point to the rise of fascism in the 1930s and the horrors of the Nazi regime as a warning. “We have learned from our history,” the Foreign Office stated. “Right-wing extremism must be stopped before it grows.”
This view is widely supported across Germany’s political spectrum. Leaders emphasize that protecting democracy sometimes means taking firm action against parties that challenge its core principles.
Political Impact Grows Ahead of New Leadership
The controversy comes at a sensitive time, with a new federal government expected soon. Conservative leader Friedrich Merz is set to become Germany’s next chancellor, forming a coalition with the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD).
SPD chairman Lars Klingbeil, who is expected to take over as vice-chancellor, signaled that the coalition will explore whether a full ban on the AfD is justified. “This party wants to destroy our democratic order,” Klingbeil said in an interview. “We have a responsibility to defend it.”
Debate Continues as Legal Review Advances
While no decision has been made on a formal ban, legal experts say any move to outlaw the AfD would face a high constitutional bar. Germany’s Basic Law allows party bans only in extreme cases, and the Federal Constitutional Court would make the final ruling.
Still, public debate continues. Supporters of the classification argue it’s a necessary step to protect democratic norms, while critics see it as a dangerous precedent.