The German governing coalition, comprised of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and Christian Social Union (CSU), is pushing for a controversial “repatriation bonus” aimed at incentivizing rejected asylum seekers to return to their home countries. The proposal, spearheaded by leading figures within the parliamentary groups, is being championed as a complementary measure alongside increased deportations, a core component of their coalition agreement.
Alexander Throm, the CDU/CSU’s spokesperson for domestic policy, emphasized the importance of voluntary returns, arguing they represent a more effective and cost-efficient approach than forced removals. “Every voluntary return is preferable and cheaper than a deportation” he stated in an interview with Bild.
Drawing inspiration from the Danish model, which provides several thousand euros to individuals choosing to return home, CSU parliamentarian Jürgen Hardt suggested a similar system be adopted in Germany. Hardt specifically envisions easing the return process for those originating from Syria, framing it as a way to contribute to the reconstruction of their homeland and alleviate the financial burden on German municipalities. “Those who want to rebuild their homeland and Germany’s economic benefits should be offered an easier start in Syria” he declared.
However, the plan faces immediate scrutiny, particularly concerning the potential creation of a “pull factor” that could incentivize further migration to Germany. Stephan Mayer, another CSU parliamentarian and interior policy expert, proposed an initial payment of €1,000 per person, striking an attempt to find a balance between providing sufficient incentive and avoiding unintended consequences.
Critics are already questioning the ethical implications of financially influencing individuals’ decisions regarding their place of residence, alongside concerns that the scheme might be exploited. The proposed measure also raises fundamental questions about Germany’s responsibility to asylum seekers and the long-term impact on the country’s migration policies, potentially signaling a hardening stance on asylum and repatriation efforts in the face of ongoing political and economic pressures. The practical implementation and potential misuse of such a program are likely to become central points of debate in the coming weeks.
