Ulrich Siegmund, the AfD parliamentary group leader in Saxony-Anhalt, has affirmed that he supports defense production, provided that it benefits an “Remigration Offensive” demanded by the far-right party. Speaking to “Welt am Sonntag”, he clarified that “defense production is a vast field,” encompassing not just weapons, but also equipment, vehicles, protective technology, and other supplies needed by the Federal Armed Forces, police, and security agencies. Siegmund stressed that this sector must be strengthened-even if that strengthening is required to enforce law, consistently carry out deportations, and enable a genuine remigration offensive. This statement came in the context of the planned establishment of the Israeli defense company Elbit Systems in Sangerhausen.
The day before this interview, Siegmund had already commented on the potential establishment, stating, “We are not generally condemning the production of defense goods, because we will naturally need corresponding supplies during later remigration and deportation offensives. This is obviously also relevant to internal security, our own stability, and national defense. We are aware of this; it doesn’t come from nowhere.”
In strong contrast, Felix Banaszak, the Greens leader, labeled Siegmund’s remarks as “disturbing.” Speaking to the news portal T-Online, Banaszak revealed how readily the AfD appears willing to disregard constitutional boundaries to achieve its objectives. He argued that anyone who openly discusses using military goods against people to force them out of the country is advocating nothing less than internal armed violence to satisfy deportation fantasies.
Banaszak called on the political body to stop treating figures like Siegmund as serious interlocutors. The Greens leader asserted that the statement makes it clear that the AfD is not interested in political competition, but rather in a willingness to sacrifice the rule of law and human dignity for the sake of its own agenda. He concluded by urging anyone who fails to recognize this reality and continues to consider cooperation to question whether the Basic Law should still guide their actions.
