On the 29th of September, a spokesperson for the interior ministry confirmed that the federal government intended to send civil servants to Kabul in October in order to negotiate the deportation of Afghan nationals who have committed violent criminal offences directly with the Taliban. The announcement has sparked outrage and protests from consular staff and civil society organisations.
The German interior minister, Alexander Dobrindt of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), had already confirmed on the 18th of September that the federal government had established contact with representatives of the Taliban in order to arrange regular deportation flights to Afghanistan and, on Sunday 28th of September, a spokesperson for the ministry confirmed to the right-wing tabloid, Bild am Sonntag, that the government has made arrangements for civil servants to visit the Afghan capital Kabul this month to undertake direct negotiations with representatives of the Islamist militant group that governs Afghanistan, but is not recognised by most of the international community.
The move, which has been widely condemned by opposition politicians and civil society organisations, forms part of an increasingly strict asylum policy adopted towards Afghan nationals. There has already been controversy surrounding Germany’s reluctance to take in Afghans who served the German government before the Taliban’s return to power in 2021, with several administrative courts ruling that the winding down of the programme was unlawful.
Politicians from the governing parties have pointed to frequent expansions of the eligibility criteria, which, they claim, have led to Germany accepting far more Afghan refugees than originally planned, as the factor which made the programme’s continuation impossible. In September this year, however, a plane carrying 50 Afghan evacuees landed in Hannover following a court order allowing these individuals to settle in Germany.
Government aims to arrange regular, scheduled deportation flights
The discussions with the Taliban are aimed at setting up regular flights to deport, according to the German government, “criminals and violent offenders”. Two charter flights have already been organised, with Qatar serving as a mediator. In relation to the second of these flights, which took place in July this year, the government claimed that the deportees were 81 of the “most serious offenders”.
The first charter flight was arranged in 2024 when the so-called traffic light coalition, comprised of the Social Democrats (SPD), the Greens and the Free Democratic Party (FDP), was in power. A spokesperson for the current administration has pointed to the fact that the foreign minister at the time, Annalena Baerbock, organised six rounds of talks with the Taliban with aim of negotiating regular deportations.
Critics focus on human rights violations in Afghanistan
Critics of the plan, including opposition politicians and civil society organisations campaigning for the rights of refugees and asylum seekers, have expressed their alarm at its potential consequences. They have claimed that entering into direct negotiations with the Taliban risks legitimising the group on the international stage while also pointing out that deporting asylum seekers back to Afghanistan, where torture and other human rights are widespread, would put Germany in violation of its commitments under international law to protect the rights of refugees.
The foreign policy spokeswoman for Die Linke (the Left) in the Bundestag, Cansu Özdemir, said,in comments published in the newspaper, taz, “Here, through the federal government, an extremely concerning normalisation of an Islamist terror regime is taking place”. She went on to criticise the policy on the grounds that it was inconsistent with Germany’s aims and actions on the world stage: “It is, in addition, impossible to communicate to anyone why we have waged war against the Taliban for years, but are now negotiating with them and, as such, contributing to their normalisation”.
In response to a request for comment on the significance of the direct contact between the German government and the Taliban, Wiedke Judith, a spokeswoman for PRO ASYL, a civil society organisation dedicated to the protection of the rights of refugees, stated that “direct talks with the Taliban are part of a dangerous development of increasing acceptance and recognition of the Taliban regime — despite the large-scale abuses of human rights against its own population, particularly against girls and women”.
She also urged the federal government not to be “naïve”, stating: “Of course the Taliban is accepting the offers from Germany and Europe out of self-interest. They want to establish themselves on the international stage. That two representatives of the Taliban will apparently be employed at the embassy and consulate is exactly a part of this plan.” Judith further highlighted the potential risks to the families of deportees, noting that “[t]his is also triggering great concern and fear in the Afghan community because the Taliban will have access to their data as a result and could exercise pressure on relatives still living in Afghanistan”.
The interior ministry, meanwhile, has repeatedly sought to quell criticism by emphasising that discussions are taking place on a purely technical, with interior minister Dobrindt insisted that the talks “in no way at all” represented a German recognition of the Taliban’s legitimacy. The co-leader of the SPD Bundestag contingent, Sonia Eichweide, reinforced the government’s view that such “technical conversations” were necessary, but adopted a more cautious tone in her comments to the Welt newspaper when asked about the implications of the negotiations for relations with the Taliban in the long term, stating unequivocally that current contacts cannot “under any circumstances lead to contact with a terror regime becoming normalised”.
Negotiations trigger backlash from consular staff
Germany has, however, already begun deepening its diplomatic links with the Taliban in exchange for the hardline Islamist regime accepting deportees. Following the departure of the second chartered deportation flight in July, two representatives of the Taliban were allowed into Germany in order to take up posts at the Afghan consulate in Bonn. While staff at the consulate in Munich had already been acting according to the wishes of the Taliban, staff at the mission in the former capital of West Germany, who had been employed by the previous western-backed administration, refused to toe the regime line. On the 29th of September, taz reported that staff at the Bonn consulate had resigned en masse in protest at the decision to employ representatives loyal to the Taliban.
Are deportations to Afghanistan legal?
There is no consensus on the legality of deportations to Afghanistan, as illustrated by the contradictory outcomes of court cases relating to this question. Since 2021, four cases brought by Afghan nationals who had their initial applications for asylum rejected have been heard in higher administrative courts on appeal, with the decision to deport the plaintiffs overturned in two cases.
In a case brought before the higher administrative court in Mannheim, it was ruled that the plaintiff could not be deported because, given his circumstances, he faced the risk of being exposed to humanitarian conditions sufficiently poor such that they could be regarded as equivalent to torture under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. In the other three cases, the plaintiffs’ claims were assessed against similar criteria, with decisions influenced by whether the plaintiff had the means to ensure their survival in the short term or any family network to help them do so.
Of all asylum claims filed by Afghans between June 2023 and June 2024, only 1% were rejected once all avenues of appeal had been exhausted. 35% of Afghan asylum seekers were granted asylum after their first application and 39% received legal protection against deportation on the grounds that removing them from Germany would violate paragraphs 5 and 7 of Article 60 of the Residence Law, which prohibit deportations if the plaintiff’s ‘life or liberty’ would be in danger.
Paragraph 1 of the law provides protections against deportation if the plaintiff would be at risk of persecution linked to a series of protected characteristics, but the provisions of this paragraph can be superseded if the deportee has committed a violent crime for which they have received a prison sentence of two years or more, or if they are deemed to pose a threat to the public.
Civil society organisations supporting refugees point to Germany’s obligations under international law
Campaigners for the rights of refugees and asylum seekers have claimed that, irrespective of provisions in domestic law, deportations to Afghanistan would place Germany in violation of its obligations under international law. Wiedke, the spokeswoman for PRO ASYL, was unequivocal in her opposition to deportations to Afghanistan, emphasising that “[w]e all want to live in a society in which we feel safe and in which justice prevails. In Germany we have a well-functioning criminal system and people who have committed a crime are punished accordingly. She emphasised that her organisation’s stance was underpinned by a firm commitment to international law, stating: “If, in the event of a deportation, the threat of torture or inhumane treatment is present, then such a deportation is in violation of international law. And this applies to all human beings, regardless of any crimes”.
The federal interior ministry did not respond to a request for comment.
Image credit: C. Müller via Wikimedia Commons
