Turkish
Italian
Spanish
Portuguese
Romanian
Albanian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Bulgarian
Greek
Hungarian
French
Croatian
Czech
In the state of Thuringia, Germany, the long-standing political consensus on avoiding cooperation with the far-right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) is under increasing pressure. While formal coalitions with the AfD remain off the table, recent developments in parliamentary procedures and voting behavior are blurring the lines of what constitutes cooperation, fueling a nationwide debate.
CDU Minister-President Mario Voigt recently defended his party’s stance, stating that the AfD must be politically challenged rather than strengthened by procedural boycotts. He reiterated that there is no formal collaboration with the party but acknowledged that democratic rules in parliament require engagement on certain procedural matters, including committee assignments. Voigt emphasized that rejecting all interaction with AfD-elected representatives could undermine public trust in democratic institutions.
Diverging Positions Inside the Coalition
The three-party coalition in Thuringia — made up of the CDU, the newly formed Bündnis Sahra Wagenknecht (BSW), and the SPD — does not hold a majority in the state parliament, controlling exactly half of the 88 seats. This political deadlock has forced strategic maneuvering, and with it, accusations of undermining prior commitments.
A recent flashpoint came when Bernd Wittig, an AfD-affiliated lawyer, was elected as deputy judge to the state’s constitutional court. While the SPD claims its members voted unanimously against Wittig, the necessary votes for his election came from within the ranks of CDU and BSW lawmakers. The SPD, which had committed to a formal policy of no cooperation with the AfD, has found itself in a defensive position, trying to explain how such outcomes could occur without violating that principle.
Frank Augsten, leader of the BSW faction in Thuringia’s parliament, argued that political realities have shifted. He said earlier hard lines — where the CDU avoided the Left and the SPD refused anything connected to the AfD — have softened. Augsten even suggested that the SPD has reconsidered its once-clear position due to the coalition’s legislative challenges.
National CDU Figures Warn of Red Lines
Across the broader CDU leadership, the issue of how to interact with the AfD remains divisive. CDU General Secretary in Thuringia, Niklas Waßmann, emphasized that meaningful cooperation with the AfD is not possible, citing the party’s own rhetoric against the CDU. He noted that internal speeches by AfD leaders often describe the CDU as their primary enemy and obstacle to power.
Lennart Geibert, a CDU lawmaker and chair of the Junge Union in Thuringia, also warned against crossing into cooperation, stating that routine parliamentary dialogue differs from jointly advancing legislation. Geibert stressed that structured collaboration, such as co-drafting laws or coordinated voting strategies, must remain strictly off-limits when dealing with the AfD.
Carsten Körber, CDU Bundestag member from Saxony, echoed these concerns, citing the extremist affiliations of AfD figures like Björn Höcke and the party’s overall orientation. He rejected any attempt to normalize relations with a group that continues to promote far-right ideology.
CSU Maintains Firm Distance
CSU Chairman Markus Söder reaffirmed his party’s firm rejection of cooperation with the AfD, calling them “not a normal party.” He pointed to ongoing investigations by the German domestic intelligence service and questions around AfD financing as further reasons for caution. Söder criticized suggestions to grant the AfD chairmanships in Bundestag committees, warning that such steps would legitimize a party fundamentally opposed to democratic norms.
He described the AfD’s rise as a result of policy failures, particularly in areas such as migration, but insisted that responding with political concessions would be a mistake. For Söder, the AfD’s own statements show a desire to destroy the Union parties, not work with them.
Debate Around Jens Spahn Adds Fuel
Amid this backdrop, former Health Minister Jens Spahn has triggered debate by suggesting the AfD should be treated like other opposition parties in procedural matters. His comments were interpreted by some as a softening of the CDU’s stance, though he has denied this. Spahn said acknowledging the AfD’s presence in parliament does not equate to endorsing its agenda.
His potential candidacy for the position of CDU/CSU parliamentary group leader has gained support from party figures including Carsten Linnemann and even Söder himself. The decision is expected to be made public soon as part of broader personnel announcements related to the incoming cabinet under the expected chancellorship of Friedrich Merz.
SPD Under Pressure to Maintain Credibility
Meanwhile, the SPD in Thuringia is under scrutiny from both political allies and critics. The party maintains that no cooperation with the AfD has taken place, but critics argue that the passive allowance of AfD-supported outcomes — like Wittig’s court appointment — amounts to indirect collaboration. Party leader Lutz Liebscher has insisted that the coalition agreement remains intact and that no SPD action has supported AfD proposals or candidates.
Yet the SPD’s position has grown increasingly difficult to maintain. With votes being cast that result in AfD-backed appointments, questions persist about whether the coalition’s current form can uphold its original anti-AfD commitment. The agreement itself contains phrasing that permits procedural discussions “due to the blocking minority,” leaving room for interpretation.
Debate Ongoing
The future of Thuringia’s fragile coalition — and the broader political stance toward the AfD — remains uncertain. As regional and federal CDU leaders diverge on tone and tactics, and as SPD officials work to defend their credibility, the issue of how German democracy handles extremist parties continues to provoke sharp public and political debate.
