Submit Your Work
Politics
Race, Caste, and Discrimination
Saturday, July 11, 2020

Germany’s evolving fight against the far-right extremism

This article is by
Inshiya Nalawala
Inshiya Nalawala
Western Europe

Share this article
Download as PDF
Cite this Article

Article Contributor(s)

Inshiya Nalawala

Article Title

Germany’s evolving fight against the far-right extremism

Publisher

Global Views 360

Publication Date

July 11, 2020

URL

Holger Munch, President BKA, Germany

Holger Munch, President BKA, Germany | Source:  Olaf Kosinsky (kosinsky.eu) via Wikimedia | Under Licence: CC BY-SA 3.0-de

Several shocking incidents of attacks on racial or religious minorities in Germany are making headlines for the last few  years.

In June 2019, a pro-refugee regional official Walter Lübcke was gunned down at his home in Central Germany by a 45-year old man, Stephan-Ernt’s. According to the prosecutor, Dr. Walter Lübcke's argument in favor of accommodating refugees in the town of Lohfelden had instigated xenophobic and extremist thoughts in the mind of his killer.

Two people were killed by a heavily armed man during a failed attempt of massacre at a Synagogue in the city of Halle in October 2019. In yet another shootout, nine immigrants and ethnic-minority Germans were killed during an unrestrained shooting in Hanau on 19th February 2020.

The government investigations and media reports blamed individuals linked or influenced by the far-right extremists groups for these attacks.

In November 2011, government Investigations revealed that National Socialist Underground(NSU), a Neo-Nazi terrorist group has fuelled the Nazi idealogy for decades and is responsible for various killings including murders of immigrants and foreigners.

Another far-right group known as the Frietal Group, launched attacks on refugee shelter houses and political opponents in the town of Saxony in 2015, claiming that they are protecting Germany from foreigners.

The German law enforcement authority also arrested members of the Revolution Chemnitz in 2018, who were allegedly planning attacks on immigrants, journalists and political opponents. Eight members of the group were sentenced to several years in prison by a court in Germany on 24th March 2020.

Looking at the rampant spread of hate, Holger Munch, the president of Federal Investigative Police Agency of Germany (BKA), accepted that suspects of the right-wing extremist under the observation of BKA have increased from 4 in 2012 to 46 in 2020, adding that “the far-right poses a pernicious and growing threat with 3 acts of far-right violence every day”.

In order to curb the spread of hatred, xenophobia, and anti-semitism by the right-wing activists, the German Government drafted a nine-point strategy to combat the recent.

The key aspects of the nine-point strategy a) Internet Service Providers to report any hate speech forwarded/shared on Social Media or the Internet along with the IP address of the wrongdoer to the government authorities, b) Tighten Gun laws with a mandatory check on requests to keep arms by the domestic intelligence police (BfV) was another stance of the government, c) Revising the existing prevention programs aimed to tackle right-wing extremism, and d)  Special protection for the politicians at local, state, and federal level who were considered to be under the threat from right-wing extremists.

The BKA President, Holger Münch said that by deploying a police patrol team online just like police officers patrol streets, the government can ensure promising results. With the increase in funding and personnel in Germany’s security apparatus sanctioned in the state budget discussion 2020, Münch reflected optimism that agencies could now work better and more efficiently in battling crime and violence.

Keeping aside the various controversies, it is also imperative to acknowledge the efforts of Dortmund, a western city in Germany, in curbing the rising trend of far-right extremism. Dortmund being an important city in the country invited migrants from Turkey and Southeast. More than 3000 immigrants from over 70 countries including Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan live here making it a hotspot, attracting xenophonic and far-right crimes.

In 2015, a special task force was set up in Dortmund to take action against far-right extremists and the city to a large extent has been successful in curbing their activities. According to the city's police chief, Gregor Lange, Offenses such as sedition, verbal assault, racist propaganda, and damage to property were down by 25%. Violent crimes such as arson and bodily assault went down by 35% year-on-year. The drop is even more impressive compared to five years ago, when figures were 50% and 80% higher, respectively.

The success of Dortmund city in fighting far-right extremism gives a hope that the nationwide implementation of nine-point strategy will help in curbing the rising trend of violent extremism in Germany

Support us to bring the world closer

To keep our content accessible we don't charge anything from our readers and rely on donations to continue working. Your support is critical in keeping Global Views 360 independent and helps us to present a well-rounded world view on different international issues for you. Every contribution, however big or small, is valuable for us to keep on delivering in future as well.

Support Us

Share this article

Read More

February 4, 2021 4:43 PM

Sweden’s No Lockdown Policy: How That Changed The Outcome

Sweden has gone against conventional wisdom in its response to the COVID-19 situation. While the neighbouring countries like Denmark, Finland and Norway imposed strict lockdown on the places and services frequented by the public, Sweden has chosen to not do so at all during the initial phases when COVID-19 started taking the shape of a worldwide pandemic. The public places like Cafes, restaurants, gyms, malls, playgrounds, ski slopes and some of the schools were kept open all across Sweden.

The country’s fight against the threat of pandemic was handled exclusively by the Public Health Authority, with no political interference. They believed that a lockdown only serves to delay the virus, which is not necessary since the health services are equipped to deal with the cases. They also made it clear that achieving herd immunity is also not their aim. The public authorities in Sweden instead relied on the public's sense of responsibility, and appealed to them to do frequent hand washing, observe social distancing and keep people over 70 years old from going out.

The state epidemiologist, Anders Tegnell, made multiple statements about the state’s unusual approach, such as 1) “Once you get into a lockdown, it’s difficult to get out of it,”, “How do you reopen?  When?” 2) “There is no evidence whatsoever that doing more at this stage would make

any difference. It’s far better to introduce stringent measures at very specific intervals, and keep them running for as little time as possible” , 3) " As long as the healthcare system reasonably can cope with and give good care to the ones that need care, it's not clear that having the cases later in time is better”.

The assumption of public responsibility did not work for Sweden and there were people out on the streets, in cafes, restaurants and playgrounds. Not wearing a mask was the social norm instead of the reverse. The models for charting the virus spread given by the concerned authorities also turned out to be faulty forcing them to rescind it. Over 2000 Swedish researchers and doctors signed a petition which claimed that there was not enough testing,tracking or isolation in the country. They believed that the authority has clearly not planned their response and that the authority’s claim for herd immunity has very little scientific basis, even though the government has repeatedly claimed that herd immunity is not what they were aiming for.

Sweden’s lax approach to the combating of coronavirus forced its neighbouring Scandinavian countries to close the border for the Swedish citizens. Some of the Swedish officials were worried for the possible harm to the long term relations between Sweden and its neighbours.  Also, the plan of letting life go on as usual to avoid the economic recession occurring due to a lockdown also failed as it didn’t shield  the country from economic slowdown.

Here comes the question; was the lockdown successful or not? There are some comparisons that have been drawn which indicate more deaths per 100,000 people than in nearby countries with homogenous population, even though it is significantly lesser than some of the European countries. While the infections rates are double that of Denmark, the death rates in comparison are much higher. This difference has been attributed to the fact that approximately half of these deaths have occurred in old care homes despite the stated priority of the officials to protect the elderly. This has been in part to the volunteer program, which replaced symptomatic old age home cares with new volunteers, hence increasing exposure. Another factor is the lack of protective equipment in such homes, along with laws preventing administration of medical procedures without the presence of doctors. There were reports of people threatened with lawsuits for banning visitors.

All of this led to Mr.Tegnell claiming that the ideal policy would have been something between what Sweden adopted and what the other countries did, in the light of what they know now. However this claim of Mr.Tegnell will be put to test when the second wave comes, later in time.

Read More