Germany urgently needs to attract migrant workers – it just doesn't want them to feel welcome
Friedrich Merz's government has sent a clear message to anyone thinking about coming to live in Germany: don't. Yet its message to those who want to come to Germany to work is: we need you.
This might sound like a contradiction, but it is a revival of the thinking that drove the 'guest worker' programme of the postwar boom years. Between 1955 and 1973, West Germany sought to rebuild its economy by attracting labour, mainly from Turkey but also from Italy, Portugal and Yugoslavia. Yet it did so without giving much consideration to the human needs of the people coming.
Repeating that experiment, and the social tensions it created, at this moment would be even worse.
The Wirtschaftswunder (economic miracle) fuelled record growth and labour shortages. Now, Germany's economy is in recession, but it desperately needs people to fulfil basic public services. Above all, it needs them to help finance its mounting pensions bill.
Given that Germany has also become ground zero for Europe's heightened sensitivity around immigration after the backlash that followed Angela Merkel's open-door policy towards Syrian refugees a decade ago, it's worth paying attention to how Berlin navigates the issue. So far, Merz is providing a masterclass in what not to do.
On the one hand, the conservative chancellor is fuelling rightwing narratives that suggest migration is a threat to the country. On the other, he speaks as the voice of German business and pleads for more foreign workers.
'We need skilled immigrants as drivers of progress,' Merz said this month, at a ceremony to honour the contributions of Özlem Türeci and Uğur Şahin – the Turkish immigrants behind Covid vaccine pioneer BioNTech. He added that anti-immigration 'ideologies' were a threat not just to Germany's prosperity 'but even worse, their narrow-mindedness threatens the future of our liberal order'.
But his government has sent exactly the kind of signal he claims to decry. Germany has continued with a new policy of rejecting asylum seekers at its borders, despite a court order calling it unlawful and a violation of EU law. The border rejections standoff comes despite a dramatic decline in refugees – up to April 2025, the figures were down by nearly half from the previous year.
Another leg of Merz's anti-migration strategy is to put an end to 'turbo naturalisation', which allows newcomers the opportunity to apply for a German passport after as little as three years in select cases. The official justification is that ending fast-track citizenship will eliminate a 'pull factor' and reduce illegal migration.
But obtaining citizenship and skirting migration rules have nothing to do with one another. Crossing the border as an irregular migrant can be an act of desperation, and at times opportunism. Getting a German passport requires legal residency at the very least, but also involves various hurdles and a significant amount of paperwork.
The fast-track procedure is even more discretionary and reserved for people that exhibit 'exceptional integration efforts', such as speaking German at an advanced level, consistently paying taxes and taking part in the community, for example by volunteering at local charities or sports clubs.
Eliminating that route, which only opened in June 2024, will have very little impact. Last year – when a rush to take advantage of the new process might have been expected – only about 7% of people receiving German citizenship had an accelerated application, according to federal statistics agency Destatis.
But Merz's moves reinforce the narrative that Germany is being overwhelmed by newcomers. The approach bolsters the far-right AfD – a close second in the polls – which has called for the deportation of thousands of people, including some with migrant backgrounds who hold German citizenship.
Controlling entry is legitimate, but such grandstanding policies fuel xenophobic sentiment and don't allay the worries of anxious citizens. Also, the political dividends are limited.
Sign up to This is Europe
The most pressing stories and debates for Europeans – from identity to economics to the environment
after newsletter promotion
While the fevered discussion around migration has kept it as the top issue for Germans, only 38% of people ranked it as one of their three main concerns, which is four percentage points lower than in April, according to an Ipsos survey. Economic concerns such as inflation and poverty/inequality are the other top concerns.
The harder-to-face reality is that Germany could use all the help it can get. With older Germans heading into retirement by the millions over the coming decade, the country must welcome a net 400,000 newcomers each year to keep things balanced and shoulder the rising cost of pensions.
But this isn't the postwar era, where Germany can sign agreements with poorer countries and expect thousands to arrive. There's global competition for qualified workers, and Germany is at a disadvantage because of its language and its reputation for being unwelcoming.
That's a legacy from the mismanaged Gastarbeiter (guest worker) programme, when Germany had neither a plan for how to integrate the people it lured for work, nor the desire to do so. It also reflects a national identity left narrow and underdeveloped due to its Nazi past.
The former footballer Mesut Özil, born in 1988 to a Turkish guest-worker family in Germany's Ruhr Valley, never felt fully accepted. Though he played a starring role in Germany's 2014 World Cup win, he said: 'When we win, I'm German; when we lose, I'm a foreigner.'
His story shows how acceptance is out of reach for many. And it's not isolated. According to a recent study by the Friedrich Ebert Foundation, between 2015 and 2022, 12 million people migrated to Germany. The study also said that, in the same period, more than 7 million migrants left again. The main reasons were difficulties feeling part of German society.
The next blow could be looming. According to a study by Germany's Institute for Employment Research, a quarter of migrants in the country – around 2.6 million people – are considering packing up and leaving.
Germany's self-imposed isolation will lead to a slow erosion of the labour force unless it is urgently addressed. Revising the narrative around migration to recast it as part of the solution would be a good starting point.
But the political class hardly looks ready. As Markus Söder, the conservative premier of Bavaria, recently told the rightwing media outlet NiUS: 'Of course we need immigration– unfortunately.'
Chris Reiter and Will Wilkes are the co-authors of Broken Republik: The Inside Story of Germany's Descent Into Crisis. Both cover Germany from Berlin and Frankfurt, respectively, for Bloomberg News
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
43 minutes ago
- The Sun
Spy chiefs probed ‘Russian double agent' at the heart of MI6 in huge 20-year global operation – and never caught ‘mole'
SPY chiefs probed a suspected "Russian double agent" at the heart of MI6 in a 20-year global operation. An investigation launched into the alleged mole, dubbed Operation Wedlock, sent surveillance officers around the world. 6 6 6 It included a team of over 30 MI5 officers, as reported by the Guardian, whose work spanned up to two decades. One on occasion, they were sent to the Middle East and sheltered in a CIA safe house. It is understood they were sent on the mission under terms that would have been illegal according to international law. Despite their work, MI5 were unable to conclude whether there had been a mole spying for Russia. A source told the Guardian: "We thought we had another Philby on our hands". Kim Philby was a prominent member of the notorious Cambridge Five, a ring of spies who passed information to the Soviet Union. With fascism plaguing Europe, Philby headed for Austria where he became active in helping the oppressed working class socialists. Alongside his wife, Jewish socialist Litzi Friedmann, the couple helped the anti-fascist cause in Vienna but later fled to London to escape the Nazis. Philby's life changed when he was introduced to a resident Soviet agent, code-named "Otto", at Regents Park. Along with four other Cambridge students, they were persuaded to start double lives as spies for the Soviets. Through the help of the KGB they worked their way into government jobs and passed on state secrets to the Russians. Philby was so good at his job he even secured a high-level job with MI6. In 1949 he was sent to Washington where be became a liaison intelligence officer 'combating Soviet subversion in Western Europe'. However, after two members of the Cambridge Five defected, suspicion grew over Philby and he resigned from the Foreign Office. Cleared of treason allegations, MI6 posted him to Beirut, where he worked as a correspondent for The Observer. In 1962, his cover was blown during a conversation with a MI5 officer at a party and he later made a 'sham' confession to be granted immunity. A year later a KGB guide smuggled him into Russia where he lived out the remainder of his life and was treated as a 'hero'. MI6 is the intelligence agency which supplies the Government with foreign intelligence (as opposed to MI5 which deals with domestic security threats). Its existence was not formally acknowledged until 1994. It is regarded as one of the best spy agencies in the world. Describing its work on its official website, the agency says: 'Our mission is to provide Her Majesty's Government with a global covert capability. 'We collect secret intelligence and mount operations overseas to prevent and detect serious crime, and promote and defend the national security and economic wellbeing of the United Kingdom.' Meanwhile, MI5 is widely understood to focus its intelligence efforts inside the UK but that isn't always the case. With threats to Britain's security often coming from abroad, the agency says it does "work outside the UK where it's necessary to protect the UK's national security or to counter security threats". It describes itself as a "publicly accountable civilian intelligence organisation", not a "secret police force", as it does not have the power to arrest people. Reporting to the Home Office, it was formed in 1909 under British army captain Vernon Kell to identify and counteract German spies in the country, according to the Britannica. The MI5 probe into an alleged mole was sparked in the 1990s and continued to at least 2015. It was launched after a tip off from the CIA in America, where they believed a British intelligence officer was working for Russia. Vladimir Putin was in charge of the FSB, Russia's secret intelligence service, at one point in the investigation. A source said: '[We were told] the target was a Russian spy. The US believed he was leaking information to the Russians. "He was suspect 1A. The job was taken more seriously than any other [MI5] was involved in. Wedlock eclipsed them all.' As reported by the Guardian, it has been revealed the UK believed they had identified the alleged spy. MI5 specialists were put in charge of tracking him down, although they did not operate from the Westminster HQ. The mission was so top secret, one insider claimed the officer in charge was briefed about the task in a church. Instead, the team were based in Wandsworth, south London, which was near an MI6 base. The officers were told the suspected mole held a senior role at MI6 and listening devices were planted inside his home, as well as secret cameras. He was tracked across the world, with officers travelling as far as Asia and the Middle East. The agents were given authentic passports, but fake names, and told they would be "on their own" if caught. A source also claimed the suspect was not thought to have been working by himself, but aided by two other people. The insider added how Wedlock was a 'highly unusual operation, the longest in recent memory and probably the most expensive'. 'MI5 never got the conclusive proof it was looking for,' they added, and MI6 "still [potentially] has a mole to find". 6 6 6
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Trump says he won't appoint anyone to Fed who doesn't back rate cuts
WASHINGTON, June 27 (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday he would not appoint anyone to head the Federal Reserve who would not lower interest rates from where they are, setting perhaps the most explicit litmus test yet for candidates to be the next central bank chief to align with his demands for steep rate cuts in order to get the job. "If I think somebody's going to keep the rates where they are or whatever, I'm not going to put them in," Trump said. "I'm going to put somebody that wants to cut rates. There are a lot of them out there." Presidents in the past have complained about the Fed setting interest rates too high for their liking, but Trump has taken it further than any recent U.S. leader in setting a clear expectation for whomever he nominates to be in line with his wishes. Trump, who said rates should be cut to 1% from the current Fed benchmark rate of 4.25% to 4.50%, has repeatedly railed against Fed Chair Jerome Powell for not lowering borrowing costs since Trump returned to the White House in January, and he did so again on Friday. "I'd love him to resign if he wanted to, he's done a lousy job," Trump, speaking at the White House, said, while also labeling the Fed chair as "stupid." After raising rates aggressively coming out of the pandemic to combat the largest inflation outbreak since the 1970s and 1980s, the Fed lowered them a bit in the second half of last year but has not cut them since Trump returned to office. That is largely because Powell and the large majority of policymakers are concerned Trump's tariff policies in particular may rekindle inflation, and they prefer to wait longer to see if that develops before lowering rates again. Fed officials themselves have penciled in half a percentage point of cuts later this year, although that is a fraction of the reduction Trump is demanding. Trump's latest rant against Powell comes as he has largely backed away from threats to try to fire the Fed leader after a recent Supreme Court opinion appeared to align with long-standing views that presidents cannot dismiss top Fed officials over policy disagreements. The protection is seen as central to the Fed's independence from political interference in policymaking, which is seen as a critical pillar of its credibility as the world's most influential central bank. Trump has since turned his focus more to a successor for Powell, whose term as chair expires in May 2026. He has in recent weeks said he has three or four potential candidates in mind and he would make a decision soon. Most past Fed chair appointments have typically been made roughly three or four months before the vacancy was scheduled. There are about 10 months remaining in Powell's tenure as chair, and an early nomination by Trump is seen as an effort to undermine Powell's authority by giving voice to a "shadow chair" who would advocate for a different policy trajectory. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, seen as one of the potential candidates to replace Powell, downplayed the "shadow chair" idea, however. "I don't think anyone's necessarily talking about that," he told CNBC. Bessent noted that just one seat on the Fed Board of Governors is scheduled to open up within the year when Governor Adriana Kugler's term expires in early 2026. While Powell's term as chair expires next May, he is not required to leave the Fed altogether until his board seat expires in 2028. That leaves Kugler's expected departure as the first opportunity for a Trump appointment. "So there is a chance that the person who is going to become the chair could be appointed in January, which would probably mean an October, November nomination," Bessent said. Asked about reports that he is among the pool of candidates, Bessent said: "I'll do what the president wants, but I think I have the best job in Washington." Others seen as possible nominees for the job are White House economic adviser Kevin Hassett, former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh, and current Governor Christopher Waller. Waller, appointed by Trump during the Republican's first term in office, in the past week has said he is open to cutting interest rates as soon as the Fed's next meeting at the end of July.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
DAILY MAIL COMMENT: Britain's annus horribilis under an accidental PM
In an Ipsos/Mori survey conducted exactly a year after the 1997 election, Sir Tony Blair 's popularity was even greater than when he steered his party to its momentous victory. Labour was polling at a thumping 54 per cent – 11 points higher than on election day and his personal approval ratings were similarly sky-high. Crucially, his backbench MPs adored him, having been propelled back to relevance after 18 years in the wilderness. There were a few exceptions, but the idea of large-scale rebellion was unthinkable. Compare and contrast with Sir Keir Starmer 's abject first year in office. The Daily Mail said from the start that his was a 'loveless landslide'. And so it has proved. He is the most unpopular incoming PM on record. His approval rating of minus-39 is a staggering 83 points behind where Sir Tony was at the same stage. Labour is also languishing behind Reform UK in the polls, his backbenchers are in open revolt and he has been forced into three humiliating policy U-turns inside a month. Meanwhile, the growth he so confidently promised has atrophied, the UK's already frightening debt and deficit are ballooning and his Chancellor's plans to 'fix the foundations' of the economy are in tatters. After the latest rebellion over welfare reform, she must find upwards of £3.2billion to balance her sums. This is sure to mean more punishing tax rises – breaking yet another flagship promise. Rachel Reeves is now a lame-duck Chancellor, who will have to seek the permission of her backbench colleagues for any major spending reform. She is clearly living on borrowed time. Her boss may be a little more secure – but the storm clouds are gathering. Having forced him into climbdowns on two key policies, his dissident MPs smell blood. Rebellion may become an addiction. Even with the concessions, the welfare Bill remains a mess and may well fail to pass in the Commons on Tuesday. If it does, Sir Keir's authority will be shot, and rumours will swell about a leadership challenge. It would be no great surprise. In many ways he is an accidental prime minister. Despite his huge majority, only one in five of those on the electoral roll voted for him. He won by default, because the Tories defenestrated their biggest electoral asset, then dissolved into a dysfunctional, unelectable rabble. Not being a Conservative was enough to sweep Sir Keir into power, but we quickly discovered he has feet of clay. The truth is he's a man of few real convictions and knows little about the politics of government. He paid billions to surrender the Chagos Islands on spurious legal grounds and absented himself from historic debates on assisted suicide and late-term abortion. Now, in just 12 months, he has lost control of his party. So, what happens next? Can he recover, or is he a permanent hostage to his party's class-warrior Left? Either way the next four years could be horrendous for anyone with a private sector job, savings, property or a pension pot. The Right must use this time to resolve its differences and unite. The Tories and Reform together currently command 46 per cent of the popular vote, comfortably enough for a super-majority. By 2029, the country will be even more on its knees than today. If neither Kemi Badenoch nor Nigel Farage can beat Labour on their own, it is their patriotic duty to do so together.
