(de-news.net) – Senior CDU leaders, opposition parties, business groups, and economists have overwhelmingly rejected Michael Kretschmer’s (CDU) suggestion of easing his party’s stance toward the AfD, reaffirming that political cooperation remains unacceptable despite the party’s electoral gains. The AfD, meanwhile, reiterated its willingness to engage in talks.
Saxony Minister-President Michael Kretschmer’s proposal to relax the CDU’s long-standing ‘firewall’ toward the Alternative for Germany (AfD) has drawn broad rejection from senior CDU figures and party officials, who have reaffirmed that political cooperation with the far-right party remains off the table. The responses underscore the party leadership’s determination to preserve its established position ahead of key state elections, despite renewed internal debate over how to address the AfD’s growing electoral strength. Steffen Bilger, the parliamentary managing director of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group, stressed that there would be no negotiations with the AfD at the federal level. He argued that the CDU should remain focused on the upcoming state election campaigns instead of reopening internal disputes over the party’s approach to the AfD.
Among the most prominent critics within the CDU was Sebastian Lechner, chairman of the Lower Saxony CDU, who distanced himself from Kretschmer’s remarks and reiterated that the AfD remained the party’s principal political opponent. He said that any suggestion of opening the CDU toward the AfD was incompatible with the broad consensus established under the CDU leader, Chancellor Friedrich Merz. While distinguishing between routine parliamentary communication and political collaboration, Lechner argued that the AfD could neither be regarded as a mainstream conservative party nor reconciled with the CDU’s core values, adding that significant parts of the party were right-wing extremist. He further warned that weakening the political divide between the two parties would only strengthen the AfD, maintaining that the CDU could regain voter support by delivering credible policies on security, balanced immigration, affordability, employment, and confidence in public institutions rather than by compromising its principles.
Support for the existing party line also came from other senior CDU representatives. Wiebke Winter, leader of the CDU parliamentary group in Bremen, reaffirmed her backing for Merz and emphasized that the resolutions adopted at the party’s national conference remained binding for party members. Dennis Radtke, chairman of the CDU’s labor wing, likewise rejected any prospect of cooperation with the AfD, dismissing the renewed debate over the firewall as politically unproductive. Instead of revisiting the issue, he argued that attention should shift toward advancing proceedings related to a possible ban on the AfD before Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court.
Criticism of Kretschmer’s proposal also extended across the political spectrum, including from the CDU/CSU coalition partner SPD. Dirk Wiese, the parliamentary managing director of the SPD parliamentary group, argued that the AfD’s continued radicalization made a clear political separation essential. Georg Maier, the SPD interior minister of Thuringia, questioned Kretschmer’s belief that substantive dialogue with the AfD was possible, suggesting that the Saxon leader’s position reflected internal political pressures within the CDU in Saxony. Maier characterized the AfD as fundamentally opposed to democratic principles, accusing it of spreading disinformation, exploiting public anxieties, and maintaining close links to authoritarian governments and the broader far-right political environment. Armin Willingmann, the SPD’s leading candidate in Saxony-Anhalt, similarly ruled out cooperation, arguing that such a scenario would require the AfD to abandon the ideological positions that define the party.
Opposition, business leaders, and economists issue warnings
Kretschmer’s comments were also sharply criticized by opposition parties. Irene Mihalic, the Greens’ first parliamentary secretary, argued that the purpose of the firewall was not to prevent ordinary civil interactions but to exclude political cooperation with the AfD. She maintained that the party sought to replace Germany’s democratic constitutional order with an authoritarian political system. Luigi Pantisano, co-chair of the Left Party, argued that previous attempts by the CDU to weaken the AfD through accommodation had instead strengthened it electorally. He also attributed part of the AfD’s electoral gains to the broader political strategy pursued by Friedrich Merz.
Business organizations likewise voiced concern over any suggestion of softening the CDU’s position toward the AfD. Rainer Dulger, president of Germany’s employers’ association, argued that the AfD offered no credible answers to the country’s economic challenges, citing its anti-European Union, anti-euro, and pro-Russia positions as fundamentally incompatible with the interests of Germany’s export-oriented economy. He maintained that workable policy solutions could only emerge from centrist parties, warned that the AfD’s strong polling numbers were a source of concern, and expressed doubts that an AfD-led government would strengthen Germany’s attractiveness as a business location. Similar concerns were raised by the Federation of German Industries with a warning that political uncertainty could discourage investment, while the German Confederation of Skilled Crafts called for constructive alternatives to populism instead of simplistic political responses.
Academic criticism echoed many of those concerns. Marcel Fratzscher, president of the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW), argued that weakening the firewall would primarily benefit the AfD by granting it greater political legitimacy despite extensive research indicating that its policies would have damaging economic and social consequences. Fratzscher also contended that democratic parties had little to gain from engaging politically with the AfD and warned that regions with strong AfD support, along with many of the party’s own voters, would ultimately bear a disproportionate share of the negative consequences of an AfD government.
The AfD, by contrast, indicated through a spokesperson for party leader Alice Weidel that it remained willing to engage in open-ended discussions. This includes in Saxony-Anhalt ahead of the state election scheduled for September.
