Within the first days after the CDU and its sister party, the CSU, won the largest share of votes in the German federal elections, Friedrich Merz had already started to piss people off. In a parliamentary Kleine Anfrage (small inquiry) signed by Merz and the Chairperson of the CSU’s parliamentary group, they asked 551 questions about various German civil society groups. The questions focused especially on potential links between the various groups and political parties or state funding, which the Anfrage claims could be considered breaches of the political neutrality expected of groups which receive state funding.
Kleine Anfragen are tools through which fractions or members of the Bundestag can pose questions to the government, often forcing the government to provide information or take a stance on a given issue. They are addressed to the governing coalition.
The CDU’s questions appear to clearly constitute retribution against organisations who critiqued Merz’s breaking of the Brandmauer, when he relied on the AfD’s support in an attempt to pass rightwing migration reforms. Groups such as Omas gegen Rechts (who do not receive state funding), Foodwatch, the anti-Deutsch Antonio Amadeus Stiftung, Greenpeace and more were targeted for their supposed role in organising mainstream anti-fascist demonstrations.
Also targeted is the investigative media outlet CORRECTIV, who have released various reports on the extreme right in Germany. Most famously, they were responsible for investigating and breaking the story on the “remigration” conference in Potsdam last year. There, members of Europe’s white nationalist Identitarian movements met with AfD politicians to discuss a plan for sending migrants and Germans with immigration backgrounds to North Africa. Also featured in the CORRECTIV story were two CDU members with high-ranking positions in the party’s grassroots WerteUnion (values union) in North Rhine-Westphalia.
The questions in the Anfrage include issues such as whether Omas gegen Rechts gets funding from international NGOs, or whether the group has direct connections to political parties or actors. Regarding CORRECTIV, the CDU asked whether the (journalistic) organisation influenced “media reporting on political issues.” Both CORRECTIV and Greenpeace have already published answers to the questions, for which they rely mostly on information already available on their websites.
Particularly concerning is the preamble, where the CDU alleges that “some voices” claim (the vagueness appears intentional) that there is a “shadow structure”, which uses state money to influence politics. While the CDU does not use the word, their source for this claim is a Welt article talking about the German “Deep State”. The use of far-right terminology with antisemitic undertones so early after the election victory is a concerning sign of things to come.
The logic behind the 30 pages of questions can be seen in the context surrounding the the Anfrage. The CDU, having won the largest majority in the election with their partner the CSU, will most likely be the leader of the future governing coalition. Having failed to win an outright majority, however, they need to negotiate with other parties before forming a government. Until that takes place, the old Bundestag remains in place, meaning the SPD are still in effect ruling Germany.
The CDU are having one last run at playing opposition, in what appears to be a pre-planned stunt. Merz, not known for his subtlety, has left it perfectly clear that this was planned: while the questions were only released after the election, the document is actually dated to Friday the 21st, two days before Germans went to the polls.
This is why the questions in the Anfrage are posed to the SPD, rather than the organisations themselves, because parliamentary Anfragen are posed to the government. How the SPD is actually meant to answer a lot of these questions, many of which are questions for the NGOs themselves only posed to the government by means of tortured wording, is beside the point. Merz’s 551 questions should be read as a statement of intent.
