The AnewZ Opinion section provides a platform for independent voices to share expert perspectives on global and regional issues. The views expressed are solely those of the authors and do not represent the official position of AnewZ
Europe's political centre is under growing pressure as migration, living costs and declining trust in mainstream parties reshape the continent. Berlin's 20 September state election may offer another indication that Germany's political landscape is entering a new phase.
A July survey by Infratest dimap placed Die Linke narrowly ahead in Berlin on 22 per cent, with the CDU on 20 per cent. Yet the more consequential shift is taking place nationally. A late-July poll reported by Reuters put Alternative for Germany (AfD) at 27 per cent, ahead of the CDU/CSU bloc on 21 per cent. The same survey found that only 15 per cent of respondents were satisfied with Chancellor Friedrich Merz's performance. These figures do not prove that the political centre is collapsing, but they point to something more enduring than a passing protest vote: a widening gap between voters and the parties that have traditionally governed Germany.
The crisis in Ceuta has reinforced that impression. In the space of a week, around 72,000 migrants entered the Spanish territory on the North African coast, overwhelming local authorities. Most later returned to Morocco, but the scale and speed of the movement transformed a border emergency into a European political shock. Although Ceuta itself is outside the Schengen Area, the crisis quickly reopened arguments over the European Union's external borders, the credibility of its asylum system and the resilience of free movement within Europe.
The political significance of such events extends beyond the number of people who ultimately remain. Images of a border being overwhelmed create the perception that governments are losing control. That perception has become one of the most valuable political assets available to right-wing populist parties. For them, borders represent far more than immigration policy. They symbolise state authority, national sovereignty and the ability of governments to shape events rather than merely react to them.
Europe's response showed how rapidly a local migration crisis can become a continental dispute. Italy introduced one month of targeted checks on non-EU nationals arriving from Spain by air or sea, arguing that temporary measures were necessary for national security. Spanish and other EU citizens were not affected, but Madrid strongly objected and the matter quickly moved to Brussels. A crisis on Europe's southern edge had become a test of political trust between member states.
The legal framework permits temporary internal border controls under exceptional circumstances. Yet the political danger lies in repetition. Measures introduced as short-term safeguards increasingly become part of the normal landscape. Each government can defend its own decision as proportionate; taken together, however, the controls raise a broader question: is emergency management gradually replacing the assumptions on which Schengen was built?
Germany has followed a similar path. Berlin reintroduced controls on its border with Poland in October 2023 in response to irregular migration. Poland then introduced its own temporary checks on its borders with Germany and Lithuania in July 2025. These measures had practical aims, but they also carried political symbolism. A border once presented as evidence of European reconciliation became a source of renewed tension between neighbouring governments.
The pattern exposes a structural weakness in the Schengen system. Free movement depends on confidence that the European Union's external borders are managed effectively and that responsibility is shared. When that confidence weakens, national governments fall back on unilateral controls. The result is a cycle of emergency decisions, diplomatic disputes and negotiations that contain the immediate pressure without resolving its underlying causes. Each crisis leaves the system slightly more defensive than before.
Germany's domestic economic climate makes the issue more politically combustible. The economy has returned to modest growth, and real wages rose by 1.8 per cent year on year in the first quarter of 2026. Yet the inflation shock has not disappeared from household perceptions. Housing remains expensive in major cities, and German households still face some of the highest electricity prices in the European Union. Statistical recovery and lived experience are not always the same.
Voters rarely compare their lives with macroeconomic forecasts. They compare them with their own expectations and with the standard of living they believe they have lost. When wages recover more slowly than confidence, political dissatisfaction can persist even after the headline data begin to improve. The ballot box becomes the place where economic unease, cultural anxiety and frustration with government converge.
Younger voters are not immune to this anti-establishment mood. Greater openness to parties such as the AfD does not always indicate a coherent ideological shift to the right. In many cases, it reflects disillusionment with a political system that appears unable to offer convincing answers to practical problems: unaffordable housing, uncertain career prospects, pressure on public services and a sense that political debate has become detached from everyday life. In that environment, promises of order and control can sound less radical than they once did.
This is why the future of the Brandmauer - the political firewall against cooperation with the AfD - has become one of the central questions in German politics. The mainstream parties continue to reject formal cooperation with the AfD, particularly at federal and state level. But the boundary is under increasing pressure as the party's vote share rises and coalition arithmetic becomes more complicated.
The Brandmauer is not a legal ban. AfD voters are represented in parliament, and other parties remain free to refuse coalition cooperation. Defenders of the firewall argue that democratic parties are not obliged to normalise a movement they consider hostile to liberal democratic norms. Critics counter that permanently excluding a party supported by a quarter of the electorate can deepen alienation and reinforce the claim that the political establishment ignores inconvenient voters.
If the firewall weakens, it is unlikely to collapse through a single dramatic national decision. Erosion would probably begin through local exceptions, tactical votes, municipal agreements or issue-by-issue cooperation. Small precedents can change what is considered politically possible. The decisive shift may therefore occur long before any mainstream party formally announces a coalition with the AfD.
Germany is not alone. France, the Netherlands and Austria have all experienced a similar normalisation of parties once treated as outsiders. Support for National Rally, the PVV or the FPÖ does not always reflect a fully developed right-wing ideology. Often it is a vote against governments seen as unable to manage migration, contain living costs or guarantee public order. Protest may begin at the margins, but repeated failures by the political centre can make it permanent.
This development has institutional consequences. As party systems fragment, forming stable governments becomes more difficult. Belgium has repeatedly shown how prolonged coalition negotiations can weaken public confidence. The danger is not only that established parties lose support, but that governments become harder to form and less capable of decisive action. Political paralysis can damage trust as deeply as failed policy.
Describing these changes simply as a shift to the right therefore misses the broader picture. Right-wing populism is also a symptom of declining confidence in state capacity. Many voters no longer believe political elites can manage migration effectively. Others doubt that European institutions can respond to crises quickly or consistently. Many simply feel that the established parties no longer understand the pressures shaping everyday life.
Migration connects these concerns. Every major shock at the European Union's external borders quickly becomes a debate about Schengen, solidarity and responsibility. Questions that begin in Ceuta, Lampedusa or the Greek islands do not remain there. They spread through national media, party systems and election campaigns because migration has become one of the clearest tests of whether governments can reconcile humanitarian obligations with public order.
The Berlin election should therefore be viewed in a broader European context. It is not simply a contest between parties in one German state. It is another measure of whether voters believe democratic governments can provide security, economic stability and competent administration. Traditional ideological divisions still matter, but they are increasingly filtered through a simpler question: does the system work?
Whether the Brandmauer survives will depend less on declarations by political leaders than on the ability of mainstream parties to restore public confidence. A firewall can define the limits of coalition politics. It cannot, by itself, persuade voters that borders are secure, living standards are protected or institutions are responsive.
Ceuta has demonstrated the speed with which a local border crisis can become a European political issue. Berlin may now offer another signal that migration, economic insecurity and public trust have become inseparable. Unless mainstream parties provide credible answers on all three, right-wing populism will cease to appear a temporary protest and instead become a permanent feature of Europe's political landscape.
U.S. Central Command said 101 commercial vessels have been redirected in the Strait of Hormuz, while oil prices rose more than three per cent&...
A Russian strike on a farm warehouse in Pryluky, north-central Ukraine, has killed at least three people, local police said. Meanwhile, EU foreign ...
Amazon has paused its operations with 21 Air, the Miami-based cargo carrier that operated an Amazon Air flight which crashed at Miami International...
Maritime trackers received new reports of an attack on a ship in the Strait of Hormuz on Sunday, according to the UK Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO), adding to concerns about energy supplies after Saudi Arabia shut down a vital oil pipeline on Saturday.
A Kyiv-Warsaw train was struck near the Polish border, Ukraine's state railway firm said on Sunday. No passengers were injured. Ukrainian Railways said that the country's railways were facing systematic attacks for a second day and warned of widespread delays.
Saudi Arabia has temporarily shut down its 1,200-kilometre East-West oil pipeline after it was hit by a drone attack, with Riyadh and Baghdad saying the strike originated from Iraq.
Swedes vote in an election on Sunday (13 September) that could see the far-right enter government for the first time if the country's right-wing parties can form a majority.
Russia's Defence Ministry said its forces struck two cargo vessels overnight in the Ukrainian Black Sea port of Chornomorsk, the Interfax news agency reported on Saturday.
The next oil shock may not begin at an oilfield. It may begin when a tanker captain refuses to sail, an insurer withdraws cover, a bank declines to finance a cargo, or a refinery discovers that crude oil is available but diesel is not.
BRICS has the scale to challenge the Western-led order. But it still lacks the political unity and financial machinery needed to turn its multipolar rhetoric into power.
Opening the Türkiye-Armenia frontier could cut costs, revive rail links and bring visitors through Kars. But traffic is not prosperity. Unless goods stop, businesses grow and jobs remain, Kars may become a corridor from which others profit.
Ankara marked a genuine transfer of conventional responsibility from Washington to its allies. But budgets are rising faster than command, integration and strategic enablers. Europe can carry more of NATO. It still cannot replace America.
Public records reveal a layered effort spanning a foundation-provided campaign hub, international lawyers, registered lobbyists, diaspora advocates and professional communications firms. The network is not secret, and its existence is not the scandal. The missing provenance often is.
You can download the AnewZ application from Play Store and the App Store.
What is your opinion on this topic?
Leave the first comment