State of fear and security in Germany
The discussion seeks to color the risk landscape in Germany, while the authorities’ assessment of the principal danger to the constitutional order remains consistent. Public stability is a focal point for the country. The interior minister, Nancy Faeser of the Social Democratic Party, spoke on Tuesday at the unveiling of the annual report from the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV). The message mirrors the one raised last year by Horst Seehofer, who previously held the interior portfolio in Angela Merkel’s cabinet.
Faeser argues that the long-standing warning about far-right violence represents the dominant threat to democracy in Germany. This view frames an ideological spectrum in which violence against political opponents, minorities, or state officials—members of parliament, mayors, and police—remains a persistent tactic of extremism. The current report’s data reinforce this claim, showing a total of 33,476 crimes with ideological motives. Of these, more than 20,357 in 2021 were classified as far-right, 6,142 as far-left, 409 as religiously motivated through Salafism or radical Islam, and 776 as foreign ideologies, including cases tied to intelligence services from outside the country. The remainder could not be clearly assigned to a single ideology. These figures present a stark picture of how extremist motives intersect with everyday life and public order. [BfV report, 2021 attribution]
War, crisis, and the pull of fear
Estimates from the BfV suggest that about 33,900 individuals, with roughly 13,500 described as violent, are ideologically linked to the far-right spectrum. Authorities maintain that these actors seek to recruit from non-radicalized segments of society by weaponizing current events. The so-called refugee crisis and the large-scale migrant influx in 2015, as well as the catastrophic floods in western Germany the previous year, are cited as catalysts that extremist groups use to deepen social divisions. Rising prices and economic strain are viewed as new levers that could widen support for the far right among economically distressed groups. The government emphasizes that restrictive measures over the past two years, paired with international tensions, have intensified a climate conducive to radicalization.
Alongside the broader social controls, a trend toward isolated violence—so-called lone wolves acting without visible organizational support—has gained traction online. The most recent extremist incidents linked to this pattern include assaults on a synagogue in Halle and on individuals with migrant backgrounds in Hanau. Those events illustrate the dangerous potential of individual actors who operate without overt networks but with a shared extremist worldview.
The siege mentality and its spread
The term siege, in English usage referring to a fenced site or confined space, appears prominently in the latest BfV report. The so-called siege scene is described as growing in influence. It rests on racist and antisemitic ideologies that advocate overthrowing the system through leaderless resistance and publicized attacks on minorities and government representatives. BfV chief Thomas Haldenwang emphasized this shift during a recent briefing. [BfV briefing, Haldenwang remarks]
The movement traces some of its roots to developments in the United States and is tied to accelerationism—the theory of hastening systemic contradictions to hasten collapse. It gains particular traction in online spaces and features prominently among younger audiences. Haldenwang notes that this digital footprint helps attract and mobilize new adherents, including first-time participants in extremist activity who may not have prior ties to established groups.
In this environment, officials caution that the battle against extremism requires persistent engagement, robust intelligence work, and clear communication with the public to prevent the spread of radical ideas. The report highlights the need for vigilance against the evolving tactics of the siege mindset, the online recruitment of vulnerable individuals, and the exploitation of social and economic grievances.