Last Sunday, regional elections took place in three German states, Baden-Württemberg, Rheinland-Pfalz and Sachsen-Anhalt. The results make abundantly clear that today the refugee question dominates the German political landscape more than anything else. The electoral victory of the extreme right Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) in all three states proves this. The prominence of the refugee issue within the political party system stands in absolutely no rational proportion to its significance for the population at large. The question of the refugees and the asylum seekers only became politically important because of the inability of the majority of political establishment to approach it in rational terms and propose intelligent and efficient policies. This inability is directly responsible for the triumph of the AfD. The extreme right says thank you for the failed policies.

Last week, EUROSTAT published some very interesting figures on refugees and asylum seekers (see here). In 2015, 1.25 million asylum applications were made across the European Union. This amounts for the EU as a whole to about a doubling compared to the previous year. For Germany, it is slightly more (from 177.000 in 2014 to 441.000 in 2015). Very interesting figures on refugees and asylum seekers are also available in a response of the Federal government to an inquiry of Die Linke in the Federal parliament (see here).

This sounds like a lot of refugees, but as a proportion of the general population there is no problem and no reason why things should not remain perfectly manageable. Throughout the EU, on average 2.470 applications are being made per one millions inhabitants. This amounts to ca. two and a half refugees per thousand inhabitants. Germany has about twice as many applicants (5.441 per thousand). Hungary has many more: 17.699 per million inhabitants. France recorded only 1.000, slightly more than Italy. Believe it or not, the UK, which is military involved in the conflicts in the Middle East, has only 591 applications, i.e. one tenth of the German figure. These figures make clear what needs to happen. A much-touted ‘European solution’ means, first of all, that a much more equal spread of asylum seekers must be arranged. The countries that have the highest numbers of applicants – Hungary, Sweden and Austria – deserve cooperation from other European nations.

The majority of the refugees come from three countries: Iraq (10 percent), Afghanistan (14 percent) and Syria (29 percent). Assuming that many applications are rejected (even Afghanistan is considered by Germany as a ‘safe country of origin’) and that the situation in Syria and Iraq will not substantially improve for years to come, Germany’s task amounts to approximately 0.5 to 1 percent of its population in terms of long term integration of refugees.

It is hard to understand how it is possible that the political republic is losing its mind over this issue. If the majority of the German politicians would tackle the refugee question with insight, foresight and rationality, there would be no question of any panic and the electorate would be far less attracted to parties that have no program but only promise to solve ‘the country’s biggest problem’ quickly and comprehensively. Angela Merkel, Malu Dreyer and Winfried Kretschmann are, in principle, examples of how this can and should be done, but their policies and proposals lack the economic dimension that is necessary to be truly convincing.

One only has to take a look at the latest developments in German construction (see here) to understand what would be possible if the German government would manage the influx of people and their integration pro-actively. Even now, although not that much is happening yet (and certainly not a boom), construction is definitely up. This is the first time in a long time. The growing activity in construction is mainly triggered by public contracts (presumably for the construction and the expansion of accommodation for refugees and asylum seekers).

If the Minister of Finance would stop clinging to his ridiculous black zero goal (i.e. balancing the Federal budget), but would instead read the signs of the times properly and aggressively stimulate public investment (which could be easily justified over the constitutional concerns given the unique challenge of the influx of refugees), no one would mind the refugees in a couple of months from now any longer. Instead, the public would look with amazement to the incredible boom that would take place in German construction. As by miracle, the many new workers that would be needed to realise this boom would already be in the country.

This could very well become the hour of the rebirth of the SPD, at least if they would at last understand the opportunity. The party is fighting for its survival. The party won a symbolic victory in Rhineland-Palatinate on Sunday, gaining less than one percentage point. The party lost so heavily in the other two regions and fell to such low levels that it is in danger of slipping into the nationwide insignificance. Now it is time for action. Sigmar Gabriel already rushed ahead, as is his way, demanding more public investment. This is positive, but it is not sufficient.  The SPD has to show its colours. The party must demand a turnaround of the German federal policies and threaten to leave the coalition if it does not get what it wants. Even more importantly, the SDP must demand a turnaround in the European fiscal policies. This is not about the resignation of the Minister of Finance. Much more is at stake than that.

Those who do not fight for their own lives cannot be saved by others. The enormous gains of the AfD in the imaginary refugee republic constitute an alarm signal of the first order, especially for the SPD.  The time of the easy options is over. One can form a grand CDU-SDP coalition of which the trademark during the last fifteen years has been the ‘successful’ and ‘solid’ policies of the centre with some social accents here and there. It is not enough and it won’t work.

Erhard Eppler, the SPD theoretician from Schwäbisch Hall, wrote in the late 1970s that it was time for the social democrats ‘to go beyond Keynes’ because otherwise they would ‘be beaten for remaining Keynesians’ (see here for the quote). That was a truly fatal piece of advice. Today, the SPD has been beaten without remaining Keynesian. Only the rediscovery of what the SPD knew for a long time already about the active role of the state in stimulating demand let the SPD regain its authentic identity and its real power potential of a left people’s party that can win elections and can win them very well.