First published in Deník N.

In Berlin, you can be whoever you want to be – as long as you can afford it. By some estimates, the city is short of 100,000 flats. Economist Alexander Kritikos of the German Institute for Economic Research explains how the housing crisis contributed to support for radical political parties.

Over the past 10 years, rent has risen 75 percent to €15.78 per square metre excluding energy and other services. Germany as a whole is short of around 1.4 million lower and middle-priced homes.

The housing crisis is one manifestation of wider discontent that is also reflected in support for political parties at opposite ends of the spectrum, from the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) to the far-left Die Linke (The Left).

Find out:

• Why so few new homes have been built in Berlin.

• Will the Left’s plans to purchase homes from private owners work?

• What lies behind growing support for the AfD?

• How Germany can get back on track with digitisation.

Germany is one of Europe’s richest countries, but it suffers major housing shortages. How come?

The housing crisis is a problem in three or four large cities. Berlin is one of them, and it is a truly major issue here, especially after an influx of tens of thousands of people from within and outside the country.

What happened in 2003?

2003 was a turning point when Berlin became a city of start-ups. Before then, the people were unable to rent out their flats due to an oversupply.

When in the 1990s Berlin was restored as the capital, people expected that many would move here. But the calculations at the time overlooked one thing: the city [West Berlin] had been surrounded by a wall, and its residents could not move to the suburbs.

In the 10 to 15 years following the fall of the Berlin Wall, when rents were at their lowest, more people left the city than arrived. Developments were therefore exactly the opposite of what had been expected. The trend did not stop until 2003, when the last major wave of residents left.

Berlin’s mayor at the time began promoting the slogan that Berlin was “poor but sexy”.

The city began attracting start-ups. It had an excellent environment for their development and outstanding research institutions. From then until today, more people have been arriving in Berlin than leaving it.

It is therefore clear that, from a certain point onwards, we no longer had any additional flats or houses available to offer.

“When you expropriate something, no new homes are built. It does not solve the housing shortage; you merely shift it from one owner to another”

With so many people arriving, why were more homes not being built?

Building new homes became a bureaucratic nightmare. Obtaining all the permits and dealing with administrative matters took a great deal of time.

And construction became exceptionally expensive while politicians regulated rent levels. Many investors concluded that building homes was not worth their while. For them, costs were too high, bureaucracy too complex and income too low.

Doubts over Left’s proposed flat buy-backs

The Left plans to buy back 220,000 flats from corporate landlords. In 2021, 58 percent of Berliners voted in a referendum in favour of expropriation. Now, the Left wants to fulfil this mandate. What do you think?

When you expropriate something, no new homes are built. It does not solve the housing shortage; you merely shift it from one owner to another.

The Left also promise the number of flats will increase, but it will not. It cannot increase in this way.

Historically, Berlin’s housing stock was managed by public institutions, who offered lower rents. And we saw that those who benefited were people with good connections to those allocating the flats.

Whenever demand exceeds supply, other ways of allocating resources emerge, whether through personal connections, under-the-table payments or otherwise.

Germany has the highest number of foreign-born residents in the EU. Does immigration play a role in the housing crisis?

It does, insofar as migrants also come to Berlin. But we must really distinguish between refugees and highly educated people who come here to establish their own businesses. They too are immigrants. So I would not say that migration is the problem. Rather, more people are arriving in Berlin than leaving, and that creates excess demand for housing.

This article continues, but the full version is available only to EUobserver.com subscribers. Visit account.euobserver.com/membership

The HQ of the German Federal Intelligence Service (BND) in Berlin, Germany. © Global Look Press / Michael Kuenne

RT | September 24, 2026

Germany’s opposition lawmakers have accused Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s government of seeking to create a “secret police” by dramatically expanding the powers of the country’s intelligence agencies.

The accusations came during the first parliamentary debate on the reform on Thursday, with lawmakers from the Alternative for Germany (AfD), the Left and the Greens raising concerns over surveillance and fundamental rights. The government argues that the changes are needed to counter growing security threats.

Under a reform approved by the cabinet last month, the BND foreign intelligence agency and the BfV domestic security service would gain broader operational powers, allowing them to move beyond primarily gathering and analyzing information.

Among the proposed changes, the BND could sabotage foreign companies, penetrate foreign IT systems and disable weapons deemed a threat to Germany. The BfV, meanwhile, could secretly enter homes and access computers and mobile phones under certain circumstances.

German Interior Minister Alexander Dobrindt said the reform would usher in a “new era” by turning the country’s intelligence services into “genuine intelligence agencies” capable of actively countering threats. He said Germany must bring its services to the level of its European partners.

AfD MP Gottfried Curio branded the proposed overhaul of the BfV “Stasi 2.0,” referring to East Germany’s notorious secret police, and called the reform a “coup against the rule of law.” The AfD, however, supports granting the BND greater operational powers.

The BfV has itself been locked in a legal battle with the AfD. In 2025, the agency designated Germany’s most popular party a “confirmed right-wing extremist” organization, but a Cologne court in February barred it from applying that classification while the case proceeds.

The ruling came months before the AfD scored major gains in regional elections. It won 43.8% in Saxony-Anhalt earlier this month and 38.3% in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania on Sunday.

Green MP Konstantin von Notz said granting the BfV such extensive powers would be a “grave mistake” and questioned whether parts of the reform would survive scrutiny by the Constitutional Court. He nevertheless backed giving the BND greater powers.

Left Party MP Clara Buenger went further, warning that the BfV could become a “new German secret police.”

“Fundamental rights are being trampled on here,” she said, arguing that the agency would gain powers traditionally reserved for police.

The debate comes as Merz’s government braces for growing AfD influence at the regional level. The Telegraph and Die Welt reported in July that Berlin was developing a “secret plan” to counter potential “obstructionism” by regional authorities, allowing the federal government to bypass them in a crisis.

The German government wants the intelligence reform to take effect at the beginning of 2027. It still requires approval from both the Bundestag and Bundesrat.