Germany’s far-right AfD faces accusations of seeking sensitive security information through parliamentary inquiries since 2020, raising concerns among officials that data on arms routes and drone defenses could aid Russia’s war on Ukraine and hybrid operations.
Germany’s far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) is facing renewed scrutiny over its extensive use of parliamentary questions to seek detailed information on security-related matters that critics say could be of interest to Russian intelligence.
The controversy centers on repeated inquiries by AfD lawmakers at both state and federal levels, particularly in eastern Germany, where the party has gained significant political strength.
Opponents argue that the pattern and scope of these requests risk exposing sensitive operational details related to arms deliveries to Ukraine and domestic counter-espionage measures.
The focus has fallen on Ringo Mühlmann, an AfD lawmaker in the Thuringia state parliament, where the party is currently the strongest political force.
Since at least 2022, Mühlmann has submitted written questions asking for granular data on military transit routes, including breakdowns by year, transport type—road or rail—and known stops.
In September alone, he sought information on Western arms transports passing through Thuringia, a key transit region for supplies headed toward Ukraine.
“An Incredible Interest”
Mühlmann’s inquiries have extended beyond logistics into technical security capabilities.
On a single day in June, he filed eight separate questions on drone detection and defense systems used by Thuringia’s police, including jammers, net launchers, and electromagnetic pulse devices, and asked whether those systems had been tested for operational use.
Thuringian Interior Minister Georg Maier said the volume and focus of the questions raised red flags.
“One cannot help but get the impression that the AfD is working through a list of tasks assigned to it by the Kremlin,” Maier told Handelsblatt, later telling POLITICO that the lawmakers showed “an incredible interest in critical infrastructure and the security authorities.”
Maier noted that foreign policy and defense fall outside the remit of state parliaments, making the geopolitical framing of the questions unusual.
The accusations come amid broader concerns in Berlin about Russian “hybrid warfare” tactics, including espionage, sabotage, and information-gathering inside Europe.
Volume as Intelligence Signal
While AfD leaders deny acting on Moscow’s behalf, security experts argue that risk does not hinge solely on intent.
Marc Henrichmann, a conservative lawmaker who chairs a Bundestag committee overseeing intelligence services, warned that Russian intelligence could extract value from the cumulative effect of numerous inquiries.
Individual questions may appear harmless, he said, but taken together they can reveal patterns about transport routes, aid flows, and security vulnerabilities.
Data cited by Spiegel underscores the scale.
Since 2020, AfD factions have submitted more than 7,000 security-related parliamentary inquiries—more than any other party and roughly one-third of all such questions nationwide.
In Thuringia, AfD lawmakers filed 1,206 of 1,738 security-related questions in the current legislative period, nearly 70 percent.
In the Bundestag, AfD inquiries accounted for more than 60 percent, or 636 of 1,052.
AfD leaders reject the allegations. Co-leader Tino Chrupalla said concerns about arms transports reflect citizen anxieties and accused critics of “perfidious” insinuations.
Mühlmann himself argued that responsibility lies with ministers, not lawmakers, to withhold classified information.
Under German law, governments are required to answer parliamentary questions but are not obliged to disclose information that would endanger national security.
Researchers note that the AfD has used parliamentary inquiries strategically since entering the Bundestag in 2017, both to pressure ministries and to monitor political opponents.
Whether driven by ideology or opportunism, analysts say the effect is the same: an expanded risk surface at a time when Germany remains a central logistical hub for Ukraine-related military support.
