Following recent criticism from U.S. Senator Marco Rubio, the German government has reaffirmed its stance on classifying the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party as a suspected extremist organization.

The dispute emerged after Rubio described the move as “tyranny in disguise,” claiming it posed a threat to democratic principles and freedom of political expression.

Speaking on May 4, 2025, a spokesperson from Germany’s Interior Ministry defended the decision, emphasizing that it was grounded in constitutional law and thorough intelligence assessments.

The classification, which allows for closer monitoring by the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), is based on findings that suggest segments of the AfD have ties to far-right extremist networks and promote ideologies that contradict Germany’s democratic order.

“The Federal Republic of Germany remains committed to upholding democratic values and the rule of law,” the ministry stated. “Our decision to scrutinize certain activities within the AfD is based not on political bias but on credible threats to the constitutional order.”

Senator Rubio, a Republican and a frequent commentator on global democratic practices, had earlier condemned the action as an authoritarian measure that silences dissent. His remarks sparked a transatlantic exchange, with German officials stressing the distinction between political opposition and threats to democratic institutions.

The AfD, known for its hardline stance on immigration and Euroscepticism, has seen growing support in some German regions. However, the party has also faced increasing scrutiny over rhetoric and policies viewed as discriminatory or hostile to democratic norms.

While the issue has ignited debate about free speech and political freedoms, German authorities have reiterated that the action is a legal safeguard, not political persecution.

As Germany approaches a critical election year, the controversy is likely to shape broader discussions around extremism, sovereignty, and international perceptions of democratic governance.