Proponents of the current government strategy argue that the state has a fundamental duty to enforce its laws and protect its citizens. By pursuing the deportation of convicted criminals, the government is sending a clear message that serious offenses against the public order will have consequences, regardless of the diplomatic hurdles involved. Supporters emphasize that a functioning legal system requires that deportation orders are not merely symbolic but are actually carried out.
Regarding intelligence oversight, advocates for stronger agencies argue that the current security environment is more volatile than ever. They contend that the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution and the BND require modern, flexible tools to stay ahead of sophisticated threats. From this perspective, strengthening these services is not about eroding civil liberties but about ensuring that the state has the necessary intelligence to prevent attacks before they occur.
This view holds that the government is acting pragmatically by seeking indirect ways to manage deportations and updating oversight frameworks to reflect current realities. By prioritizing the safety of the population, the administration is fulfilling its primary mandate. Supporters believe that a strong, capable state is the best guarantor of public peace and that these measures are essential steps in maintaining that stability in an increasingly uncertain world.