Proponents of the government's current deportation strategy argue that the state has a fundamental duty to enforce its immigration laws and ensure public safety. By expanding the criteria for deportation to include individuals who have exhausted their asylum claims, the administration is taking necessary steps to restore integrity to the asylum system. Supporters emphasize that those who have no legal right to remain in Germany must be returned, as the state's capacity to provide protection is not unlimited and must be reserved for those who meet the legal requirements for asylum.
From this perspective, the inclusion of non-criminal individuals is a logical extension of a fair and functional migration policy. If an asylum application is rejected through due process, the legal obligation to leave the country should be upheld. Allowing individuals to remain indefinitely after their claims have been denied undermines the credibility of the entire immigration framework and places an undue burden on public resources. The government's willingness to engage in technical discussions with de facto authorities in Kabul is viewed as a pragmatic necessity to ensure that these legal decisions can be carried out effectively.
Furthermore, officials have argued that the removal of individuals who have not integrated into society is essential for maintaining social cohesion. By prioritizing the return of those who are not entitled to stay, the government aims to demonstrate that the rule of law is being applied consistently. This firm stance is seen as a way to address public concerns regarding migration management and to ensure that the asylum system remains focused on its original purpose of providing refuge to those in genuine need, rather than serving as a permanent residence for those whose claims have been legally exhausted.
Ultimately, supporters believe that a clear and enforced return policy is the only way to maintain public trust in the state's ability to manage its borders. By taking decisive action, the government is signaling that it is committed to a policy that balances humanitarian responsibilities with the practical requirements of national security and administrative order.