13% Refugee Relatives

The 177,382 Visa Decisions Breakdown

The political discourse surrounding migration in Germany has long been dominated by the complexities of family reunification, yet recent government data suggests the actual scope of refugee-related reunification is significantly narrower than often portrayed. According to an analysis of decisions made regarding national family reunification visas, the vast majority of those joining family members in Germany are not fleeing conflict, but are instead following spouses who arrived under different legal statuses. The sheer volume of administrative activity is evident in the numbers. Of the 177,382 decisions processed in the first four months of 2025, only 23,273—roughly 13 percent—pertained to individuals joining refugees, asylum seekers, or those with other specific protection statuses. The remaining decisions were largely distributed among two other major groups: spouses of German nationals and the partners of foreign residents living in Germany under different permits, such as skilled worker visas. Within the group of spouses joining non-refugee residents, the data highlights significant migration corridors from India and Turkey. During this period, approximately 9,000 spouses from India and more than 9,800 from Turkey were granted visas to join their partners. This demographic reality underscores a migration pattern heavily influenced by labor and residency rather than asylum claims alone.

The Two-Year Suspension for Subsidiary Protection

While the overall numbers focus heavily on skilled labor, a specific and more restrictive policy is currently impacting a vulnerable segment of the population. In late July 2025, the government implemented a two-year suspension on family reunification for individuals holding subsidiary protection status. This category typically includes people, such as many from Syria, who cannot prove they are being individually persecuted but who face general threats to their life and limb in their home countries. The suspension of family reunification for those with subsidiary protection status has effectively limited the ability of these families to reunite, except in documented hardship cases. These exceptions are strictly reserved for spouses, minor children, and, in the case of unaccompanied minors, their parents. The administrative reality of this “hardship” loophole appears to be extremely narrow. As of the May 15, 2026, reporting deadline, only seven visas had been issued under this specific regulation. While 285 additional cases remain under intensive review, the current pace suggests a significant bottleneck. This administrative delay is exacerbated by external factors; in several countries of origin, relatives are reportedly waiting more than a year just to secure an appointment to even begin the application process.

Clara Bünger’s Critique of Alarmist Debates

The disconnect between the statistical reality of reunification and the intensity of the political debate has drawn sharp criticism from lawmakers. Many observers argue that the focus on refugee reunification serves as a political lightning rod, often used to justify broader legislative tightening. Clara Bünger, an internal affairs expert for the Left Party, has been vocal about this perceived manipulation of public sentiment. She argues that the political focus on this issue is disproportionate to its actual impact on the total migration numbers.

Family reunification for refugees makes up only a small proportion of family reunification in total.

Clara Bünger, via Express Bünger maintains that “alarmist debates” have been repeatedly conducted over the years, serving as a pretext to legitimize increasingly strict immigration laws. For the families caught in the middle—particularly those under the subsidiary protection suspension—the result is a separation that may last for an indefinite period. As the government continues to review hundreds of pending hardship cases, the tension between humanitarian obligations and restrictive migration policy remains a central, unresolved conflict in German politics.