As Germany approaches municipal elections in North Rhine-Westphalia on Sept. 14, the sudden deaths of six Alternative for Deutschland (AfD) candidates have unsettled the campaign. Four primary contenders and two reserves died within days of one another in late August, forcing ballot reprints and requiring some postal voters to cast ballots again. Police investigations have attributed the deaths to natural causes or pre-existing conditions, though the cluster has stirred widespread speculation online.

The timing adds weight to an already volatile political climate. The AfD has expanded its voter base steadily since its founding in 2013, evolving from a Eurosceptic protest party into a party that is concerned about migration, sovereignty and identity. Its support surged during the refugee crisis of 2015, and in recent years the party has outpaced traditional rivals in several eastern states, even winning the largest share of the popular vote in Thuringia and Saxony. Nationally, it nearly doubled its support in the 2025 federal election, securing about one in five votes.

Despite this, the AfD has remained locked out of government. This outcome is the result of what German political leaders call a “firewall.” The practice is an unwritten pact among mainstream parties—Christian Democrats, Social Democrats, Greens, and Liberals—that no coalition will be formed with the AfD at any level of government. The strategy, which draws on Germany’s postwar memory of authoritarianism, reflects concerns about extremist elements within the party, which is under surveillance by domestic intelligence in several regions.

The firewall has held even where the AfD has outperformed all rivals. In Thuringia’s 2024 state election, the AfD won just over 30 per cent of the vote, making it the strongest party in the legislature. Yet other parties united to prevent it from forming a government, opting instead for strained coalition arrangements among themselves. In Saxony, where the AfD finished close behind the CDU, similar maneuvers ensured it remained on the opposition benches.

This consensus comes at a cost. Coalitions without the AfD often require alliances across the political spectrum that would not otherwise form, producing fragile administrations with limited policy cohesion. Critics argue that the firewall undermines democratic representation, as it prevents voters’ preferences from translating into executive power. Supporters contend it is a safeguard against the normalization of extremist politics and a necessary line of defence for Germany’s constitutional order.

The AfD positions itself as a nationalist party that places immigration, identity and sovereignty at the centre of its platform. It advocates for strict limits on asylum and migration, calls for stronger border enforcement, and opposes what it describes as the cultural and social effects of mass immigration. On identity, it emphasizes the preservation of German traditions, language and values, often framing multiculturalism as a threat to national cohesion. Its stance on sovereignty includes resistance to deeper European Union integration, promotion of national decision-making authority, and rejection of policies perceived as eroding Germany’s independence within international institutions.

The debate has grown sharper as the AfD’s numbers climb. In parts of eastern Germany, the party commands near-majority support, with some surveys showing more than a third of young voters backing it. Its rise has forced the established parties to confront the possibility that the firewall, while effective in keeping the AfD out of government, may also deepen polarization by convincing AfD supporters that their votes are systematically discounted.

The sudden deaths of AfD candidates in North Rhine-Westphalia now intersect with this broader question. While investigators dismiss foul play, the series of losses has heightened the sense of unease surrounding the party’s momentum. The election on Sept. 14 will not only determine municipal control in Germany’s most populous state but also test whether the firewall strategy can continue to contain a party that has steadily grown from the margins into one of the country’s most significant political forces.