The conjunction of authoritarian rule, state and regime fragility, terrorist insurgents and forced migration has long been a core feature of Middle East politics. But today’s unprecedented number of the forcibly displaced is set to become a defining feature of the 21st century. Its political impact reaches into both domestic and foreign policy spheres and poses challenges to areas of origin, transit and destination. Germany stands out as the sixth among the world’s main countries of asylum, and as the first by far among European countries. The influx of one million refugees to Germany and Chancellor Merkel’s open-border policy, have led public discourse to refer to it as a “refugee crisis”. It is more accurate to describe it as a political crisis over the issue of forced migration. The proposed paper therefore presents a cross-time within-case comparison of the German case, comparing political reactions and foreign policy strategies as a reaction to two waves of migrant influx (1992 and 2015). The paper finds striking parallels in how both waves have been politically dealt with. The broader research question that can travel to different cases is therefore, why root causes of forced migration have (still) not been effectively prioritized in German foreign-policy formulation and implementation despite mounting public pressure at home that resulted in heavy political crises. Methodologically based on document analysis and a range of interviews with practitioners, two instances of policies vis-à-vis Arab countries are discussed. This demonstrates that while 2015 was not the first significant refugee influx to Germany, very similar patterns of reaction can be observed both domestically (e.g., a tightening of the legal framework governing immigration) as well as in foreign policies. However, this paper focuses on the latter. Incoherent policy priorities and inconsistent to contradictory jurisdiction are a result of an inefficient state bureaucracy and an ongoing stability-over-change-paradigm when dealing with Middle Eastern autocrats. Thus authoritarian rulers cash in on desperate European attempts to calm down public pressure at home thereby reinforcing the very causes of forced migration. Illustrative examples of Germany pushing for unsustainable moves veiled in a narrative of “combatting root causes of migration” include the Merkel-initiated “EU-Turkey deal,” the “Italian-Libyan bargain,” recent readmission agreements with Morocco and Tunisia and ongoing talks with Egypt’s president. Although this presentation focuses on Germany, both its research question and the methodology allows for transferrable implications and thus insights into other cases.