On September 30, 2025, the Higher Regional Court of Dresden delivered a verdict that has sent shockwaves through German politics and reverberated across Europe. Jian Guo, a former aide to the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) politician Maximilian Krah, was sentenced to four years and nine months in prison for spying on behalf of China. The case, which also led to the conviction of a second defendant, Yaqi X., for leaking sensitive information, has intensified concerns about foreign espionage and the vulnerability of European institutions to outside influence.
According to Reuters, Jian Guo, a German national, was found guilty of working for a Chinese intelligence service since 2002. His espionage activities included passing on information about negotiations and decisions within the European Parliament between September 2019 and April 2024, when he was finally arrested. The court found that Guo did not act alone. Yaqi X., who worked for a logistics company at Leipzig airport, was convicted of leaking passenger lists and details of Western arms deliveries to Guo, who acted as her handler. She admitted to passing on data but denied having knowledge of any broader espionage plans.
The details of the case, as reported by the Associated Press and WRAL, reveal that Guo’s activities extended beyond parliamentary intelligence. He also spied on Chinese dissidents living in Europe and gathered information on AfD lawmakers. Prosecutors argued that Guo’s access to Krah’s parliamentary office, including his emails, appointments, and documents, gave him a unique vantage point from which to collect and transmit sensitive data to Chinese intelligence services.
The conviction comes at a time when concerns about Chinese and Russian influence in European politics are running high. The AfD, Germany’s most prominent far-right party, has faced repeated scrutiny for the pro-China and pro-Russia stances of some of its senior members. The case against Guo, and the subsequent spotlight on Krah, has only added fuel to the fire.
Krah, who was a witness during Guo’s trial, testified that he had no knowledge of his former aide’s activities. As reported by dpa and cited by AP, Krah told the court, “All staff in my office at the time — including Guo — had access to my personal account and therefore also to emails, appointments and documents.” In the wake of Guo’s arrest, Krah said he had significantly tightened security in his office. He also expressed his hope for “clarity about the espionage activities of which I was a victim” once the court’s written reasoning was published.
The ruling has not only put Krah in the spotlight for his connection to Guo but also for his own alleged ties to foreign powers. Earlier in October 2025, Germany’s parliament lifted Krah’s immunity, a necessary step to allow authorities to investigate and potentially prosecute him for corruption and spying allegations. His home and offices were searched under court order. Krah has consistently denied any wrongdoing, calling the accusations “politically motivated” and dismissing them as a “witch hunt.”
According to BBC and Reuters, the timing of the espionage charges was particularly sensitive, as they emerged while Krah was campaigning as the AfD’s lead candidate for the European Parliament. The party, which has seen a surge in popularity in recent years, made historic gains in the Bundestag during the national elections earlier this year. Krah himself was elected to the German parliament in February 2025, despite being banned from the AfD’s EU delegation in 2024 after controversial remarks about the Nazi SS — comments that led to his exclusion from the party’s European election slate.
The Guo case has heightened anxieties about Germany’s exposure to foreign intelligence operations and the strategic targeting of politicians. As Reuters noted, the verdict “heightens concerns over Germany’s exposure to foreign intelligence, its role as a strategic target, and the vulnerability of politicians to outside influence.” The revelations have prompted calls for tighter security protocols within parliamentary offices and renewed debates over how best to protect democratic institutions from covert interference.
China, for its part, has repeatedly denied accusations of espionage in Europe. Last year, China’s foreign ministry dismissed reports of Chinese spying as “hyping up with an aim to smear and suppress China.” The Chinese embassy in Germany did not immediately respond to requests for comment following the verdict. Beijing’s consistent denials have done little to assuage fears among European officials, who see the Guo case as a stark warning about the risks posed by foreign intelligence services operating within their borders.
For the AfD, the scandal comes at a precarious moment. The party’s second-place finish in the recent national elections cemented its status as a significant force in German politics, but mainstream parties have maintained a “firewall” by refusing to work with it. The espionage case — coupled with the ongoing investigations into Krah’s alleged ties to China and Russia — threatens to further isolate the AfD and undermine its credibility among voters wary of foreign meddling.
The implications of the Dresden court’s decision extend well beyond the individuals involved. The case has exposed the ease with which foreign intelligence services can exploit access to parliamentary offices, underscoring the need for robust safeguards and vigilant oversight. It has also reignited debates over the balance between transparency and security in democratic institutions — a tension that is unlikely to dissipate anytime soon.
As Europe grapples with the fallout from the Guo affair, questions remain about the full extent of foreign influence in its political systems and the measures necessary to counter it. The Dresden verdict may mark the end of one chapter, but the broader story of espionage and political vulnerability in Germany is far from over.
With the dust still settling, politicians, security officials, and the public alike are left to ponder just how deep the roots of foreign influence may run — and what it will take to safeguard the integrity of their democracy in the years ahead.
