Translation Gwendolyn Albert
On Tuesday 24 March 2009 the Czech lower house passed a vote of no confidence in the Czech government. The proposal, made by the opposition Social Democrats (ČSSD), received 101 votes in favor and 96 against. The news began to spread immediately through the international media like an avalanche. This was quite understandable, as the Czech Republic will preside over the European Union until the end of June 2009.
This is not the first time that the Council of the EU has been presided over by a country with an outgoing government. Tuesday’s vote also was not the first, but the fifth attempt by the opposition during this voting period (2006 – 2010) to bring down the coalition government of ODS, KDU-ČSL and the Green Party. However, this is the very first time that the EU facing a period of crisis has been led by a government weakened by crisis. The most recent vote of no confidence in Topolánek’s cabinet was also the first such vote in the history of the modern Czech Republic to succeed.
Political tug-of-war
On the day of the vote, commentaries could be heard in the foreign media and elsewhere about the fact that yet another government from the Central and East European region had fallen victim to the global financial and economic crisis. However, the Czech PM’s failure is not related to the economic crisis. Rather, it is the result of a political tug-of-war, the constant struggle for power and influence that has overwhelmed the Czech political scene for many years.
After the elections in 2006, the situation in the lower house of the Czech Parliament was fragile. Every parliamentary vote was a harsh test of the government’s cohesion. Due to the rivalry between Mirek Topolánek and Jiří Paroubek, the chairs of the strongest parties, a grand coalition could not be considered. However, no other coalition was able to acquire a majority due to the division of power in the lower house at that time. The government whose fate was sealed this week could count on only 100 of 200 votes. At the start of 2007, Topolánek’s cabinet succeeded in winning a previous vote only due to the votes of two Social Democratic MPs, who were subsequently forced to leave the socialist club and party.
Since 2007, the Czech government’s main concern has been convincing opposition MPs to vote for its proposals without losing any of its own MPs in the process. The opposition has taken advantage of every opportunity to try to bring the government down, but until now had not been able to get most MPs on its side.
Rebels and the government collapse
Four governing coalition party members opposed the government during Tuesday’s vote, two from the ranks of the ODS (Jan Schwippel and Vlastimil Tlustý) and two MPs originally elected to the lower house on the Green Party ticket (Věra Jakubková and Olga Zubová). Both Green Party MPs were dismissed from the party at the start of March after long-term inner party conflicts. In November 2008 they left the Green Party club in the lower house, voting against proposals submitted by the government and attempting to advocate for their own policy in opposition to the decisions of the Green Party leadership.
The ranks of those elected for ODS and ČSSD were also culled. As of today, three members have been dismissed from the ODS club. The ČSSD club has dismissed four MPs since the elections, one of whom decided to end his activities as an MP altogether in December 2008.
The 101 MPs who voted for the collapse of the Topolánek cabinet arrived at their decisions due to a diverse range of the widest possible reasons: To some the government seemed too euro skeptic, to others too pro-EU. For several months, Tlustý and Schwippel made no secret of the fact that the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty and Topolánek’s coalition compromises rubbed them the wrong way. Věra Jakubková and Olga Zubová declared they did not intend to express confidence in Deputy PM and Green Party chair Martin Bursík.
Winners and losers
Currently there are stormy arguments ongoing among politicians over who is responsible for the chaos in which the Czech Republic now finds itself. In these debates, the opposition says the governing coalition was not able to govern constructively. On the other hand, the coalition constantly emphasizes the opposition’s irresponsible approach in deciding to bring the government down during an economic crisis and the ongoing EU presidency.
It is hard to avoid the impression that the Social Democrats themselves were surprised by the success of their no-confidence vote. This can be particularly seen in their extraordinarily strange response to their success in bringing down the government, when they insisted on the latest possible term for early elections. The outgoing cabinet wants the elections to happen sooner. According to the Social Democrats, the outgoing cabinet should properly complete the Czech EU presidency, and then a caretaker government should lead the country to early elections.
It is difficult to expect that the Social Democrats will score any points for bringing down the government. Rather, many voters will be exasperated by the fact that the opposition has damaged the Czech Republic’s image abroad. Former Czech PM and former ČSSD chair Miloš Zeman said he condemned the move and could not understand what led the Social Democrats to bring down the government in the middle of the “wondrously successful” presidency.
What now?
Looking behind the scenes, it starts to quickly become clear that the real winner in this situation is Czech President Václav Klaus. The erstwhile honorary chair of ODS had repeatedly criticized the Topolánek government. The outgoing PM also has made no secret of his belief that not only Klaus but Prague Mayor Bém were involved in the collapse of his cabinet.
Klaus and Klaus only will now decide the political direction of the country, as per the Constitution. After the PM announced his resignation to the president on 26 March, it was up to Klaus alone to decide to whom to entrust the building of a new cabinet. The president is not restricted by any time constraints with respect to this decision. The Constitution merely establishes that the new government is obligated to request the lower house to express its support for the government within 30 days of its appointment. If the government does not receive support, the president must again appoint someone to put together a new cabinet. If this second attempt fails, the president of the lower house will suggest a candidate for PM to the president. If this third attempt fails, the president can dissolve parliament.
On 26 March, President Klaus publicly declared the conditions which the new candidate for PM must meet. He said he would entrust the government to Mirek Topolánek or anyone else provided they could guarantee at least 101 lower house votes. The president also said the solution must primarily be reached quickly and based on political agreement in the lower house. However, it is difficult to find someone to meet these requirements in the current situation.
Václav Klaus will attempt to advocate for his own political ideas and opinions in the weeks and months to come. This could put the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty at risk, which is waiting to be approved by the Czech Senate.
International impacts
At international level, the fall of the Czech government is a harsh blow to the EU, as it concerns the political weakening of the Czech EU presidency. Moreover, this has occurred on the eve of many important events, including the London G-20 summit, the EU-USA summit in Prague in April, the Eastern Partnership summit, which the Czech capital will host at the start of May, and the Copenhagen UN conference on climate change in December. A fragile EU presidency could weaken the negotiating position of the EU-27. Even though the European Commission announced immediately after the no-confidence vote that it was convinced the Czech Republic would be able to secure an effective course for the rest of its presidency, those behind the successful no-confidence vote on Tuesday have succeeded in giving a very bitter flavor to the Czech EU presidency’s slogan, “We are sweetening Europe.”
The Green Party
Their participation in the government has cost the Greens a healthy portion of strength and energy. When the Green Party won their historically first election to the lower house in 2006 and took up co-responsibility for governing after seven months of hard negotiations, they won four ministerial posts with their six MPs. However, soon afterward the party began to have difficulties and the first internal divisions appeared. After many months of intra-party conflict in the leadership and the Green Party club, the party decided to take a radical step: At the start of March 2009, four members were dismissed. The main cause of disagreements inside the party was not a substantial discussion about its policies, but primarily personal rivalries between various actors. This made efforts at constructive collaboration difficult inside the coalition and also damaged the image of the Greens as a new political force.
After her departure from the Green Party, MP Olga Zubová became a member of the board of the newly established Democratic Green Party. 20 years after the political earthquake in Central and Eastern Europe and the fall of the Berlin Wall the party name seems rather weird. It took many months to prepare to establish it, and its main aim seems to have been to damage the Green Party brand.
In the opinion of many NGOs, the four Green Party ministers represented in the government (the ministers of foreign affairs, environment, education, and human rights and minorities) have done good work. However, the Greens did not succeed in presenting their own successes to the broader public, to a certain degree because media attention in recent months has rather been focused on the internal party divisions that refused to die. Despite this, public opinion polls show that the Green Party’s electoral potential is significantly higher than just their core voters. The Greens have no choice but to try to activate these potential voters prior to the EP elections and the eventual early elections to the lower house. In the weeks that remain until the EP elections, the Greens must do their best to communicate the message that they continue to pose an appropriate alternative to the other parties and that it will pay to vote for them.
In the interests of the Czech Republic we can only hope that the Green Party will be successful during the EP elections and the eventual early elections. The Czech Republic badly needs a green political force. We must wish the party the best of luck in overcoming their internal party disputes in future so they can fully concentrate on profiling their policies and developing the potential offered to them as the Greens in the Czech Republic.
Eva van de Rakt is the director of the Prague office of the Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung