Side effects
The current government crisis may have some nasty consequences — and not the ones in the headlines today
By Alexandr Mitrofanov
March 10, 2005
No matter that I did not know while writing this piece whether the Czech government of Social Democrats (CSSD), Christian Democrats (KDU-CSL) and liberals from the Freedom Union would survive its crisis. The side effects of political turmoil are much more important for Czech society than the name of a new prime minister or even the configuration of a probable new Cabinet.
First of all, the bizarre story of Social Democratic Prime Minister Stanislav Gross' apartment and the weird circumstances of his wife's business activities did not just harm the reputation of Gross or the CSSD in general. Paradoxically, the two main politicians to raise the alarm — who did not hesitate to escalate the crisis by pointing out Gross' awkward explanation of the source of the money he used to purchase the apartment — were themselves far from examples of virtue.
Miroslav Kalousek, the head of the KDU-CSL, who initiated the government crisis by demanding Gross' resignation because of the prime minister's suspicious creditors, has actually faced a similar problem. He borrowed money to build his cottage in southern Bohemia from his brother-in-law, who was later shot dead by a business associate.
The second man who has been willingly playing a role of moral authority in the story, President Vaclav Klaus, seemed to forget that his own behavior during a 1997 scandal in his former party, the Civic Democratic Party (ODS), was far from a model for decent politicians. When a trial began because the ODS had lied and fabricated false sponsors for the party, the memory of Klaus, who was then chairman of the ODS, suddenly went blank.
People could easily come to the conclusion that popular politicians such as Gross, Klaus and Kalousek are probably crooks whether they belong to right-wing, leftist or Christian parties. Simultaneously, a bill that forces local politicians to abandon their paid positions in companies owned by city halls went into effect March 1 and resulted in a string of resignations of local political representatives who found this style of performing duties too low-paying. The reputation of the Czech political class has dropped to the freezing point.
Set against this picture of decline, the situation of the CSSD is especially dark. Stanislav Gross, its temporary chairman, has up to now been seen as a strong favorite for getting confirmed as head of the party at a congress at the end of March. However, the scandal has weakened not only Gross but also the CSSD as a trustworthy name. Moreover, the party has been going through its own crisis since an authoritarian chairman, former Prime Minister Milos Zeman, retired in 2002.
Gross was seen as a new chance for a confused party with declining results in the opinion polls. The 35-year-old politician, who was for many years the most popular political figure in the country, was the best choice the CSSD could make after they expelled their former chairman, Prime Minister Vladimir Spidla, for disastrous results in the elections to the European Parliament last summer. But now the face of the party has turned dirty due to Gross' worsened reputation.
Although the CSSD pulled together under pressure in a way that was not possible even a month ago, they have no chance of avoiding a critical dilemma: either continue governing under any circumstances or resign and prepare for early elections. Every member of the party, however, knows that his or her current position in Parliament and in executive bodies will surely fade away in any new elections because the CSSD will not be repeating its victories from 1998 and 2002 because of its low popularity.
The temptation to prolong this profitable period is too strong to resist by any other incentive, even the prospect of the party's total failure in the elections. The crux is that almost no Social Democrat will ever reach the current level of power again for the rest of his of her life. This is the reason they really suppose a minority government of the CSSD, with the tacit support of the Communist Party, could be formed if the current crisis ends in the destruction of the three-member government.
This possibility could lead to a third grave side effect of the crisis: It could mean the growing influence of the communists. The very existence of a Social Democratic minority Cabinet supported by them would have breached rules of Czech political life in the days after the revolution of 1989, which brought down the communists. On top of that, if the CSSD had collaborated with the communists back then, it could have erased the CSSD from the political scene. There would have been no logical motive for potential leftist voters to support any Social Democrat with such close ties to the communists in an election. The electorate would have saved the trouble and voted for the communists directly.
All these effects of the government crisis would have been useful if they led to catharsis and introduced new and better politicians. Paradoxically, some of the disappointed voters who are not necessarily left-wingers or hard-core Stalinists now are beginning to seek clean politicians in the communist pond. The communists have a real advantage. As they have not been allowed to share power in the last 15 years, they have been spared the chance to get smeared.
— The writer is a columnist for Pravo. This piece was written for The Prague Post.
|
Purchase online
Spotlight on
Weekly list
BOL Online