The Czech Republic seems headed for another political deadlock

Recent opinion polls in the Czech Republic suggest that the country is headed for a repetition of the political situation after the elections in 1996, which resulted in a deadlock. Support for the strongest party, the Social Democrats (CSSD), has stopped going up; in fact, some polls suggest it may be eroding.

The latest polls do not yet reflect a political scandal currently rocking the CSSD. It started after a television station suggested that CSSD chairman Milos Zeman and two of his associates signed a joint memorandum two years ago with a group of Czech-Swiss businessmen, in which they promised giving the businessmen influential government positions after a CSSD electoral victory, in exchange for financial support for the party.

Zeman at first claimed that the document was a forgery. Later he admitted that there was a short meeting but that he "threw the businessmen out" after learning of their offer. According to his latest version, he and his associates held extensive meetings with the businessmen but, he claims, no memorandum was signed. However, one of Zeman's associates at the time, CSSD vice-chairman Karel Machovec, told journalists that the three CSSD officials, indeed signed a memorandum with the businessmen along the lines suggested by the TV station.

The accusations are now under investigation by the Czech Intelligence Service (BIS). The truth, just like in so many other recent scandals, may never be found. But the public has learned that Zeman, who has repeatedly accused the former government of lying, is capable of lying when his own political fortunes are threatened. It is quite possible that the scandal may push the CSSD's popularity down.

Should that happen, the possibility of forming a stable government after the elections will be even dimmer than it is now. Should the CSSD's preferences drop below 25%, it will not be able to form a majority government even if joined by another democratic party. Moreover, both the Civic Democratic Party (ODS) of Vaclav Klaus and the Freedom Union (US) of Jan Ruml have ruled out any possibility of forming a coalition with the CSSD. The Christian Democrats (KDU-CSL) have suggested a possibility of forming a grand coalition, involving the CSSD, but their idea has so far been rejected by all other major parties.

Unless a grand coalition can be formed, it is likely that the post-election government will again only be a temporary solution, whose fate will depend on the whims of the majority opposition. Such a development would undoubtedly prompt calls for changing the electoral system. Currently, the country uses a proportional representation system, which favors political parties over individual candidates. It also allows extremist parties to gain seats in the parliament. The political deadlock after the 1996 elections was partly caused by the fact that the Communists and the far-right Republicans together gained some 20% of the 200 seats in the parliament's lower chamber. As no democratic party has been willing to cooperate with the extremists, the space for political maneuvering by the democratic parties has been greatly narrowed.

A majority or a combined electoral system would either eliminate or greatly reduce the presence of the extremists in the parliament. A majority system also often forces the political forces of the same ideological orientation to merge or form pre-electoral coalitions. President Vaclav Havel is among the leading advocates of changing the current electoral system. Havel proposed a combined system already in 1991, but his proposal was rejected.

A grand coalition would be probably the best solution but, given mutual animosities that exist between major parties, it is not likely. Czech political leaders still engage in mindless ideologizing of even the most trivial issues. The idea of forming a coalition involving both the rightist and the leftist parties is still unacceptable to most of them. However, it is possible that the post-election reality will force many politicians to change their minds, as changing the electoral system may be more difficult than putting their ideological differences aside and finding a common ground.

Reuters - 19. 3. 1998