A Czech President and a Bulgarian Poll

Milos Zeman, a former social democrat Prime Minister, won the first direct elections to the office of Czech president at the weekend. The presidency in the Czech Republic is mostly ceremonial, though Vaclav Klaus used the position to great effect in his opposition to the Lisbon Treaty during the Czech presidency of the Council. Before this the President was indirectly elected.

Zeman led the polls in the first round of the election at 24.2%, followed by Karel Schwarzenberg's 23.4%. Schwarzenberg was foreign minister during part the Czech presidency of the EU. As the BBC reports:

"Mr Zeman is seen as a hard-drinking, chain-smoking politician, known for his witty put-downs of opponents.

[...]

[Schwarzenberg is] A titled prince, 75 years old but wildly popularly amongst young, urban voters, in the early 1990s, he worked as chancellor to the President Vaclav Havel, the leader of the Velvet Revolution that brought down Communist rule in 1989."

Both of them beat the eye-catching  university professor Vladimír Franz in the first round.

The final result was 54.8% to Zeman and 45.19% to Schwarzenberg. Both Zeman and Schwarzenberg are more pro-European than Vaclav Klaus.


While the Czech Republic was holding its first direct presidential elections, Bulgaria was running its first referendum since the end of the Communist era. The referendum was on whether to build the country's first nuclear power station (which would cost €10 billion), but the referendum failed to pass due to the very low turnout in the harsh wintry weather. The 20% turnout meant that the referendum didn't reach the 60% threshold to make the poll valid.

The left-wing opposition is celebrating the vote in favour of the nuclear power station as a victory, even if the vote is not binding.

The Man who would be King(maker)

Concerns that an indirectly elected President may interfere with the formation of the next Czech government have been circulating in the Czech media, EurActiv reports. No, not Barroso (even if you'd think he could): the Czech President himself, Vaclav Klaus.

I had previously largely dismissed concerns that the fall of Topolánek's government would make that much difference to the Czech Presidency of the European Council (mainly based on the assumption that Topolánek's government would remain in place until Parliament could elect another one), but this article has made me think again. Though it should be noted that the Parliament may have trouble forming a government without any suggestion of interference from Klaus (the CSSD have acted irresponsibly as an opposition, so I wouldn't be surprised). In any case, if a government can't be formed, it certainly leaves a lot of power in Klaus' hands.

Whatever you're view on the EU and Klaus' Eurosceptic stance, the scenario painted is a disturbing one: that a government may be forced on an unwilling Parliament by what should be a ceremonial head of state. Perhaps I'm influenced too much by the role of the head of state in the UK and Ireland...

The Falling European Leadership

Falling, because technically the Czech government of last week is still the current Czech government - and will continue to be until a replacement can be found. So the current Presidency of the European Council is not so much a lame duck as a duck in a deep coma which is dependant on life support. Of course, it was never that much of a presidency - indeed it reminds me of the "Barroso ghost" picture on Anyone but Barroso - though, granted, Barroso is incorporeal through choice.

The CSSD, the main opposition party, doesn't fill me with much hope - it is unlikely to be able to form a government, so it seems that the fall of the government was due to the CSSD opposing it for opposition's sake. Their actions seem to be politically irresponsible, though I don't know much about Czech politics. They have said that they are happy to see the current ghost-government carry on until the presidency passes on to Sweden. I can't make up my mind whether this is a good thing or not.

In the end, I hold pretty much the same views expressed in this Entangled Alliances article: the presidency can be a powerful motor for change and a vehicle for effective leadership, but it largely depends on the political stability of the leader, and on personality. Which is never a good basis for good governance.

Czech president Klaus' position has been strengthened by the fall of his country's government: after all, it's now much easier to ignore/speak out against/plot against the policies of the ghost-government which he doesn't like. His influence over the passage of the Lisbon Treaty is likely to grow (though it was effectively blocked before anyway), despite polls showing that his view on the matter are out of touch with the Czech public.

(As a side note, whatever the truth of the stories of Russia's influence on Klaus (or indeed Russia's influence through Klaus), Klaus and his allies must be fought on the battleground of ideas and policy, not on "playing the man" (or woman). In any case, I'm sure that Klaus has held the views he has independently of any Russian influence, and I doubt that he needs political pointers on playing the system. If there is any Russian influence on Klaus, I'd say it is just egging him on.)

So, basically it doesn't matter much, but only because the situation was already quite bad in a way that mattered quite a lot. The point has been made that this shows that the Lisbon Treaty is needed for the effective functioning of the EU. I largely agree: it seems that over the last 6+ months the weaknesses of the EU have shown the need for reform in practically all areas, and although imperfect, the Lisbon Treaty does remedy some of the problems, to some degree.

Czech government falls

The embattled Czech government, who could not get their two major foreign policy aims passed by parliament, has fallen. The vote of no confidence was 101 out of 200. I'm afraid I don't have time to blog about it now, but I thought I'd flag up the EUobserver report.

Is the Lisbon Treaty a hostage to US-Russian relations?

I would like to think not, but a report from EurActiv sadly suggests that EU politics are not subject to the decisions of European countries. And where are the effects of this diplomatic positioning being felt? Prague.

I've long since lost the impression that there was an effective government in the Czech Republic - does it get many laws passed, or is it just treaties that it has problems with?

Enlarge your Horizons

The Czechs are using the impending release of a Commission report on enlargement to push the benefits of enlargement. The report will be released on Friday and is supposed to detail how enlargement has strengthened the economies of both the new and old member states.

I've mixed feelings on this. The need for EU reform is pressing now, so with more members the EU will become less and less effective. Also, the countries closest to membership, Croatia and Turkey, face opposition from within the EU and still have progress to make on meeting the conditions for membership, so it's not as straight-forward as: enlargement is good, therefore we should push on with enlargement. Romania and Bulgaria were arguably not ready for membership, and it is a lot harder to put pressure for reform on them now that they are members (that said, some older members are in need of reform too...). It would also make keeping other candidate countries to the letter of the conditions harder in the future if any current candidate got a fast-track entry. Not that that's what's being suggested.

On the other hand, it would be good to open up more markets (by increasing the EU market size) and secure free trade. I'd like to see the report to see how much enlargement has added to the EU economy and how convincing the evidence is. I could see lots of conditions attached to the free movement of people, etc for any new member states that join over the next few years, though - if so many member states did it during the 2004 enlargement, then I can't see a more open approach any time soon. Would enlargement help at all in the current crisis? The 2004 member states attracted investment to grow; such investment is very scarce now.

Still, it's good to know that the Czech deputy prime minister has his enlargement priorities right:

""In general, Croatia is a country that belongs to the community - I go there almost every summer," he added. "It has a strategic value.""