© Agencja Gazeta/Slawomir Kaminski via REUTERS

Mr. Schwarzenberg, how do you see the situation of the countries in Central and Eastern Europe today? Let’s start with the Czech Republic. I’m not very happy with the situation in my country. The economic situation is very good, the country develops very well economically. People are much richer than a few years ago. But the political situation is deplorable.

Is it comparable to the situation in Hungary and Poland? In Hungary, an authoritarian government has successfully eliminated every meaningful opposition, including all opposition media. And, one must admit, the top echelons of the regime have become much richer over the last years. The situation in Poland is different: There’s an active opposition and an active media. Even the worst critics of Jaroslaw Kaczynski [the leader of the Law and Justice party, which has been governing Poland since 2015] don’t suspect him of taking any money; in fact, he lives very modestly in Warsaw with two cats. So, there is a huge difference between Hungary and Poland. Of course, the Germans are not very happy with Mr. Kaczynski, and that’s understandable! He is a traditional Polish nationalist, but he is a decent man.

For these and other states in the region, what have been, and continue to be, the biggest challenges—authoritarianism, weak institutions, and corruption, external actors like Russia or China? There has been corruption in all our countries; it’s been worst in Romania. In fact, the further southeastwards to get, the worse the problem becomes. But in Western Europe, there has been corruption, too. In Central and Eastern Europe, it is slowly getting better.

How persistent are the aftereffects of communist rule? The consequences of the dictatorships are grave, of course–and you have to remember, often there were the Nazis first, then came the communists; taken together that’s up to 60 years of totalitarian rule. In Austria, the Nazis were in power for seven years only, but the country still grappled with the consequences in the 1970s. So of course remnants of that deplorable totalitarian mentality take a long time to disappear.

Do you think EU enlargement was a success? How would you assess the role Germany and the Western Europeans have played? The Western European countries, including Germany, were first of all interested in their own opportunities, and they had enormous economic success. Just look at the export numbers of Germany or Austria! For Western European countries, enlargement was an enormously successful business. The political impact was different, it was somewhat less of a success.

Are the Eastern Europeans being given their fair share of involvement in the European project? Well, if you ask the people, it differs, but basically, they are not that interested in the European project. However, they are interested in the economic success that started with membership of the European Union. They all know very well that they need the EU for their own economic gain and prosperity. But they are not really interested in the project as such. And then there are some demagogues like Viktor Orbán and others, including here in the Czech Republic, who do their utmost to denigrate Europe for their own populist interests.

What was the biggest failure of the German foreign policy in Central and Eastern Europe? German policy has always had this dilemma: the relationship with Russia. The Germans have been prioritizing Russia over its immediate neighbors for over two centuries now. That’s nothing to do with Russian President Vladimir Putin speaking very good German. You can go back as far as the early 19^th century, or just remember the illicit cooperation between the Reichswehr and the Red Army in the 1920s and 1930s. It always leads to disappointment in Central and Eastern Europe.

Current German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas has spoken of redefining the term Ostpolitik as to no longer referring to Russia, but rather to Germany’s eastern neighbors… That would be nice if it would happen. But I’m afraid deeds are stronger than words. And of course, Germany should not abandon Russia in its foreign policy, but rather consider the interests of the other states, too. If you think of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine, where Angela Merkel has been mediating—after five years, some Germans still seem to have difficulties spelling out precisely who the aggressor is and the German industry is arguing for the lifting of sanctions.

How could the present divide between Western and Eastern Europe be overcome? Scrapping that famous project of the second gas pipeline [Nord Stream 2] across the Baltic Sea would be a start. It runs against the interests of Ukraine and other countries. Or speaking clearly about the situation in Hungary. Of course, the votes of Orbán’s Fidesz party were needed to make the European People’s Party the biggest political group in the European Parliament. But my impression is that German conservative politicians simply close their eyes to whatever Orbán does at home.

So we need more honesty? More honesty would be a wonderful idea.

The interview was conducted by Henning Hoff. Assistance: Matthias Hempert.

The post “More Honesty Would Be a Wonderful Idea” appeared first on Berlin Policy Journal - Blog.

© REUTERS/Radovan Stoklasa

Slovakia may have gotten off to a slow start after the overthrow of communism 30 years ago, but it has since emerged as the star performer of the former Soviet bloc in Central and Eastern Europe. The largely rural country of 5.5 million people is the only Visegrad country in the eurozone and has enjoyed dynamic economic growth in recent years. Nevertheless, like many countries in the region it has been plagued by corruption.

However on March 16, with the surprising victory of an anti-corruption campaigner in the first round of the presidential election, Slovakia showed that it could emerge as a beacon of hope in its immediate neighborhood.

It looks increasingly likely that the March 30 run-off will see the election of 45-year-old lawyer Zuzana Čaputová, nicknamed Slovakia’s Erin Brockovich for her dogged battles against corruption and environmental malfeasance. A political unknown in the country until last year, she is everything that many of her opponents and their peers in other Eastern Europe countries like Hungary and Poland are not: pro-EU, liberal, worldly, principled—and a woman.

In polls, she leads her rival, Maroš Šefčovič, currently the country’s European Commissioner, who is running as an independent but was nominated by the ruling populist-left Smer-Social Democracy party. On March 16, he only managed just 19 percent of the vote compared to Čaputová’s remarkable 41 percent.

A Gust of Fresh Air

Čaputová appears to be exactly the gust of fresh air that Slovakia and much of the region could badly use. The divorced mother of two, who lives with her partner, made her name by opposing a landfill site agreed upon by a big-name oligarch and local politicos near her hometown north of Bratislava, Slovakia’s capital city, for which she won the Goldman Environmental Prize, informally called the Green Nobel. “This small, local case accurately reflects the situation in country,” she said earlier this year, “the battle of the little guy against the political and economic powers that be.”

The grassroots activist Čaputová is a product of Slovak civil society, not the sclerotic political establishment, much of which has been in place since the mid-1990s. Last year, she became vice-chairwoman of one of Slovakia’s newest parties, the left-liberal Progressive Slovakia, which will face its first real test by running in next year’s general election.

Čaputová’s candidacy, with her focus on equal justice for all Slovaks, captured her countrymen’s deep frustration with the graft and clientelism that riddles the country. Slovakia ranks poorly on Transparency International’s corruption register at 57^th in the world, behind Jordan and Rwanda but ahead of Hungary and Croatia. “Corruption was the number one issue by far,” says Gabriel Sipos, director of TI’s Slovakia branch. There has been little serious tackling of corruption, although last year two former construction ministers were jailed for graft.

“Backlash Against Populism”

Milan Nič, a Slovak analyst at the German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP) in Berlin, says that while the figure of Čaputová is significant, “this is a backlash against the populism and the captured institutions, such as the courts. People are simply disgusted with the corruption and weak institutions. Many consider it a last chance to change things or else they’ll leave for abroad.”

A turning point came last February, when the country was rocked by murder of the 27-year-old investigative journalist Jan Kuciak and his fiancée, Martina Kusnirova. They were shot to death just as Kuciak was closing a story on ties between Slovakian politicians and the Italian mafia. Čaputová was one of tens of thousands of Slovak citizens who poured onto the streets across the country for weeks on end to protest the killing and stand up for media freedom. The demonstrations brought down Slovakia’s decade-long Prime Minster Robert Fico (who still heads Smer), but not the Smer-led government. Four men were eventually charged with the killings, and in mid-March multimillionaire businessman Marian Kocner was charged with ordering the murder.

On the campaign trail, Čaputová has promised to end what she calls the capture of the state “by people pulling strings from behind.” Also, in overwhelmingly Catholic Slovakia she has spoken in support for gay marriage, the right of gay couples to adopt, and women’s access to abortion. Breaking completely new ground for a national political candidate, she also directly addressed the country’s minorities in their own languages, using Hungarian, Romanesque, and Ruthenian on her Facebook page and on election night to thank her voters.

Moreover, Čaputová further burnished her reformist image with “the most transparent campaign in Slovakia ever,” says TI’s Sipos. “Her campaign bank account detailed every item, documenting how much went to Facebook, billboards, or voters‘ meetings.” Moreover, says Sipos, she was the only candidate who published detailed tax records.

Reaching Beyond the Base

Čaputová’s core support has come from urban voters, young people, ethnic Hungarians, and the liberal middle class that has emerged during the country’s post-Soviet economic upturn. Slovakia was resourceful enough to turn its Cold War-era tank and munitions factories into automobile assembly plants. Today, the country is, per capita, the world’s largest manufacturer of cars. Small, down-at-the-heel cities and towns that a decade ago looked passed over by the transition from communism, now boast revitalized downtowns, attractive cafes, and lots of new cars. In contrast to Romania’s migrants, many Slovaks who left the country have since returned.

However, Čaputová’s campaign bent over backwards to reach beyond her young and progressive base. “Hers is a whole new style of politics,” says writer and poet Juliana Sokolova from the old Habsburg town of Košice in eastern Slovakia. “She’s sincere and empathetic, not confrontational. And she doesn’t speak in political jargon,” says Sokolova, explaining why Čaputová’s appeal crosses traditional party and religious lines.

Just how definitively a Čaputová victory in the run-off will mean a fresh start for Slovakia—and break from the regional trend toward nationalism and authoritarianism—is anything but certain. For one, the current president, Andrej Kiska, is pro-European and has already started an anti-corruption campaign. The presidency itself is not particularly powerful office in Slovakia, although it does play a key role in picking justices for the constitutional court, the country’s highest judicial body. Moreover, surveys show that Slovaks are just as opposed to migration as their neighbors. In polls, the new parties, including Progressive Slovakia, still trail those of the establishment. And last week an unsettling 25 percent of Slovaks voted neither for Čaputová nor Šefčovič, but for far-right candidates.

Might the liberal vibes in Slovakia nevertheless spill over the borders to its neighbors? Hungarian social anthropologist Peter Krasztev from the Budapest School of Economics says his country’s nationalist Prime Minister Viktor Orbán isn’t losing sleep over events in Slovakia. “We’ve tried absolutely everything to gain traction against Orbán and it hasn’t worked,” he says. “But still, Čaputová is a glimmer of hope. Maybe if Hungarians find someone as absolutely perfect as she is, really without a flaw, then perhaps we’d have a chance too.”

The post Slovakia’s Star Is Rising appeared first on Berlin Policy Journal - Blog.

© REUTERS/ Piroschka Van de Wouw

Let’s start in Prague. Even for the scandal-tainted Czech prime minister, the billionaire-turned-politician Andrej Babiš, it was a bizarre turn of events. In mid-November, local media broadcast the shocking testimony of his 35-year old son, who claimed that last year, associates of his father had forced him to go on an “extended holiday” to Crimea. The purpose was to prevent him from testifying in a criminal investigation into charges that his father had committed an EU subsidy fraud. The fraud charges are part of a notorious case involving a conference center near Prague formally owned by Babiš’ children, who are now also implicated. The police want to close the investigation by the end of the year. Prime Minister Babiš has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing and argues that the accusations are part of an orchestrated political smear campaign.

Amid the scandal, the opposition parties forced a no confidence vote. The social democrats, a junior partner in Babiš’ minority coalition government, decided to leave the chamber during the vote: they did not have confidence in the prime minister, but they also did not wish to vote against their own government. Their proposal to follow “the Slovak model”—in neighboring Slovakia, the discredited Prime Minister Robert Fico was replaced by his deputy Peter Pellegrini in March 2018—was vehemently rejected by Babiš. “I will never resign. Never! You should all remember,” Babiš declared in the parliament. As the Czech ruling party ANO is closely controlled by its founder and chairman Babiš, replacing him as prime minister against his will simply would not work.

Babiš had reason to be defiant. Because of the parliamentary mathematics in the 200-seat Chamber of Deputies, the two extremist parties, the communists and the anti-migration party of Tomio Okamura, were always going to determine the balance of power. Babiš rode out the crisis by showing the social democrats that Okamura’s party is ready to replace them in government and that the communists will continue to support him regardless of the investigation. He was also helped by Czech President Miloš Zeman, who publicly declared that, even if Babiš were to lose the vote of confidence, he would ask him to stay on as prime minister and form another cabinet.

What Price Power?

Babiš paid for the support of both the extremist parties and pro-Russian President Zeman by granting, for instance, some minor budget handouts to organisations that are politically close to them. But what will be much more important in the medium term is the political boost they have gained from the deal: like the president, both extremist parties are pro-Russian as well as anti-EU and anti-NATO. In fact, they are proposing limits to Czech contributions to NATO missions, and insist on a tough, uncompromising migration policy.

The alleged conflicts of interest around Babiš and his business empire have become so toxic that they have not only paralyzed Czech domestic politics but also damaged the country’s position within the EU. On December 13, the European Parliament adopted a resolution expressing concern about the Prime Minister’s conflict of interest and the use of EU funds in the Czech Republic. Most allegations focus on Agrofert, Babiš’ large business conglomerate, which is now formally owned by two trust funds and continues to be a major recipient of EU agricultural subsidies in the country. These new developments are likely to push the Czech government into a corner in the ongoing negotiations about the new EU budget. Under pressure from Brussels, Babiš will now find it more difficult to pull off the balancing act by which he cultivates ties with western EU leaders while also embracing Hungary’s populist leader Viktor Orbán.

Meanwhile, neighboring Slovakia was shaken by a different kind of political crisis. As in Belgium, the ruling coalition in Bratislava was deeply split on the Global Migration Pact. After 18 months of negotiations, the legally non-binding document on the treatment of migrants was agreed at the UN in July by all member states except the United States. At that time, Slovakia’s Foreign Minister Miroslav Lajčák was president of the UN General Assembly. The pact was formally endorsed at the UN intergovernmental conference in Marrakesh on December 10-11, but not before several countries had publicly withdrawn their support, including EU members Austria, Italy, Hungary, Poland, Latvia, and the Czech Republic.

“Populist Race to the Bottom”

The dispute within the three-party coalition government in Bratislava burst into the open after a junior partner, the pro-Russian populist Slovak National Party (SNS), demanded that Slovakia reject the migration pact, too. Foreign Minister Lajčák defended the document, criticizing its opponents for making false statements and leading a “populist race to the bottom.” He also threatened to resign if his opponents prevented Slovakia from taking part in the UN conference in Marrakesh. This was about the country’s credibility in Europe and its approach to multilateralism, he argued. If politicians have objections to the UN migration pact, they should allow diplomats to take them to Marrakesh.

Lajčák was hoping for political support from his own party, Smer-Social Democracy (SD), but he miscalculated. Weakened by recent country-wide protests against corruption, Smer-SD was careful not be outflanked on migration by the SNS. Prime Minister Peter Pellegrini said Slovakia would “never” accept a pact that described migration as a generally positive phenomenon, a position that contradicts Slovakia’s will to distinguish between economic migrants and refugees. So the tide turned against Lajčák. After a strongly worded parliamentary resolution opposing the pact was passed—supported by Smer, SNS, and the neo-fascist Kotleba party—the foreign minister tendered his resignation on November 29.

Lajčák’s U-Turn

But it took him only one week to rescind it. He said he had received guarantees from both Prime Minister Pellegrini and Robert Fico, now the chairman of the Smer party, that Slovakia’s foreign policy will not change. The real reason for his change of heart could be something different—Bratislava is full of speculation. If Lajčák left the cabinet, Robert Fico would try to return to the government, thus threatening both the fragile balance of power and the position of Prime Minister Pellegrini. Or perhaps Lajčák is simply waiting in his post until there is a new top international job available for him—distancing himself from Slovakia’s position on the migration pact might improve his chances.

In any case, despite guarantees of foreign policy continuity, the SNS feels emboldened to pursue its agenda. Its new target is the country’s new security strategy. Having been approved by the government, it was supposed to be debated in the parliament. However, the SNS asked to change its wording by further watering down references to Russia as a threat. Pellegrini offered a procedural way out, emphasizing that, as the government has already approved the security strategy, it is bound by it even without the parliament’s confirmation.

What Europe Should Do

So, what do these recent Czech and Slovak political crises have in common?

Both show that as political elites tainted by corruption cling to power, they increasingly have to turn to the pro-Russian extremists for tactical support. This shift also has foreign policy implications. First, as the main ruling parties decline, fringe parties are going to grab more seats in the European parliament elections. Second, this weakens the more pro-European governments within the Visegrád group, which also includes Poland and Hungary. This means that Hungary’s leader Viktor Orbán will gain more space within the group to expand his populist, anti-Brussels rhetoric (though he himself has come under pressure by wide-spread civic protest at home). Third, the Czech Republic in particular risks to undermine its relatively strong negotiating positions in the debate on the new EU budget and the future of cohesion policy. Fourth, if the conflict between Russia and Ukraine escalates, Prague and Bratislava will become even more vulnerable to Russian disinformation.

Overall, the outlook for 2019 is more instability, as domestic politics continue to drift into turmoil. What does this mean for their partners in Europe, first of all for Germany, both countries’ most important interlocutor? As the antagonism between the EU’s East and West continues to grow, Berlin cannot take for granted that Prague and Bratislava will continue their pragmatic approach to important EU issues. While insisting that both countries address issues of corruption and conflict of interest, Germany should also enlist France’s support to anchor their governments in the pro-European camp. At this point in time, both the Czech Republic and Slovakia need help to consolidate their strategic consensus and resist both internal and external pressures for further radicalization.

The post Double Trouble in Central Europe appeared first on Berlin Policy Journal - Blog.

© REUTERS/Radovan Stoklasa

At the end of February, the murder of Slovak investigative reporter Ján Kuciak and his fiancée Martina Kušnírová shocked the country. Within days it sparked mass street anti-corruption protests that toppled populist Prime Minister Robert Fico and pushed his center-left ruling coalition to the verge of collapse. For now, it seems that a snap election has been avoided—but the implications carry a powerful message beyond this small Central European nation.

Let’s start with the killings. This is the second high-profile murder of an investigative journalist in an EU member state, the first being that of Daphne Caruana Galizia. Like her, Kuciak was probing not only financial crimes in his home country, but also local links to international crime schemes and tax evasion exposed by the leaked Panama papers. He was only 27 years old, but according to his colleagues ahead of the others in data mining, and was deep into an advanced collaboration with colleagues in the Czech Republic and Italy. Slovak authorities have set up the largest investigative team in the country’s history, and are being assisted by Italian and Czech colleagues, as well as by Europol and the US Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI). Meanwhile, a joint international investigative team has been demanded by the protest organizers, who do not trust Slovak police.

Kuciak’s murder is a tragic reminder that, in some EU countries where state law enforcement bodies are not doing (or not allowed to do) their job, it is up to fearless reporters to risk their lives. This makes peripheral eurozone countries with weak state structures and histories of political cronyism attractive for money-laundering. In this context, fearless, skillful “lone wolf” investigative journalists, plugged into international investigative networks, present a bigger threat to organized crime than meets the eye.

An EU Challenge

But let’s not fool ourselves—this is not only about Malta or Slovakia. There are several countries in the EU with similar corruption problems and weak law enforcement.

Therefore, this is also a challenge for EU institutions. The European Parliament sent an ad hoc delegation to Bratislava last week, which published a solid report. Its findings, and the safety of journalists across the Union, were discussed in the European Parliament on Wednesday. But it’s not clear what the next steps are. Members of the EU delegation were shocked to find widespread distrust of the state institutions, notably the police and the law enforcement agencies; this stands in sharp contrast to the external perspective from Brussels, where Slovakia was passing under the radar.

Perhaps this tragic case should be a catalyst for a more systematic approach at the EU level, including a new mechanism to support journalists and civil society organizations working on corruption or rule of law issues, especially in member states with high distrust in law enforcement. This is a chance to fulfil the “more Europe” demands voiced by protest organizers, and supported on paper by the embattled but still pro-EU government in Bratislava.

Second, the murders of Kuciak and his fiancée stoked a huge amount of public anger over corruption and the government’s lack of effort to tackle it. Within days, this rage erupted into the biggest street protests since the end of communism. If the reported numbers do not look significant from the outside, think proportionally: Bratislava has a population of half a million, so a crowd of 40,000 people in the main square would be like 200,000 people in nearby Vienna or Budapest.

Organized by grass-root activists, last Friday’s protests spread out to some 50 towns throughout the country, and symbolic gatherings of Slovak expats even took place around the world, from Vancouver to Munich. Their main demands: a decent country, independent institutions, and stronger rule of law. This is a very encouraging sign in our times of political apathy. But will it be enough to achieve lasting improvement and a decent country?

Third, the deep political crisis in Slovakia is still evolving. Protests that started as strictly apolitical eventually turned against the government of Robert Fico. His populist Social Democrat Smer („Direction“) party has been in power for most of the last twelve years. Although serious concerns about corruption existed before, the scale of scandals and conflicts of interest involving the Smer leadership have reached unprecedented levels. And yet none of them has been properly investigated.

This paradox was summed up by The Economist recently: just six of the more than 800 people convicted and sentenced for corruption since 2012 were public officials, and the highest-ranking of those was mayor of a town with fewer than 2,000 residents. These numbers translate into falling support for the ruling party. A fresh poll by the Focus agency a few days ago showed 20 percent support for the government, a five percent drop from last month before the protests started, and 62 percent of Slovaks wanted Fico to leave.

A Former Star

Fico was once seen as one of Europe’s most successful center-left leaders. Back in 2012, Smer won a huge 45 percent share of the vote, allowing him to form a single-party government. To Fico’s credit, he was careful not to follow the steps of Viktor Orbán’s Hungary in democracy backsliding and curtailing civic or political freedoms. At the same time, even as many partners in the EU and at home sighed with relief, his party machine took control of public money flows and became more entrenched with big business than any government before. It was just a matter of time before the shady corruption bubble would burst.

On March 4, Slovak President Andrej Kiska called for either a major government reshuffle or early elections. The combative Fico responded with an accusation that President Kiska had conspired with American philanthropist George Soros—already to favored target of a vicious Orbán campaign. This went too far even for members of the junior coalition party, the liberal Most-Hid (“Bridge”). Snap elections were seen as the only credible solution to quell the mounting protests around the country, and government parties started talks about possible dates.

On Wednesday evening, Fico announced that he had negotiated a last-minute deal to save the three-party ruling coalition, and that he was prepared to step down as Slovakia’s Prime Minister. He submitted his resignation the next day, but only after President Kiska agreed to allow Fico’s Smer, as the largest party, to nominate the head of the new government. The newly designated Prime Minister is Peter Pellegrini, one of Fico’s deputies and a former speaker of parliament, who so far has kept a relatively clean track record.  In reality, Fico—who is staying on as Smer party chairman—will continue to pull the strings from behind the scenes. His discredited governance model, based on cronyism, will stay in place, just with better PR. Will this be enough to calm the situation?

New protests are announced for Friday evening, March 16. The vote of confidence in the old-new Slovak government is expected next week, but it will only be a formality; on Thursday Pellegrini presented the president with a list of signatures of 79 lawmakers guaranteeing a narrow majority in the 150-member parliament. One thing to watch will be the 14 MPs of Most-Hid—its popular minister refused to continue in the new government, but she will stay as MP and vote with the ruling coalition.

So what could have swayed the party’s position on the snap elections?

The rumor has it that Fico threatened the veteran Most-Hid leader Bela Bugár that he would unleash a harsh Slovak nationalist campaign with fake news, Soros-type accusations, and anti-Hungarian undertones should the party support a snap election, pushing ethnic Hungarian votes into the hands of conservative nationalists from SMK/MKP (4 percent), Most-Hid’s rivals. As a de facto local branch of Orban’s Fidesz party from neighboring Hungary, SMK/MKP would also get funding and Hungarian state media support for the campaign. Such a strategy would play into the hands of Slovak extremists, further weakening the non-Smer alternative.

Devilish but effective. But what would you do if you had to choose between maintaining your grip on power or losing it, and thus risking that your people would get a call from empowered and independent prosecutors finally allowed to do their work? The latest developments are a worrying sign that this is a transitional period for Slovakia, and throughout Central and Eastern Europe. With the exception of illiberal stalwarts Poland and Hungary, it is very hard to say what politics will look like in 2020.

The post Fed Up appeared first on Berlin Policy Journal - Blog.