Mr Mečiar & Mr Veteška: Running mates

It is often the case that those in high political office do not step down so easy. Each county has its examples and even some are famous. When the person not wanting to step aside to a successor or say the ‘next generation’ it is a poignant historical moment. Those in Europe may remember Margaret Thatcher not being re-elected Conservative Party leader in 1991 and thus without the title was lost an even greater one that she had held for twelve years. In recent memory anti-Iraq war feeling swept from the backbench to the government seats of Tony Blair with party faithful and Whitehall observers fearing a backbench revolution that, in the end, never occurred.

Ms Royal in France had to fight an uphill battle to gain the leadership position within the Socialist Party, a momentous feat in itself only to see the party hierarchy mobilize a half-hearted supportive campaign. In the United States Richard Nixon had to fight for the vice-presidency in 1952 that most party stalwarts wanted to give to Robert Taft and then when he ran for the presidency in 1968 Nixon had to fight off liberal New Yorker Nelson Rockefeller who many in the Republican Party thought had a better chance of beating Democrat Hubert Humphrey than Nixon.

In Slovakia, delegates at the Movement for a Democratic Slovakia (HZDS) regional congress in Prešov on May 19 gave their unanimous support for the re-election of incumbent HZDS chairman Vladimír Mečiar. This was expected but what has not been expected most political observers agree was vice-chair, Viliam Veteška’s, decision to run against Mečiar. His campaign of the last few months has brought into the spotlight a fact many people privately wondered: is Mečiar vulnerable?

It is true that all 98 delegates at the regional congress voted in support of Mečiar and Mečiar has the support of seven out of the eight of the party’s regional branches, with only the Trnava Region backing Veteška. However, for HZDS as a Party, the fact those two candidates were available to be chosen says something about the future of the party. Mečiar will not be chairman forever and a democratic process for party leadership is always good.

Sacrificial Truth

Race and national origin play an important role in the dialogue of a country. This is particularly true in the growing cross-national living of people, whether they are students or ex-patriots. Cities take pride in their diversity and if the United States, the ‘melting pot’ of the world has overflowed in recent decades the spill has gladly been collected in Europe’s metropolitan cities. When however racism rears its ugly head citizens are forced to look deep within themselves for answers to the difficult questions that for Europe is an ever-present shadow.

 Each country has its own way of dealing with the difficult questions of race and xenophobia. Germany may have exorcised its demons but it is proving hard for other European nations. Anti-Semitism may have played a role in last spring’s torture and murder of a young Jewish man kidnapped and held for ransom in Paris, later being found handcuffed and covered with burn marks. Britain has had a difficult time dealing with a series of assaults and murders of Africans and Arabs over the years. Who cannot forget the fatal stabbing of Stephen Lawrence in 1993 that shocked the nation out of its apathy. For the Slovak Republic it may be equally as hard. Hedviga Malinova, the student from Nitra whose cut and bruised face was splashed all over the media last August as proof of anti-Hungarian violence in Slovakia, was officially charged at the beginning of last week with making the whole story up. In an investigation into the allegedly extremist attack on the 23-year-old that saw the personal involvement of the Interior Minister and public comments by the Prime Minister over 250 officers and a list of 600 suspects, Slovak police on September 12 came to a verdict that stunned the nation: It never happened.  

Evidence in the case is full of contradiction and Ms Malinova did not help her cause later under police interrogation by recanting her claim. This may sound a bit similar to the rape case, now closed, in the United States of an exotic dancer who last year March accused the Duke University lacrosse team of rape, sodomy, strangulation and beating. Since the woman was African-American the story with its heavy overtones of race and class, immediately popped onto the front pages and TV screens. Months later it was proven that she had made up the story. The difference between the two stories is that Ms Malinova’s story holds a bit more truth in it.  

As is often the case truth is lost to politics and ego, pride and nationalism. Ms Malinova is a victim of a process repeated over the world where what really happened is often not as important as what may have happened. And, more importantly, what people remember. When the printer’s digital ink has been spelt and camera lights turned off Ms Malinova will still be alone as she was that night. This case now headed to the Constitutional Court in Slovakia, if not handled correctly will leave the nation alone too. Alone in its guilt and confusion facing a future with links to a past yet resolved.

Mr Slota’s Favorite Issue

There are times in the life of a country when a politician or political party becomes the butt of jokes. This is common in every democracy and even in non-democratic nations, albeit through underground dissention. Such humor usually centers on statements or policy that at its core is based on fallacy and fear but is translated into language that borders on stupid. Depending on political ideology America has Rush Limbaugh and Alan Comes. England has Chris Evans and one should not forget Austria’s Freedom Party under the leadership of Jörg Haider.

When the issue is immigration or minority status those who speak as to what is reasonable within the confines of the law are not heard. Rather, it is the shock jocks on radio and racists in the streets who shout their ignorance and hatred. The issues mentioned above have touched every nation on earth. For the Western nations of the world within recent decades how to cope with the large influx of immigrants while protecting their status within a society has been a concern. Europe has had to deal with these issues and the ugly face of racism twice within the last twenty years. Slovakia may not have the pressing concern of immigration. It does however have to deal with an issue that is equally old and emotionally challenging. What to do with ethnic Hungarians living in the southern part of the country that make up the majority of the population? This question and the corresponding debate has fueled antagonists on both sides for years since the Velvet Revolution brought democracy to Czechoslovakia and three years later Slovak independence. The answer for the most part was to not discuss it; let sleeping dogs Lie. Then the Slovak National Party joined the coalition government last May and Ján Slota, the butt of many jokes, but an antagonist all the same received a cabinet post.

This past week Mr Slota said that he had evidence that activists have launched a campaign in the south of the Slovakia to secure political autonomy for the ethnic Hungarians living there. Considering the situation in the Serbian province of Kosovo and what happened there back in 1999, most political observers took a deep breath. This Mr Slota claims amounts to a demand for a level of autonomy close to that of an independent state. Mentioning petitions in support of autonomy, and t-shirts emblazoned with a map of a future Slovakia. The SNS chairman said the SNS was ready to initiate a parliamentary debate on this issue. Most Slovaks and political observers now should let out that air they have been holding. The man who can’t be taken seriously made his position ever more illegitimate. On the same day, the opposition Hungarian Coalition Party (SMK) distanced itself from a petition organized in southern Slovakia that calls for autonomy for areas of the country with an ethnic-Hungarian majority. Mr Berenyi, the leader of the SMK went further saying that any autonomy-linked activities, if they were to be done, would take place in parliament and not via petitions.

Mr Berenyi has deflected the non-issue that had potential to become an issue. The question is if, and he probably will, Mr Slota will continue in this nonsense will the Slovak people care to listen? Let us hope not.

Mr Fico & Mr Putin

Last week Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico announced his support for Russian President Vladimir Putin’s opposition to the US’ plan to build an anti-missile base in the Czech Republic and Poland during his one-day official visit to Russia on May 4. Attempting his best imitation of a mediator on the international stage Mr Fico said that he understands Russia’s fears and thinks the main problem is insufficient communication between Washington and Moscow. With such international relation pleasantries disposed off Mr Fico turned his eyes on business. While he assured Mr Putin that a US radar base would never be built in Slovakia Mr Fico confirmed that his government supports the defense industry indicating interest in cooperation with Russia in development, production and the sale of weapons. All of this caused political analysts and “European observers” to warn of a major policy shift towards Russia that would only cause embarrassment to fellow EU partners and a return to backwardness that such people have attributed the first six years after the birth of the Second Slovak Republic. A full week after Mr Fico’s one-day visit the content of the meeting is still being discussed in the news and in the papers. Though such a visit causing such national conversation is a good thing what should be remembered is the context.

Russia, as the Soviet Union, had intimate involvement in the political and economic decisions made in Czechoslovakia until the formers disintegration in 1991. It is accurate to point out that the political and economic policies of Slovakia beginning in 1993 and lasting until 1997 harmed rather than helped the country. However, by making his visit and offering support Mr Fico is doing in practice what all leaders do to former allies and neighbors, both categories that Russia falls under. It is this same criticism that has plagued Mr Blair the last five years in office and one of the reasons Spain’s Mr Aznar and his party lost the March 2004 elections to Mr Zapatero’s  Partido Socialista Obrero Español (PSOE).

Such promises to Mr Putin did not stop Mr Fico a few days later in meetings with Austrian Prime Minister Gusenbauer to pledge economic and political agreements from which has Slovakia taking a leading role in re-starting dialogue on the EU Constitution. So, while Mr Fico may be criticized for the approach he took in his meeting with Mr Putin it should not forgotten the role that geography and politics must play in Slovak foreign relations. If Mr Fico is clever he will try to become a bridge for a reactionary Europe and a Russia reasserting itself on the European stage.

Legacy

Legacies are important for politicians as they are for citizens. The good, bad, and ugly of an individual’s professional career are open for prosperity. The older the legacy the more evident can be found myth and legend. From Mr Churchill’s famous evening pouring over a map of Africa and with a ruler and grease-pen dividing a Continent for European superpowers to Mr Nixon’s “Checker’s Speech” in which he defiantly defended his finances in his bid to keep the vice-presidency. In recent times it has become necessary for politicians to control their legacy. Mrs Thatcher’s two-volume tome of an autobiography in equal parts defensive and aggressive, Mr Clinton’s apt entitled and flagrantly self-promotional autobiography My Life and Mr Schroeder providing a book to rival both Clinton and Thatcher.  

The news that Mr Blair had set a date for which he would step down as Labour Party leader and thus as Prime Minister of Britain was duly reported around the world but made scant headlines. In part it is because the ‘hype’ is past but also in part because all eyes have turned to heir apparent Mr Gordon Brown. So, as Mr Blair contemplates his legacy and an autobiography, another leader tried this past week to create a legacy positive enough to be remembered till the next election and significant enough for prosperity.  

Prime Minister Robert Fico and Austrian Chancellor Alfred Gusenbauer’s talks in Vienna on May 8 centered around opportunities for further economic co-operation. With more than 1,700 companies in Slovakia supported either entirely or at least partly by Austrian capital one can see why. For Mr Fico’s own legacy regarding foreign affairs non-success in China and rumblings of discontent from European Union partners over his recent visit and tacit support for Russia’s president provided a shadow over his talks with Gusenbauer. However with agreements that Slovakia will support Austria’s efforts to become a non-permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, and that both countries will try to resolve issues relating to the stalled European Constitution are signs of diplomatic success. Moreover, Slovak-Austrian transport projects, such as the new Vienna-Bratislava motorway, due to be completed by November 19 and discussion on the cancelled privatization of Bratislava Airport indicate that Mr Fico is a competent negotiator. 

This is good skill for any politician. As to how history will judge him one will have to wait for the autobiography.

Corruption & Jozef Majský

Most people dislike politics because of politicians. To be one carries with it the stigma of being corrupt. There is some truth to this generalization and each nation has its share of corrupt politicians and dirty politics. Tony Blair had Peter Mendelson and “cash for honors”, while Italy elected Silvio Berlusconi, twice. Slovakia is no exception. In its history only one politician carried enough respect in death as he did in life, first president of the Czechoslovak state, Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk. This past week the Special Court of Slovakia sentenced Jozef Majský, one of Slovakia’s richest citizens, to 12 years in a high-security prison for planning and founding a criminal gang and for embezzling millions of crowns from two failed pyramid schemes, Horizont Slovakia and BMG Invest. The allegations, trial, and verdict remind me of another big name businessman connected to politics in the United States. 

Former political lobbyist, Republican political activist and businessman, Jack Abramoff, a central figure in a series of high-profile political scandals two years ago liked to make flippant comments to the media and boast of his powerful contacts. In addition to offering many Republican members of Congress free meals at his expensive restaurant, Abramoff maintained four skyboxes at major sports arenas for political entertaining and fundraisers at a cost of over $1 million a year. Moreover, golf trips to Scotland apparently arranged or funded by Abramoff for key political leaders in the years 2000, 2002, and 2003 and alleged intimate knowledge of Bush Administration plans about Iraq created an atmosphere that bred corruption. Mr Majský may not have had the equivalent cash or skybox tickets, but he helped found the Civic Understanding Party, got himself photographed with representatives of the right-centre Slovak Democratic and Christian Union and was close to Vladimir Mečiar. By owning part of the private Radio Twist station and a newspaper with the abovementioned ‘connections’ an atmosphere of corruption was created where Mr Majský could appropriately boast to journalists that he was a media tycoon who sponsored public officials.

 Corruption will always exist. The stigma of corruption and politics will persist as long as both politicians and business believe they can do it. Individual verdicts read in courtrooms solve only part of the problem. The answer also lies in the ballot box, the newspaper, over radio and television, and in our schools and at our dining room tables.

A Presidential Entrepreneur

Though people may dislike American culture and its influences and shake their heads when a tourist displays the popularized ‘ugly Americanism’ there is a much more subtle American influence being permanently and irrevocably imprinted over Europe. Politics. I do not mean the ‘talking points’ for press conferences or music inspired rallies. Instead, in style and execution, European leaders have modeled themselves off of their American cousins. From Blair to Schroeder and his replacement Merkel, Berlusconi and Aznar, even the Dutch Jan Balkenende all have taken pages from the American presidential course book. Now, it seems is France’s turn.   

Nicolas Sarkozy, France’s president-elect, has given himself 100 days to pass a first wave of economic reforms after voters endorsed his call to break with the stagnation that marked the 12-year administration of his predecessor. When hearing the news most historians will immediately think of Franklin D. Roosevelt, often referred to by his initials FDR. In fact, Mr Sarkozy’s entire campaign and pledges are ripe with comparisons.  

Mr Sarkozy disappeared Monday for a three-day break before consulting with his inner circle to constitute his new government. After FDR won the 1932 presidential election he retired to his home and consulted with advisors soon called the ‘brain trust’ who developed the ideas, later legislation, of the New Deal. With only 15 ministers, Mr Sarkozy’s cabinet will be leaner than previous governments, and will include some new and controversial posts like that of minister for immigration and national identity. Half of his cabinet members are expected to be women, and at least one of them, Rachida Dati, is a French woman of North African descent.  FDR’s cabinet was equally diverse, including the first woman, Francis Perkins, a milestone appointment at that time. 

Instead of addressing the French twice yearly on Bastille Day and New Year’s Eve from Élysée Palace, Mr Sarkozy plans to give regular press conferences. Expanding on a technique used as New York governor, FDR began national radio addresses, affectionately entitled ‘fire-side chats’ that offered inspiration and hope to a nation very much depressed and later doubt-ridden over world war. Such an example is still followed by U.S. presidents with weekly radio addresses, though with mass media today the American public seldom tunes in.  

Mr Sarkozy’s main task will be to push through a first installment of economic reforms. Again, one cannot help but see the shadow of Roosevelt. Following the two-round legislative elections on June 10 and 17, Mr Sarkozy will convene an extraordinary parliamentary session. One bill would eliminate payroll and income taxes on overtime in a bid to water down the 35-hour week. Another would grant universities more autonomy. A third draft law would mandate minimum service during strikes in the public transport sector. FDR sent to Congress a record number of bills proposing action on economic reform. Through the Federal Emergency Relief Administration (ERA), major relief for the unemployed occurred. The Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) employed unemployed young men to work on rural projects while agricultural relief was sought through the Agricultural Adjustment Administration (AAA). Reform of the economy was the goal of the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) and the banking sector was regulated through the new Securities and Exchange Commission.  

France does not face the difficulties that the United States did when Franklin Roosevelt took office, however, as Le Monde said in an editorial Monday. “His speeches have the imprints of a protectionist Bonapartism; his program, much more liberal, talks of break of Blairist inspiration.” It should be remembered that Blair took inspiration from Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher who followed the example of American president Ronald Reagan, a believer and student of FDR.

Opposition leaders on Healthcare

Being in political opposition is an interesting position for politicians. It is fascinating at times, in its vagueness, while also providing the venue necessary for future aspirations. Most people might think of Winston Churchill’s ‘wilderness years’ as an example of a politician who benefited from the experience. Interestingly, Churchill was not active in politics at the time. Either was Ronald Reagan when he gave his “time for choosing” speech in 1964, sparking the interest of Republicans that cumulated sixteen years later with his nomination for the presidency.

Finding oneself in opposition after being in government is a much more difficult experience. One is forced to accept the loss while seeing your opponent’s smug face across from you. You may pout in the backbench as Mr Hague did in 1997 or sulk in rejected silence as fellow Tory and successor Mr Duncan-Smith did in 2001. It is a bit different in the United States though Mr Kerry’s performance post-Nov 2nd 2004 warrants mentioning. Opposition gives the Party or Party’s the duty to hold the government accountable. This is true in Slovakia though fiction is being created from fact.

Opposition leaders Mikuláš Dzurinda (SDKÚ), Pál Csáky (SMK) and Pavol Hrušovský (KDH) agreed at their meeting on May 3 that it is Prime Minister Robert Fico, rather than Health Minister Ivan Valentovič, who is to blame for the “miserable situation in the healthcare sector”.

Economists and historians will tell you that there is a cycle of five to ten years to see the affects of specific governmental policies. The difficulties in the healthcare sector existed under the Dzurinda era too. It is a bit bold for Mr Dzurinda and fellow opposition leaders to place all responsibility on Mr Fico for within such blame lies the fallacy similar to the one Mr Fico has used taking credit within recent months of the strength of the Slovak economy. There is an overlap in policy execution from government to government that is seen over years not weeks. Interestingly, a point not commentated on by Mr Fico or Mr Valentovič.

The opposition has said it will not propose a no-confidence motion against Valentovič at the next parliamentary session due to begin on May 9. The parties will propose, however, a declaration obliging the cabinet to submit a report on “the miserable situation in the healthcare sector” to parliament. Such actions though appropriate for parliamentary procedure belie a fact the opposition seems to forget: you cannot fault the Prime Minister and then ask his Cabinet to answer before the Parliament. The Slovak Republic is a Parliamentary-style not a Presidential-style government. Questions and blame lay in the Cabinet. Yes, the prime minister is responsible for overall policy but questions on and blame for the execution of policy lies with respective ministers. Mr Valentovič should be no exception. That is why cabinet reshuffles are so anticipated and feared in British politics every time policy fails.

Anthony Eden, British Prime Minister following Churchill’s death did not repeal England’s National Health Service, legislation introduced under the Labour government of Clement Attlee, even though both Churchill and Eden opposed it from the other aisle when it had been debated in the Commons. The United State’s does not have a national health service, but an issue equally divisive is social security. Ridiculed by business and Republicans when Democrat Franklin Roosevelt introduced it as part of his ‘New Deal’, successive Republican Administrations have kept and expanded the system. The health sector in Slovakia, a homogenous remnant of socialism and a decade of democratic policy, is in need of cash and reform. It is hoped these facts will be remembered on May 9.

The Media & Mr Fico

Those of us familiar with American politics may criticize the conduct of the media, generally dubbed ‘the press’ over its failure to keep the Bush Administration accountable over the past seven years. This criticism comes from a deep memory of the specific relationship the press has had with public officials, specifically presidents. Whether it be the dogged interview style of a female reporter that kept Mr Van Buren in the Potomac River naked until he answered her questions or an exasperated Mr Grant commentating on the number of press and office-seekers hanging out in the Willard Hotel lobby that gave a title to a new group of Washington insiders. It could be the friendly and almost equal exchange of favors and information that characterized the Roosevelt cousins or the media inspired, media driven Camelot era.

From Watergate, a new golden age began, and though charmed for eight years by Reagan the press never lost sight of its role within the public discourse, acting as advocate and at times mediator. It is this history and the similar histories of western European democracies in England and France and Germany that has inspired the press in former communist countries. If the model cannot be followed in content then the hope often is to replicate in at least style. Unfortunately, in Slovakia, even this has proved elusive since the new government took office in May 2006. Reviled at best, locked-out in typical ‘Soviet’ style at worst, the Slovak press and Slovak government have a horrible relationship.

This relationship between the government and the Slovak media grew even more tense last week. At a meeting in Veľký Krtíš on April 22, Prime Minister Robert Fico did not even try to hide his disappointment with the media’s conduct. Spurning all questions, instead he spoke to what he saw as media bias. This is a mantra often tried by politicians around the globe and its moderate success has made such repeated efforts possible. The difference last week is in how Mr Fico treats the press. Unlike Mr Blair’s bright smile or Mr Bush’s nicknames given to the American press corps that follow him Mr Fico actions indicate clear disdain. You know you are on the s#*t list if Mr Bush revokes the nickname or worse calls you by an expletive. Losing access to Whitehall is Blair’s equivalent. Mr Fico does not even bother with a list.

For Slovakia to evolve in its democratic experiment all elements need to function. This includes dialogue between the executive and the fourth branch of government, the press. Mr Fico likes to tout his populist credentials, it is important for him to remember that the people also hear his message by reading newspapers and watching television.

Preparations for euro introduction

Ninety-three percent of Slovak companies believe the introduction of the euro will have an impact on their work, according to a survey that aimed to find out how prepared Slovak companies are for euro adoption. The poll was carried out in March of 2007 by the Ernst & Young professional services company. This is very good news, however it is who was surveyed that was the trouble. The most advanced in their preparations were the financial sector and firms concerned with network industries and telecommunications. This was to be expected, what is a bit confusing and frustrating is though Slovak companies of various sizes participated as many as 50 percent of the companies were based in Bratislava, the capital.

Slovakia’s motto is ‘Little Big Country’. Yes, it is small, but from Trencin, Zilina, and Martin to the north; Banska Batrisa in the center and Kosice in the east there are many major cities with international business interests. Why did this poll not have more of a representation throughout the rest of the country? Education and prepardness are the two vital ingredients for the Slovak Republic before January 2009. These two ingredients will also go a long way in solving the apathy and silencing the cynics in the country, not to mention assist companies work out their strategic analyses. Time, one might argue is still on our side here in Slovakia. Candidates for the presidency in the U.S. hoping to move to a new residence in January 2009 would tell us otherwise.