Germany is one of Europe’s countries where the principle of a parliamentary republic has not only been fully implemented, but is successfully functioning with all the stability and scrupulousness the Germans have become famous for. Unlike in Italy, which is also a parliamentary republic, German governments have never replaced one another in succession. Undoubtedly, finding a key to Germany’s political well-being was no easy task, and this was not achieved overnight. A political reform is in full swing in Ukraine. Under such conditions, the experience of Germany, which worked an economic miracle in the postwar period and overcame a cultural split after the fall of the Berlin Wall, could be useful. Germans have managed to find the most successful combination of integral elements of any parliamentary republic, and now it would not be an overstatement to call their brainchild one of the world’s best political systems. The specifics of the German parliamentary system and the problems Ukraine may face when attempting to build a European-style parliamentary republic are discussed in the interview with celebrated German political scientist Alexander RAHR.
“Currently the Ukrainian leadership is periodically reviewing the fundamentals of the country’s system of government in favor of a parliamentary model. In your view, is Ukraine ready for such changes? Will a parliamentary republic justify itself as a form of government under post-Soviet conditions?”
“In my view, Ukraine is not quite ready to become a parliamentary republic, although there are many preconditions for this. Countries in the post-Soviet space have their own specifics. After the collapse of the Soviet Union — I mean the period between 1989 and 1991 — the Baltic States and Russia wanted to create parliamentary republics as the most democratic form of government. However, it transpired later, especially in Russia, that as a result of it the country becomes uncontrollable. To solve the problems that post-Soviet states faced in those days they needed a national hero that would enjoy a high level of popular trust. The population was traditionally oriented toward a strong personality, a president with presidential staff capable of coordinating the work of the government. To this end, the president needed greater powers than those of the parliament. The parliament was the scene of political struggle and debate that negatively affected the sociopsychological state of the society. Had all these squabbles come to the fore, and if it was for the parliament to decide the fate of the country, I think that neither Ukraine, nor Russia would have been able to implement all of ther planned political and economic reforms. Thus, in the 1990s the presidential model justified itself completely.
“In my view, within the next ten years practically all the post-Soviet states will attempt a transition to a parliamentary model, since this model is quite successfully used in many EU countries, envisions a higher level of democracy, and defines the terms of reference of the two whales of power, that is, the parliament and government.
“I get the impression that the Ukrainian parliament is not united enough. I also fear that there are many diametrically opposite views, which could lead to a radicalization of the supreme legislative body. In any case, this could destabilize the situation in the country and precipitate a political, economic, and social chaos. On the other hand, your president’s attempt to initiate a transition to a parliamentary model merits special note. It seems to me Leonid Kuchma has resolved to go down in history as the first president in the CIS to create a parliamentary republic in his country, thereby discarding once and for all the rigid presidential model of power.”
“Does this mean that the parliament is thus far the major center of destabilization in the country?”
“Not every thing depends on the parliament alone. It mirrors the state of the society, because the deputies are elected by the people. It is the electors who grant extremists access to the parliament. Radical movements can penetrate a legislative body when they enjoy popular support. It is imperative that the country’s independence and a course toward Europe be not questioned, that matters relating to private property, privatization, and so forth be always regulated. In Germany, these are the benchmarks that are never questioned.”
“Do you mean that the root cause of our problems lies on the plane of social consciousness, political culture, and education?”
“Absolutely. But even the elites have not realized in which direction Ukraine should be moving. When Ukraine becomes a full-fledged state with its own national idea, effective constitution recognized by the society, and a new mentality of the twenty-first century, which should be a European and not post-Soviet or Asian mentality, then the transition to a parliamentary model will be less painful. When this happens, not only the president, who has been vested with power to clear the way for a policy of reforms thorough the confrontations among the leftists, rightists, and centrists, but also the parliament will be able to decide the destiny of the country in a democratic way.
“When the center acquires strength, with the centrist parties struggling for power, as is the case in all European countries, then the parliament, vested with enough power to govern the state, will be answerable to the people. The main leverage of power should not remain in the hands of one man, since this could likely lead to an autocracy or dictatorship.”
“How does the fact that many parties and blocs lack clear ideological doctrines affect the country’s political situation?”
“Most parties are created for a purely pragmatic reason, that is, to rally support for a single leader. When the leader is gone, the party sinks into political oblivion. Nobody really cares about building parties in Ukraine. Most parties are merely rungs on a career ladder of certain politicians.
“Proceeding with the building of a parliamentary republic, sooner of later the president himself, caring about the political structuring of the society, will have to head one of the parties and be responsible not only for the state, but also for the work of his party structure. The president will personify not only the state, but also a certain party, thereby encouraging party building, for another party leader will immediately step forward as his opponent.
“The presidents of Ukraine and Russia have not made such a step yet, because there are certain specifics. But I believe it is worth it to make such a step toward a parliamentary republic in Ukraine. This will be a guarantee of President Kuchma’s future political career. After stepping down as president he could occupy a high post in the party, for example, that of honorary chairman, and use his experience as a public politician to further develop his party. However, thus far tradition and mentality seem to get the upper hand here.”
“You have mentioned the president’s key role in political processes. What is the role of Germany’s federal president? It seems it is not much different from that of the British queen.”
“Germany’s president has been traditionally equated with a king. As you may know, Germany got its democracy in the nineteenth century, but not as a result of a revolution, as was the case in France or Russia, but as a result of an evolution from a monarchy to a constitutional monarchy and later to a parliamentary republic. The office of Germany’s president has been traditionally an attribute of imperial power. But the federal president can also act as a guardian of democratic values, should the chancellor attempt to usurp power. He has an option to influence the government. Although few, if any, presidents have used this option in recent years, it is envisioned for certain cases.”
“Can the federal president put forward bills and is he entitled to impose a veto?”
“No. Our president represents the country, signs international treaties, and appoints federal judges. These are his major responsibilities. The Bundestag and Bundesrat [the lower and upper houses of Germany’s federal legislature — Ed.] draft bills in cooperation with the government. As for the right to veto, the president is only entitled to return laws for revision. However, as far as I know, there have been only five such cases, all of which happened for technical reasons. In general, presidents of presidential republics in which major historical transformations are underway have the right to veto laws. Germany, like all European countries, has passed the stage when it had to resort to such extreme measures to address major social problems. The parliament discusses the possible alternatives, and the decision is made by a majority vote. The decision of the parliamentary coalition cannot be contested. This is the essence of a parliamentary republic.”
“In what cases can the parliament be dissolved and by whom?”
“In theory, the federal president can dissolve only the lower house, if it does not elect a new chancellor within the established period. But in practice this is impossible. Germany has its own bitter experience from the times of Hitler. Then a dissolution of the parliament by Hitler resulted in a global catastrophe. For this reason, the postwar constitution does not provide real possibilities for dissolving the parliament. Germany is special in this respect.”
“Bundestag deputies have a free mandate. How is stability and discipline within factions maintained?”
“I can think of only two cases in German history when politicians broke rank, with Verhoigen of the Liberal Democrats switching over to Social Democrats and Otto Schily of the Green Party leadership also crossing over to Germany’s Social Democratic Party. I can’t think of any deputies passing from one faction to the next or leaving their faction altogether.
“It’s just that in Ukraine it is easier for accidental persons to make it into the parliament than in Germany. We have a stable party system. To illustrate, representatives of the Christian Democratic Union or Social Democrats invariably sweep elections in single member constituencies, leaving the Liberals or Greens no chance. The less influential parties can make it into the parliament only on party lists, if they pass a five percent threshold. Germany also has parties such as the Party of Beer Lovers or the Party of European Christians participating in the elections, but they never manage to garner more than 0.5% of the vote. Thus, one can win seats in the parliament only by serving one party for many years.”
“If your parties are so developed, why do you have a mixed and not simply proportional election system?”
“A mixed system enables regional elites to influence the central power. Strange as it may sound, single member constituencies help reinforce Germany’s federal system. Party lists are more anonymous. Anyone can be included in them. As a result, the voter’s choice is quite limited, since he votes for the whole list.”
“A discussion of the election law continues in Ukraine. The draft of the political reform envisions an exclusively proportionale election system. Will it be effective considering the specifics of modern Ukrainian parties?”
“In my view, a mixed election system would be more effective at the present stage. Under conditions of a proportionale system too much power is concentrated in the hands of party leaders, who become dictators of sorts, since they choose those to be included in the party lists. If you follow in the footsteps of the USA, which has a majority election system, you have to remember that its bipartisan system took over two centuries to form, and there are no influential parties in the classic sense of the word. They mobilize only during elections and decamp afterward. Moreover, a majority system will reinforce the position of local structures and governors, who will use local and regional resources to push their protОgОs into the parliament.
“But Ukraine is not America, for which reason it would do best to draw on the experience of France, Germany, or Poland, where parties as integral parts of a full-fledged civil society play a major role in political processes. There is no need to reinvent the bicycle. If Ukraine really wants to become a prosperous European country, it should learn from Germany’s experience of building a final political system, of course, considering its own traditions. This will enable you to build a strong and prosperous democratic and federal state.”
“Federal?”
“With time, when there is no rift between the East and West, when the issue of the Crimea is exhausted, when Ukraine starts living as a single country, then, of course, as any democracy your country will have to decentralize power and hand over responsibility for governing the society and implementing economic reforms to local government bodies.”
“Do you mean that the parliament should be divided into two houses, and governors should be elected by popular vote?”
“Absolutely. After all, local authorities should also have a say in the decision making process in the center. Who elects the governors it is not all that important, as long as the upper house exists and is capable of participating in legislative activity. For example, in Germany representatives of the upper house are appointed by the governments of the lands.”
“Under a recent draft of the political reform, the president — to be elected by the parliament — reserves the right to appoint two ministers and dissolve the parliament in four cases.”
“This way the transition from a presidential to a parliamentary model will be less radical. I think this corresponds to the realities of political life in Ukraine. For a while Ukraine will have to live under a form of government whereby the president means more than the prime minister, unlike in most Eastern European states. This is a gradual process. Thus far it could be dangerous to strip the president of all his powers and authority. Whether we want it or not, Ukrainian society has deep-rooted traditions of being ruled by one leader. The people have no confidence in the parliament yet. Meanwhile, the president will enjoy more popular trust, even considering the fact that he will be elected not directly by the people. He will become the country’s visage. Therefore, he will need additional means of controlling the political situation, should it spin out of control.”
