The recent German elections having returned no clear majority party to the Bundestag, only giving a very slight plurality to the conservative Christian Democrats, they and the heretofore-ruling Social Democrats have decided to form a “grand coalition” government: CD leader Angela Merkel gets the chancellorship (becoming Germany’s first female chancellor, ever), while the two parties will divvy up the Cabinet posts: http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/10/10/germany.talks/index.html (Up to now, there was discussion of the possiblity that either party might form a governing coalition with smaller parties more or less on its own side of the divide.)
Will this be a workable government? What will be its policy lines? What does this mean for Germany’s future, and its relations with the EU, the U.S., and the world?
Is it workable? Sure. Both parties agree that economic reform is necessary and even broadly agree on what needs to be done. They also have a history of working together when need be - in the last few years, the parties came together to slash subsidies, cut corporation taxes and nearly performed a nice overhaul of the federal system back in 2004. Both agree broadly that the tax system has to be simplified a bit, the budget deficit needs to be reduced, etc., they just disagree on the details. No reason it can’t work itself out.
In terms of foreign relations, there likely won’t be any serious change. Policy will likely be a bit more Atlanticist and Turkey is going to have a more difficult time with EU accession, but it’s not like the CDU is seriously anti-EU or anything. Further EU integration had all already been killed off by the referendum debacle in France and other countries, so that wasn’t on the table, either. There’s no way Merkel sends troops to Iraq or makes any other serious foreign policy changes.
Basically, you’ll see a modest shift to the right, but not that much difference.
I think it may become very ineffective. While there is some agreement at the top, I’m not certain that the to parties can actually agree enough to get it done. They may have worked together in the past, but there are sufficient personal animosities that I don’t know they can do it again now. It all comes down to specifics.
I’m not saying it’ll be the most effective government out there, I’m just saying it’s not likely to be a debacle because there aren’t really any massive ideological differences on what needs to get done and how, that’s all. I’m sure elections will need to be called early in a few years. Some necessary reforms will get done, others won’t.
I agree. What is more important, since the two parties understand that something needs to be done and even pretty much what, ironically the only way to pull it off might be to do it together. Only that way can they get things done, without fear of the other party getting all the blame or all the fame.
Is there any real precedent, in any parliamentary country for that matter, for a shotgun-wedding weak coalition having any durability or stability or, for that matter, effectiveness at defining and implementing bold policies?
From the outside, this latest situation looks pretty familiar.
Yes, there was another “grand coalition” between the same parties in Germany 1966-1969 (this isn’t a full term because it began during one and ended at the next regular election.) It wasn’t overly popular, but it worked reasonably well for the rest of the term.
In addition to that I think that many people underestimate the overlap between the parties - especially without their respective smaller coalition partners. They aren’t really polar opposites, especially not in recent years.
It’s not ideology I was talking about. Amongst other things, a great many groups said some awfully nasty things about Merkel, and some of them are not the kind of things you can just take back. And some of the poeple who said them are going to be officially in her coalition.
She may overlook this. Or not. She’s probably willing to work with it, but if I were them, I’d be worried she might take the opportunity to do launch reprisals for th next year or two. And that could bring it down again.
Israel in the early 90s had a Labor-Likud coalition. It didn’t work particularly well. There in one now, as well - jury’s still out on its effectiveness (except, of course, for the Gaza withdrawal).
That’s one of the examples I was thinking of. Israel now has a strong PM, independently elected, reducing some of the Knesset’s power and most of the tiny, 1-seat parties’ former influence, IIRC.
kellner, thanks for the background info. Good luck to you.