Euroscepticism in Czech politics

Veronika Brantová
i6009322
University College Maastricht
2009/2010

SSC 1025: Introduction to Political Science

Course coordinator: Roberta Haar
Group number: 4
Tutor: Wolfgang Giernalczyk
March 24, 2010
 World Count:

Introduction
The ODS and its former leader, Václav Klaus, have been known for the critics
concerning the matters of European Union (EU). During the World Economic Forum in
Davos in 1995, Klaus tackled the question regarding the agricultural policies of EU and
attacked them by strong opposition. The former EU commissioner, Hans van der Broek,
then reacted, stating that “it is not the EU who wants to get into the Czech Republic.”
(Kopecky & Ucen, 1998) As president, Vaclav Klaus was keen on falsifying the Lisbon
Treaty and caused a great fiasco for the Czech Republic concerning the Treaty’s
signature in 2009, despite the approval of main political. Thus, Czech Republic ratified
the document as the last of the member states and by this position Vaclav Klaus
underscored the phenomenon of Euroscepticism within the country.
Yet, in the aftermath of the fall of communism and the change of regime,
Czechoslovak politics expressed a widespread euphoria concerning the return to Europe.
Then, after the separation of Czechoslovakia, as of the last day in 1992, both independent
states declared to follow unified foreign policies (Mares 2002). The domestic actors
frequently anticipated the regime changes in the whole Central and Eastern Europe as a
“return to normality” and even equated with the notion of “return to Europe”. In other
words, European integration was perceived as a logical consequence of the “return to
normality.” (Kopecky & Ucen, 1998) It is undoubtedly true that the issue of European
integration had undergone a dramatic development in the Czech Republics since the early
1990s, nevertheless the questions of sovereignty remain in the policies of the major
political parties. Moreover the phenomenon of Euroscepticism has been flourishing in the
country. Although the accession of the Czech Republic to EU was actively and openly
supported, Czech political parties have developed a relatively cohesive, visible and
critical position on European integration, nevertheless consistent with its ideological
orientation.
In this paper, the research will consider the transformation of political parties in
the Czech Republic from the separation of Czechoslovakia mainly until the elections held
in 2006. Although the political situation in the Czech Republic will be presented up till

2
now, the government experienced major upheavals during the mentioned period, which
will therefore be underlined. Focusing primarily on foreign policy and geopolitical stance
of the main political parties; in particular, EU related matters, the analyses will include
the Civic Democratic Party/Obcanska Strana Demokraticka (ODS) and Czech Social
Democratic Party/Ceska Strana Socialni Demokracie and the Communist Party for Czech
and Moravia/Komunisticka strana Cech a Moravy (KSCM). First, different classification
of Euroscepticism will be presented. Following, the main features of political culture in
the Czech Republic will be underlined in order to demonstrate the political development.
Lastly, the major political parities will be analyzed based on their foreign policies and
degree and attitude for European integration.

What is Euroscepticism?
In the last years many different classification that attempt to describe the relations of
political parties and European integration had been developed in political science. In
regards to the Czech Republic, very few original text and literature tackle this topic; the
majority of documents are rather in the form of essays or working papers.
Paul Taggart (1998) introduced this topic as a complete rejection of any European
question. However, this understanding showed to be insufficient in the upcoming years
and more complex questions regarding European policies arose. Elaborating on the
question of Euroscepticism, Taggart and Sczcerbiak (2000, 2004) ignored the positive
attitudes for European integration and made a distinction between “soft” and “hard”
Euroscepticism. The “hard” form of Euroscepticism “implies outright rejection of the
entire project of European political and economic integration, and opposition to ones
country joining or remaining a member of the EU.” ( p3, 2004) “Soft” Euroscepticism, by
contrast, “involves contingent or qualified opposition to European integration.” (page4,
2004) In other words, the “soft” Euroscepticism applies when the party is in principle
neither against European integration nor membership in EU, however opposes certain
policies of EU.
Different classification came up in the works of Petr Kopecký and Cas Mudde
(1998, 2002). They underlined three main factors that contribute to the phenomenon of
Euroscepticis. First, the two-dimensional aspects distinguish the relation to EU, which

3
they referred to as either “diffuse” or “specific” support for European integration In other
words, whereas the first dimension concerns the party positions on European integration
in general, the second emphasizes Euroscepticism in particular, specific policies and
approaches. Second, Kopecky and Mudde (1998) analyzed the location, type and
electoral strength of the particular political party and as an ultimate concept they
emphasized the ideology, meaning whether the party is rather right- or left-wing oriented.
The last two concepts rather explain the two-dimensional aspect and underline either the
“diffuse” or “specific” support. Additionally, in the first dimension Kopecky and Mudde
made a distinction between Europhiles and Europhobic whereas in the second dimension
they underlined the differences between EU-optimists and EU-pessimist. The former
ones believe in the current approach of European Union and are convinced in its right
direction whereas the latter politicians disapproves both the current and future situation.

Czech political arena

After the fall of communism and separation with Slovak Republic three parties in
particular took over the political campaign in the Czech Republic, Civic democratic
party/Obcanska democraticka strana (ODS) and Communist Party for Czech and
Moravia/ Komunisticka strana Cech a Moravy (KSCM) and Czech Social Democratic
Party/Ceska strana socialni demokracie (CSSD). (Fitzmaurice, 1998) Being the largest
party, in the current times, ODS was established in 1991 as a result of disintegration of
the Civil Forum/ Obcanské forum (OF), a political notion in opposition to the Communist
Party from 1989. (Mares, 2002) Czech Social Democratic Party/Ceska strana socialni
demokracie (CSSD), by contrast to ODS, builds on a long tradition of the Czech political
arena. (Fitzmaurice, 1998) The party did not transform from a communist party as many
other Socialist Parties in Europe but dates back to early 19th century. CSSD functioned as
Social Democratic Workers Party after 1918 and remained active under the name
Czechoslovak Social Democratic Party after the Second World War. In 1948 the party
involuntarily merged with the Communist Party however, continued its activity in exile.
Nevertheless, after 1990, CSSD re-established its former program as a social democratic
party. (Mares, 2002)

4
 Even though CSSD received the necessary representation in 1992, the social
democrats did not succeed to form a governing coalition to ODS, led by Vaclav Klaus.
Major change and visibility arose with Milos Zeman, who was elected as chairmen in
1993. CSSD became the strongest party in opposition during the period of Zeman,
sharply criticized the former right-wing government for the breakdown of
Czechoslovakia and for stiff economic reforms. KSCM (Communist Party) was looking
for a particular democratization, nevertheless as Miroslav Grebenicek became its leader
in 1993, any attempt for democratization died out, which inevitably put KSCM into
isolation. The following elections held in 1996 stirred the Czech political arena chiefly as
the Social Democrats placed second just behind the winning ODS. (Fawn, 2000) While
the Civic Democrats established the right-center coalition, dependent on the toleration of
CSSD, Milos Zeman become the President of the Chamber of Deputies – the lower house
of the Czech parliament. Yet, early elections of 1998 were clearly positive for Social
Democrats and Zeman became Prime Minister of the Czech Republic. (Mares, 2002)
Also, in the following elections in 2002 CSSD aced again however, led by Vladimir
Spidla at that time. During this period, namely on January 1, 2004, the Czech Republic
became a member of the European Union.
In the first elections for European Parliament held in June 2004, CSSD did not
succeed according to their ideas since the party gained only two seats. (Holman, 2009)
Due to such poor results, Spidla resigned as Prime Minister and was replaced by former
minister of inferior, Stanislav Gross. Inevitably, CSSD lost voters support. In addition, as
smaller parties and Constitutional Court opposed both CSSD and ODS for their
“opposition agreement”, the elections of 2006 brought another major stir in the political
arena. The elections ended with a stalemate, where both CSSD and ODS gained an equal
number of seats. Finally, in January 2007 ODS, with Mirek Topolanek as the leader,
succeeded in winning a vote of confidence. Nevertheless, in March 2009 the government
lost a no-confidence vote and Jan Fisher was proposed Prime Minister. The following
elections will be held in May 2010.
Since the beginning, ODS stands on the right-wing of the political spectrum and
represents the liberal-conservative values, emphasizing economic liberalism. (Mares,
2002) In the basic vision, ODS differs very little from the British Conservative party even

5
more, the Conservative deemed to be an inspiration for ODS. (Mares, 2002) Already in
the first program for the national elections in 1992, ODS entitled their manifesto as
Svoboda a Prosperita/Freedom and Prosperity and their foreign policy expressed the
importance of an immediate integration of Czech Republic into the European
Commission as means for long-term stabilization of economic and political system and
also stabilization of country’s security (Svoboda a Prosperita, 1992). Nevertheless, ODS
openly and actively expressed reservations, especially from the side of the parties former
Prime Minister, Vaclav Klaus. The reservations concerned different preferences in
regards to the form and development of European Union. Furthermore, the attitude for
cooperation with Europe, respectively European Union remained restrained, emphasizing
the sovereignty of the Czech Republic. (Zielonka & Rupnik, 2003)
ODS, foremost Vaclav Klaus attempted to make a strict distinction between
“integration”, on one side, and “unification”, on the other, while refuting the later one
(Mares, 2002). Klaus (2008) claimed “the question of our position in Europe today and in
the future is in fact the question of our national and state identity”(Bugge, 2000). Taking
the priceding arguments into account, ODS set its policy with the mind of
intergovernmental European integration, where the positive aspects of European
integration come especially in the area of economic cooperation particularly, in
liberalizing trade and thus removing the barriers to trade development. In addition, it was
the government of Klaus, which launched the application for Czech membership in EU in
1996 and Civic Democrats as political party never explicitly expressed any negative
attitude towards the membership of the Czech Republic in EU. According to the typology
of Taggart and Sczcerbiak (2002), ODS represents a “soft” form of euroscepticism, as the
party opposed certain policies, especially concerning agriculture in European Union.
Nevertheless, as Miroslav Topolanek replaced Vaclav Havel in the leading
position of ODS, the party decreased its strong opposition for the questions regarding
European Union. Therefore, one might classify Vaclav Klaus as a prominent EUpesimist,
according to the classification of Kopecky and Mudde, since he had opposed not only the
former structure of EU but also its future under Lisbon Treaty. On the other hand, it is
inevitable to mention the passage from the Manifesto of Czech Eurorealism (2001),
which became the summary of the ODS foreign policy at that time. In this document, the

6
authors and main opponents of European integration, Jan Zahradil and Petr Adrián,
consider the alternatives for the case the Czech Republic would not become a member of
EU. (Manifesto ceskeho eurorealismu, 2001) Even though this document was highly
publicized in national media, it never became an official program of ODS. Nevertheless,
this document would partly underline the “hard” form of Euroscepticism, as Taggart and
Sczcerbiak distinguish, since the Manifesto completely denounces any possibility for
European cooperation. Yet, this classification is in question for interpretation and as
better illustration of “hard” form of Euroscepticism, The Communist Party for Czech and
Moravia/ Komunisticka strana Cech a Moravy (KSCM) should be stressed as the case
study in the Czech Republic.
Following a rigid communist ideology of Miroslav Grebenicek, KSCM had lost
many of its members and also voters from the public in early 1990s. (Holman, 2009)
Nevertheless, since the elections in 1996, KSCM has been supported by a stable number
of voters however Communist have remained mainly in isolation since other parties have
refused to cooperate and form a coalition with them. KSCM as orthodox, extreme left-
wing party, fundamentally oppose European integration and sharply criticized the entry
of the Czech Republic into this Alliance. (KSCM, 1996, 2000) In their agenda from 1999,
called KSCM on the Turn of Millennium (1999), the Communists refused the former
situation of EU however already at that time realized that the integration is inevitable.
Additionally, after the Czech Republic became a member of European Union, their
rhetoric has eased however, the larger problem for communists remained Czech
membership in NATO. (Holman, 2009) Using the classification of Taggart and
Sczcerbiak, KSCM can be placed into two categories. In the early 90s, Communists
represented the most critical group regarding their foreign policy for European Union,
thus they stood for the form of “hard” Euroscepticism. However, their position
“softened” and KSCM did not reject EU as a whole in their later documents, however
Communist still remained highly reserved about EU competence. Looking at the second
factor, Kopecky and Mudde underlined as contributing factor to Euroscepticism, in
particular the location, strength and position of a particular political party. KSCM is
considered as an anti-systematic, extreme left-wing party that remains in opposition in

7
the Czech Republic since 1989, therefore as Kopecky and Mudde underlined in their
classification, their position should oppose European integration.
The other strong party CSSD, center-left party, has based its program on same
goals as most Western Social Democratic parties. As stated in its program, CSSD has
aimed at common prosperity of social security, continuous development and strengthens
the international position of the Czech Republic (CSSD, 1996, 2000) Yet, since the early
90s, their election programs has emphasized the involvement of the Czech Republic in
the international structure (Mares, 2002). By contrast to ODS, CSSD emphasized their
support for European integration already in their program in 1991. (CSSD, 1991) In the
following years, questions concerning Czech foreign policy and countries membership in
EU remained the priority of CSSD. During the period in government, CSSD remained its
pro-European program and continuously refused the policy that would undermine any
position of European Union. (Mares, 2002) In addition to strengthening democratic
system and the rule of law, the Social Democrats emphasized the economic benefits of
European integration (CSSD, 2002). In the first elections for European Parliament held in
June 2004, CSSD did not succeed according to their ideas since they only achieved two
seats. The two elected deputies became part of the Social Democrats part in European
Parliament, which supports the equality of opportunities, creating new employment and
emphasized rapid adoption of Lisbon Treaty.
Looking at the classification of Taggart and Sczcerbiak (2002) they did not even
include a positive attitude for European integration in therefore, such a classification is
not applicable for the case of CSSD. For Kopecky and Mudde (1998), however CSSD
represents the category of Europhiles as the party has expressed a positive attitude and
policies for both, the question of European unification and also European integration.
However, as a center-left political party and under the second concept, which emphasized
the location, type and electoral strength of a particular political party, the classification
does not apply perfectly. According to Kopecky and Mude (1998), parties in opposition
tend to diminish their pro-European program; however in the case of CSSD this factor
did no play a significant role.

Conclusion

8
There cannot be any doubt that the issue of European integration had undergone dramatic
changes. In the former analyses, the reader may, in fact, trace that although the accession
of the Czech Republic to EU was actively and openly supported, Czech political parties
have developed a relatively cohesive, visible and critical position on European integration
as the theses underlined. The phenomenon has moved from a relatively consensual issue,
framed in essentially positive terms as “return to Europe” into an issue which might
become a feature of party competition. Nevertheless the position of particular parties has
remained consistent with their ideological orientation.
First, the “soft” form of Euroscepticism can be traced in the agenda of ODS, as
the party opposes certain policies of EU, underlines the importance of sovereignty of the
Czech Republic and tackles the problem of large European bureaucracy. Thus,
unification with limited integration has remained on their program, as oppose to KSCM
in the early 1990s, which had been rejecting any form of European integration and by that
represented the “hard” form of Euroscepticism. Ultimately, the Social Democratic party,
CSSD, had denounced any form of Euroscepticism in their programs, by contrast to the
other two parties, the program of Social Democrats remained positive even in the time
party was in opposition. The Czech Republic is currently deemed to be a Eurosceptic
country, mainly due to Klaus’ rigid opposition to Lisbon Treaty. In my opinion, this label
is not valid, since it is mainly one person at the powerful position and the Communist
party that currently opposes the questions of European integration in the Czech politics.

9
Reference list

Bugge, P. (2000) Czech perceptions of EU membership: Havel vs. Klaus. European

University Institute
CSSD (1991) Volebni program CSSD 1991 retrieved from
http://www.cssd.cz/soubory/kestazeni/dokumenty/programovedokumenty/progra
mova_brozura_el.verze.pdf
CSSD (1996) Volebni program CSSD – Lidskost proti Sobectvi 1996. retrieved from
http://www.cssd.cz/soubory/kestazeni/volebni_program_lidskost_sobectvi_1996.
pdf
CSSD (2002). Volebni program CSSD 2002 retrieved from
http://www.cssd.cz/soubory/ke-stazeni/volebni_program_cssd_2002.pdf
Holman, O. (2009). Integrating Central Europe; EU expansion and Poland, Hungarz
and the Czech Republic. London ; Routledge
Fawn, R. (2000). The Czech Republic: a nation of velvet. Amsterdam: Harwood
Academic Publisher
Fitzmaurice, J. (1998). Politics and government in the Visegrad countries: Poland
Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Basingstoke: Macmillan
Kopecky, P. & Ucen, P. (1998). Return to Europe? Patterns of Euroscepticism among
Czech and Slovak political parties. Unpublished paper, European University
Institute.
KSCM - Volebni programy KSCM retrieved from thttp://www.kscm.cz/index.asp?
thema=2665&previev=archiv&archivYear=2004
Mares, M. (2000). Ceska republika. In: Zahranicni politika politickych stran v Ceske
republice, Madarsku, Polsku a na Slovensku. Brno:MPU
ODS (1998). Volební program ODS. Hlavu vzhuru. Retrieved from
http://www.ods.cz/docs/programy/program_1998.pdf
ODS (2002) - Volební desatero. Volební program ODS. Retrieved from
(http://www.ods.cz/volby/programy/2002.php)
ODS (2006) - Společně pro lepší život. Volební program ODS 2006. Retrieved from
http://archiv.ods.cz/volby/weby/2006/program.php

10
Szczerbiak, A. & Taggart, P. (2000). Opposing Europe: Party systems and opposition to
the Union, the Euro and Europeanisation (Sussex European Institute Working
Paper No.36). Brighton: University of Sussex.
Szczerbiak, A. & Taggart, P. (2002). The party politics of Euroscepticism in EU member
and candidate states. Paper presented to the European Consortium for Political
Research Joint Sessions
Taggart, P. (1998). A touchstone of dissent: Euroscepticism in contemporary Western
European party systems. European Journal of Political Research 33: 363–388.
Svoboda a prosperita (1996). Volební program ODS. Volby do PSP ČR 1996
(http://www.ods.cz/volby/programy/1996.php); ověřeno k 20. 3. 2007.
Zahradil, J. (2001).: Manifest českého eurorealismu. Dokument k ideové konferenci ODS
http://www.ods.cz/knihovna/dokument.php?ID=11); ověřeno k 8.4. 2007.
Zielonka, J. & Rupnik, J. (2003) The road to the European Union: Czech and Slovak
Republic. Manchester University Press

11