Choosing between China and Europe? Virtual inspiration and policy transfer in the programmatic development of the Czech Communist Party

Abstract

Significant processes of programmatic transformation have taken place within the Czech Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia (KSČM) since the collapse of state socialism. Although the KSČM's programmatic development has been primarily driven by influences that are specific to Czech politics, ideational borrowing from external sources has none the less taken place. The strategy of ‘leftist retreat’ that emerged through the 1990s had its roots in the internal divisions that existed (and continue to exist) within the party. While the KSČM has enjoyed increasing electoral support as a party of radical protest, the internal divisions have resulted in a clear dichotomy in terms of attitudes to prospective external models for programmatic inspiration.

Acknowledgments

This study has been written in co-operation with Radomíra Handlová, who contributed mainly by collecting the documents, analysing them and making transcripts of the interviews. I also wish to thank William E. Paterson, James Sloam, Dan Hough and Hana Svobodová for their useful comments, and particularly to Dan Hough for his careful editing of the text.

Notes

1. KSČM, ‘Zpráva ÚV KSČM o činnosti KSČM v období po IV. sjezdu KSČM’, in Dokumenty V. sjezdu KSČM, 4.–5.12.1999, Ždárnad Sázavou (Prague: ÚV KSČM, 1999), pp.31, 25, 27.

2. P. Fiala, M. Mareš and P. Pšeja, ‘Stranický systém České republiky a jeho vývoj po listopadu 1989’, in P. Matějů and J. Večerník (eds.), Zpráva o stavu české společnosti 1989–1998 (Prague: Academia, 1998), pp.269–291.

3. See P. Buras, ‘Polish Social Democracy, Policy Transfer and Programmatic Change’, in the present collection, pp.88–108.

4. Eighty-six per cent claim that the ideational orientation of the party they choose to support is important; 85 per cent have the same opinion about the party's programme; 78 per cent also see trust in the leadership as being crucial: D. Kunštát, Politické strany a jejich příznivci (Prague: Centrum pro výzkum verejného mínění, Sociologický Ústav Akademie věd České republiky, 2002).

5. D. Dolowitz and D. Marsh, ‘Who Learns What from Whom: A Review of the Policy Transfer Literature’, Political Studies, Vol.44, No.2 (1996), pp.343–57; D. Dolowitz and D. Marsh, ‘Learning from Abroad: The Role of Policy Transfer in Contemporary Policy-Making’, Governance, Vol.13, No.1 (2000), pp.5–24; C. Radaelli, ‘Policy Transfer in the European Union: Institutional Isomorphism as a Source of Legitimacy’, Governance, Vol.13, No.1 (2000), pp.25–43; D. Stone, ‘Learning Lessons and Transferring Policy across Time, Space and Disciplines’, Politics, Vol.19, No.1 (1999), pp.51–9; D. Stone, ‘Non-Governmental Policy Transfer: The Strategies of Independent Policy Institutes’, Governance, Vol.13, No.1 (2000), pp.45–62.

6. A. Grzymala-Busse, Redeeming the Communist Past: The Regeneration of Communist Parties in East Central Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002); A. Gryzmala-Busse, ‘Czech and Slovak Communist Successor Party Transformations after 1989: Organizational Resources, Elite Capacities, and Public Commitments’, in J.T. Ishiyama (ed.), Communist Successor Parties in Post-Communist Politics (Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science, 1999), pp.43–69; S. Hanley, ‘Towards Breakthrough or Breakdown? The Consolidation of KSČM as a Neo-Communist Successor Party in the Czech Republic’, Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, Vol.17, No.3 (2001), pp.96–116; J.T. Ishiyama and A. Bozóki, ‘Adaptation and Change: Characterizing the Survival Strategies of the Communist Successor Parties’, Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics, Vol.17, No.3 (2001), pp.33–50; M. Perottino, ‘The Position and Role of the Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia’, in L. Cabada (ed.), Contemporary Questions of Central European Politics (Pilsen: Aleš Čenĕk, 2003), pp.176–97. The most detailed analysis of the party's development is to be found in P. Fiala, J. Holzer, M. Mareš and P. Pšeja, Komunismus v České republice (Brno: Masarykova univerzita, 1999); and in M. Mareš, ‘Pokusy o reformu komunistické strany a postkomunistické subjekty v České republice’, in L. Kopeček and V. Hlošek (eds.), Rudí a ružoví: Transformace komunistických stran (Brno: Masarykova univerzita, 2002), pp.83–99.

7. G. Pridham, ‘Rethinking Regime-Change Theory and the International Dimension of Democratization: Ten Years After in East–Central Europe’, in G. Pridham and A. Ágh (eds.), Prospects for Democratic Consolidation in East–Central Europe (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2001), pp.54–95.

8. See M. Klíma, ‘Consolidation and Stabilization of the Party System in the Czech Republic’, Political Studies, Vol.XLVI (1998), pp.507, 509; Ishiyama and Bozóki, ‘Adaptation and Change’, p.49; Hanley, ‘Towards Breakthrough or Breakdown?’, p.97. M. Kubát, Postkomunismus a demokracie: Politika ve středovýchodní Evropě (Prague: Dokořán, 2003), p.102; for Sorino, see K. Biggs, ‘All Quiet On The Eastern Front? Most Definitely Not!’, Postmark Prague, No.374, 14 Oct. 2002, at <http://www.solidnet.org>.

9. M. Grebeníček, ‘Máme reálnou sílu změnit pořádky nepřátelské vůči obyčejným lidem’, Haló noviny, 14 April 2003.

10. Author's interview with Radim Valenčík, assistant to Jiří Svoboda, chairman of the KSČM (1991–93), Prague, 29 Dec. 2003.

11. J. Heller, ‘Bída analýzy aneb Co překroutili analytici ČSSD’, Alternativy, No.14 (2003), pp.26–37; Grzymala-Busse, Redeeming the Communist Past, p.86.

12. For an impressive analysis of the conflicts between mental barriers and modernization pressures, see H. Fehr, ‘Krisen des Übergangs: Überlegungen zur intergrations- und Legitimationsproblematik vor und nach dem revolutionären Umbruch von 1989’, in P. Waldeman (ed.), Diktatur, Demokratisierung und soziale Anomie (Munich: Verlag Ernest Vögel, 2003), pp.389–407.

13. Ishiyama and Bozóki, ‘Adaptation and Change’, pp.34, 41.

14. Hanley, ‘Towards Breakthrough or Breakdown?’, p.97.

15. For a different categorization of the party streams, see the neo-communist analyst Josef Heller, ‘Bude KSČM stranou nejprogresívnějších složek dělnické třídy nebo stranou nepoučitelných nostalgiku?’, in Konference o prognóze KSČM, Oct. 2002, at <http://www.kscm.cz/archiv>, accessed 15 Aug. 2004.

16. The ratio between party members and non-members in the electorate of the KSČM was 1:2.5 in 1990 and 1:7 in 2002: see L. Vacek, ‘K příčinám úspěchu KSČM ve volbách’, Alternativy, No.10 (2002), p.9.

17. S. Oates, W.L. Miller and A. Grødeland, ‘Towards a Soviet Past or Socialist Future? Understanding Why Voters Choose Communist Parties in Ukraine, Russia, Bulgaria, Slovakia and the Czech Republic’, in P.L. Lewis (ed.), Party Development and Democratic Change in Post-Communist Europe: The First Decade (London: Frank Cass, 2001), pp.16–31; H. Kitschelt, Z. Mansfeldova, R. Markowski and G. To´ka (eds.), Post-Communist Party Systems: Competition, Representation and Inter-Party Co-operation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), p.288.

18. J. Hartl, quoted in T. Menschik and V. Dubský, ‘Nový cíl komunistů – získat mladé voliče’, Lidové noviny, 19 Nov. 2003, p.3.

19. In 1992 the Czech Communist Party had 354,549 members in 10,669 grassroots organizations (Zpráva, V. sjezd, 1999, pp.52–4), while in 1999 it had 128,346 members in 5,276 organizations; in 2003, 100,781 members in 4,691 organizations; the average age was 68.1 years, and 95 per cent had been members since before 1990; with 27,783 members younger than 60, the party is still the largest party in the Czech Republic: see ‘Zpráva ÚV KSČM o činnosti KSČM v období po V. sjezdu’, in Dokumenty VI. Sjezdu KSČM 15–16.5.2004 České Budějovice, pp.78–9. Also interview with RSDr. Vlastimil Balín, the then first deputy chairman of the KSČM, Prague, 26 March 2004.

20. M. Ransdorf, ‘KSČM 2001: Profil a projekt nové strany’, Alternativy, No.7 (2001), pp.40–49; M. Ransdorf, ‘Komunální politika vyžaduje více pozornosti od nás všech’, Haló noviny, 28 April 2003; ‘Lhostejnost lidí ohrožuje demokracii’, Haló noviny, 8 Nov. 2003.

21. D. Matulka, ‘O co bude boj’, Alternativy, No.10 (2002), p.16.

22. Author's interview with Vlastimil Balín, 26 March 2004.

23. The KSČM supported its ideological rival, Václav Klaus, the former chairman of the ODS, in his bid for the Czech presidency in March 2003. In November 2003, KSČM senators co-sponsored the establishment of an ‘independent group’ of senators in the upper chamber of the Czech parliament, the head of which became Senator Železný.

24. M. Ransdorf, ‘Je to Tvá věc, o kterou běží’, Haló noviny, 19 March 2004.

25. Author' s interview with Miloslav Ransdorf, the then deputy chairman of the KSČM, Prague, 6 Jan. 2003; and similarly also interview with Václav Exner, deputy chairman of the KSČM, Prague, 7 Jan. 2003.

26. Author's interview with Jiří Dolejš, deputy chairman of the KSČM, Prague, 7 Jan. 2003.

27. Author's interview with Václav Exner, 7 Jan. 2003.

28. Author's interview with Josef Heller, theoretical analytical unit (TAP), professional staff of the Central Committee of the KSČM, Prague, 6 Jan. 2003.

29. The commissions are usually linked with clubs, some of which are agile and intellectually open and do invite non-communist discussants (for example, the club of psychologists and sociologists, headed by Lubomír Vacek, or the club of economists).

30. ‘Zpráva o činnosti ÚV KSČM v období po V. sjezdu KSČM’, pp.73–5.

31. On the PDS, see D. Hough, ‘The Programmatic Development of the Eastern German PDS: Learning What from Whom and Under What Conditions?’, in this collection, pp.146–164; and also D. Hough, The Fall and Rise of the PDS in Eastern Germany, 1989–2000 (Birmingham: University of Birmingham Press, 2002).

32. The platform was designed by one of the neo-communist leaders, the deputy chairman of the KSČM, Jiří Dolejš. Typically enough, though, not the KSČM but its small partner, the Party of Democratic Socialism (SDS), established the Society for European Dialogue in order to enable project co-operation with the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation attached to the German PDS, which has invested up to 100,000 euro into collaborative programmes.

33. The ‘soft no’ position represented a rejection of EU accession under the current conditions, but not in principle: ‘Stanovisko KSČM pro referendum ke vstupu České republiky do Evropské unie’, 16 zasedání ÚV KSČM, 22 March 2003.

34. Author's interview with Jaroslav Kohlíček, head of the section for international co-operation of the Central Committee, Prague, 17 Jan. 2003.

35. Author's interview with Jaroslav Kohlíček, Prague, 1 April 2004.

36. Author's interview with Miloslav Ransdorf, 6 Jan. 2003.

37. J. Schwarzová, ‘Evropský parlament se formuje už dnes’, Haló noviny, 22 Sept. 2003.

38. ‘Stanovisko k zapojení zástupců KSČM do klubu Evropské sjednocené levice’, Haló noviny, 6 Oct. 2003.

39. See the position of the head of the international department of the KSČM, H. Charfo, ‘Zakládající sjezd Strany evropské levice’, Haló noviny, 4 June 2004.

40. M. Ransdorf, ‘V Berlíně šlo o posílení evropské levice’, Haló noviny, 15 Jan. 2004.

41. Later, however, the KSS followed the KSČM and voted against the EU accession treaty in the Slovak parliament as it believed the treaty to be disadvantageous to Slovak interests.

42. ‘Závěrečné slovo L. Adamce’, Rudé právo, 22 Dec. 1989.

43. Author's interview with Radim Valenčík, 9 Dec. 2003.

44. M. Grebeníček, Prameny naděje (Prague: Futura, 2001), pp.25–6.

45. Author's interview with with Jiří Dolejš, 7 Jan. 2004.

46. Author's interview with with Jiří Dolejš, 7 Jan. 2004.

47. M. Grebeníček, Prameny naděje (Prague: Futura, 2001), p.131.

48. V. Janků, ‘KS Číny pro čestnou politiku’, Haló noviny, 28 Jan. 2003; Oldřich Schwarz, ‘Tchen Siao-pching: sto let zrození jedinečného revolucionáře’, Haló noviny, 23 Aug. 2004.

49. J. Kojzar, ‘O Číně, demokracii a všem možném’, Haló noviny, 14 Aug. 2003.

50. V. Věrtelář, ‘Nedělejme si iluze o situaci ve světě i doma’, Haló noviny, 20 Oct. 2003.

51. On relations between the PDS and the KSČM, see D. Hough and V. Handl, ‘The (Post-)Communist Left and the European Union: The Czech KSCM and the German PDS’, Communist and Post-Communist Studies, Vol.37, No.3 (2004), pp.319–39.

52. KSČM, ‘Zpráva ÚV KSČM o činnosti KSČM v období po IV.sjezdu KSČM’, p.25.

53. Rozhovor Jiřím Dolejšem', Český rozhlas 6, 23 Oct. 2003, at <http://www.rozhlas.cz/cro6/stop/_print/91767>, accessed 25 Aug. 2004.

54. KSČM, ‘Program KSČM’, in Dokumenty I. sjezdu KSČM, 13–14 Oct. 1990, Olomouc (Prague: ÚV KSČM, 1990), p.17.

55. KSČM, ‘Zpráva ÚV KSČM o činnosti KSČM v období po IV. sjezdu KSČM’, p.25.

56. Author's interview with Professor Zdeněk Hába, expert commission on economics in the Central Committee of the KSČM, Prague, 12 Feb. 2003.

57. KSČM, ‘Vystoupení předsedy ÚV KSČM Miroslava Grebeníčka’, in Dokumenty V. sjezdu, p.12.

58. V. Exner, ‘Do Evropské unie nemusíme’, Haló noviny, 9 Dec. 2002.

59. Head of the expert group of the Central Committee for EU, Member of Parliament, Jiří Maštálka, ‘Evropská unie prožívá krizi růstu’, Haló noviny, 31 May 2003.

60. KSČM, S lidmi pro lidi, Volební program KSČM (Prague: ÚV KSČM, 2002); Z. Štefek, ‘Vidět rudozeleně neznamená vidět nerudě’, Haló noviny, 1 Sept. 2004.

61. KSČM, ‘Výchozí stanovisko k diskusi o návrhu smlouvy zakládající ústavu pro Evropu’, Haló noviny, 6 Oct. 2003.

62. KSČM, ‘Zpráva o činnosti ÚV KSČM v období po V.sjezdu KSČM’, p.30.

63. Author's interview with Zdeněk Hába, 12 Feb. 2003.

64. Z. Hába, ‘Spor o vlastnictví’, in Politická ekonomie, No.38 (1990), pp.1195–7.

65. Z. Hába, ‘Zaměstnanecká participace – tichá revoluce?’, TAP KSČM, at <http://www.kscm.cz>, accessed 15 Nov. 2003, p.75.

66. Author's interview with Václav Exner, 7 Jan. 2003.

67. KSČM, S lidmi pro lidi.

68. V. Exner, ‘Zaměstannost – jak a co dál’, Alternativy, No.10 (2002), pp.32–3.

69. Author's interview with Jiří Dolejš, 7 Jan. 2003.

70. KSČM, S lidmi pro lidi, p.10.

71. Author's interview with Zdeněk Hába, 12 Feb. 2003.

72. KSČM, ‘Program KSČM’, in Dokumenty III. sjezdu KSČM, 26 June 1993, Prostějov (Prague: ÚV KSČM, 1993), p.52.

73. J. Dolejš, ‘Reforma veřejných financí zatím politickým balancováním’, Haló noviny, 28 April 2003.

74. M. Grebeníček, ‘Vláda neplní své programové prohlášení’, Haló noviny, 8 April 2004.

75. Author's interview with Karel Hošek, head of the theoretical and analytical unit (TAP), professional staff of the Central Committee, KSČM, Prague, 6 Jan. 2003.

76. Interview with Miloslav Ransdorf for Mladá Fronta DNES, 18 June 2004.

77. KSČM, ‘S Vámi a pro Vás, doma i v Evropské unii’, at <http://www.kscm.cz> accessed 26 April 2004.

78. Interview with Stanislav Suja, expert on foreign policy, professional staff of the Central Committee of the KSČM, Prague, 8 Jan. 2003.

79. Author's interview with Jiří Dolejš, 7 Jan. 2003.

80. W. Jacoby, Imitation and Politics, Redesigning Modern Germany (Ithaca, NY and London: Cornell University Press, 2000) p.2; C.J. Bennett, ‘Understanding Ripple Effect: The Cross-National Adoption of Policy Instruments for Bureaucratic Accountability’, Governance, Vol.10, No.3 (1997), p.215, as quoted in Stone, ‘Learning Lessons and Transferring Policy’, p.56.