Czech National Identity and the European Constitution: a Chance and/or a Challenge(a Historical Perspective)

Transcription

1 Czech National Identity and the European Constitution: a Chance and/or a Challenge(a Historical Perspective) PhDr. Milada Polišenská, CSc Anglo-americká vysoká škola The New Anglo-American College in Prague Lázenská 4, Prague, Czech Republic Visiting Professor in the Graduate Institute of European Studies, Tamkang University milada.polisenska@aac.edu The focus of my article is on the European Constitution as discussed by the Czech President Vaclav Klaus, who is one of its major opponents, and on analysis of the Constitution by Martin Louzek, advisor to President Klaus. A brief survey of Czech parliamentary political parties and their attitudes toward the European Constitution provides basic information on the political context of the debate on the European Constitution in the Czech Republic. The thesis of my article is that President s Klaus arguments on loosing of national identity and sovereignty, and his project of Organization of European States, will not mobilize the Czechs to change their basic consent with the European integration. My argument is that President Klaus did not offer any new concept of Czech national identity, yet its modern formulation is missing and the traditional one is an anachronism not addressing the society today. I support my thesis by a series of arguments from older and contemporary history of Czech national identity. Landmarks of the Czech entry into the European Union Membership in the European Union, then European Communities, became a goal of highest priority for Czechoslovak foreign policy after the collapse of communism in November Since then, this goal has never been abandoned or questioned, even if the country had governments that differed substantially in their political priorities, and this goal was not affected by the split of Czechoslovakia into two independent states, the Czech Republic and Slovakia, in At the beginning, the knowledge of European integration was very low among the Czechs. For most of them, joining the West European integration meant primarily returning to Europe or back home which was understood mainly in its historical and cultural meaning. The political and economic aspects of the European integration were rather source of unspecified hopes for a better future and worries from the unknown. 1

2 In the 1990 s, the European integration went through a substantial process of transformation and had, at the same time, to react to the challenge of its enlargement. The post-communist candidates were for the European Union in many aspects an unknown space, and vice versa. Main landmarks on the path of the Czech Republic to the full membership in the EU were the European Agreement on Association of Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Poland to the European Communities (signed December 16, 1991); European Agreement on Association of the Czech Republic with the European Communities (signed October 4, 1993, in power from February 1, 1995); Application for Accession of the Czech to the European Union submitted (January 23, 1996); Official invitation of a group of eleven candidate countries approved by the European Council in Luxembourg (December 13, 1997); Process of enlargement officially started (March 30, 1998); Pre-Accession negotiations concluded at the meeting of European Council in Copenhagen (December 12-13, 2002); Treaty on Accession of the Czech Republic to the EU signed in Athens (April 16, 2003); Referendum in the Czech Republic in which 77,33% voters approved the entry of the Czech Republic into the EU (June 13-14, 2003); Treaty on Accession of the Czech Republic to the EU entered in power (May 1, 2004). 1 Czech political scene today The Czech political scene is dominated by two strongest parties, the Civic Democratic Party (CDP, in Czech ODS) of a conservative and right of the center orientation, and the Czech Social Democratic Party (CSDP, in Czech CSSD). In 1990 s, the CDP was more successful in the parliamentary elections and the founder of this party Vaclav Klaus, today the President of the Czech Republic, served twice as the Prime Minister of the State. From 1998, the Czech Republic is having its fourth Social Democratic Prime Minister. The first and the only of them who served the entire term was Milos Zeman who had to conclude an Oposition Agreement with the Civic Democrats. He was succeded by Vladimir Spidla who is now serving as European Commissioner for Employment and Social Affairs in Brussels. During Spidla s term as Prime Minister, Vaclav Klaus won the presidential election against his major competitor, former Prime Minister Milos Zeman, and starting February 28, 2003, he succeeded former President Vaclav Havel in his office. Vaclav Klaus and Vladimir Spidla signed in April 2003 in Athens the Treaty on Accession of the Czech Republic to the European Union. The next Social Democratic Prime Minister was Vladimir Gross, the youngest (34 years) Prime Minister in Europe and then the most popular politician in the country, who had to resign after a series of scandals and was replaced, in April 2005, by Jiri Paroubek. The popularity and support of Paroubek by the Czechs is having an increasing trend. Jiri Paroubek s time in his position is limited as the next parliamentary election is scheduled for June Another significant component of the Czech political scene is the Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia which occupies usually the third position among the parliamentary parties, but in some particular situations received even the second highest preferences. The Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia did not make any substantial 1 Fajmon, H. (ed.): Cesta Ceske republiky do Evropske unie. Brno: Centrum pro stadium demokracie a kultury, 2004, p

3 declaration regarding its policies and practices during the forty years of the totalitarian regime in Czechoslovakia, and sixteen years after the fall of communism continues to be supported by a large electorate. It was not banned after the collapse of communism, but the appointment of former higher ranking apparatchiks and communist secret police officers and collaborators is restricted by the lustration law. The success of the communists in the election contrasts with the recent opinion pool according to which 46% of Czechs consider the communist party as a criminal organization. 2 The last parliamentary formation in the Czech Republic is the Coalition of Christian Democrats and the Union of Liberty-Democratic Union. Either the Civic Democratic Party nor the Social Democratic Party to some extend, are willing to be in a coalition with the Communists. The current government coalition is composed of Social Democrats and the Coalition. Both the Civic Democrats and the Communists are in opposition but each of them is on the opposite side of the political scale. The government coalition has in the House of Deputies a very narrow majority having 101 voices out of 200. Attitudes of parliamentary parties toward the Constitution for Europe In the Czech Republic, the discussion on European integration has been an issue of political battles and not of a rational analysis. The European Constitution became for the Czech politicians a political grail requiring either an unconditional support, or a death in the fight for its destruction 3, rather than a topic for a qualified discussion and an incentive for a productive communication. The dividing line between Czech political parties in the attitude toward the Constitution for Europe goes not between the right and the left, but it separates the government coalition from the two opposition parties, the Civic Democratic Party and the Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia. Thus, the attitude toward the European Constitution became from the beginning a subject of domestic political competition. Even the discussion itself, actually an absence of discussion, became an instrument of political rivalry. The opposition from both the right and the left side of the political spectrum even accused the government coalition that it had the intention to not inform the parliament about the positions that will be taken by the representatives of the Czech Executive. 4 (a) The government coalition The positions of the members of the government coalition are more or less the same and they are positive toward the European Constitution. The summary was presented to public debate in a document called Non-paper on the reform of the EU institutions which was identical with the position that Czech Republic held internationally. 5 The attitude could be characterized as moderate, with some more support to the supranational dimension of the integration expressed by the Union of Liberty Democratic Union. 2 www. seznam.cz/novinky.cz/october 18, Pitrova, M.: Institucionalni zmeny EU po prijeti ustavni smlouvy. Mezinarodni politika 2005/6, p. 6. All quotations from Czech into English translated by M. Pol. 4 Pospisil, I.: Diskuse o evropske ustave v Ceske republice. In: Fajmon, op. cit., p Pospisil, ibid, p

4 The government parties rejected the standing character of the President of the Council and supported the rotation in this position. They supported the system of each state having one seat in the Commission and supported the eventual cooperation of major member states, as the government coalition did not consider such cooperation as an instrument of division of members into first and second category members or of division on the new and old states. Already in July 2003, the Christian Democrats proposed to include a paragraph on God s authority and Christian spiritual and cultural roots of European civilization into the Constitution. In the other suggestions, the Christian Democrats were close to the other coalition parties. The Christian Democratic proposal was partly adopted as position of the Czech Government. The government coalition parties first did not want to declare a referendum on Constitution for Europe, but finally the Social Democratic Party suggested in August 2004 to run the referendum simultaneously with the election to the House of Deputies in June (b) The Civic Democratic Party The CDP is from 1998 the major Czech party in the opposition, but in 2002, the Civic Democrats were very successful in the first election to the European Parliament and in the election for President of the Czech Republic the strongest and most visible Civic Democratic politician Vaclav Klaus. The CDP has been a major opponent of the European Constitution and it was critical not only to the Draft Constitution as submitted by the Convention and later to the final version of the Constitutional Treaty, but this party questions the existence of the European Constitution itself. One of the main reasons of the CDP s approach is that, according to the CDP, the Constitution would limit the state sovereignty of the Czech Republic. As the CDP members who participated in the work of Convention expressed, it is going to be a new concert of big powers, Big Four or Big Three will decide everything and it is obvious who will play the small role, a hard gravitation core is being formed, a Union within a Union is being formed, the Constitution strengthens the French-German Axis that will play an avant-garde role and will influence the transformation of the EU into a unitary state. 6 The Civic Democratic Party would thus prefer the preservation of status quo and suggests that a quasi-constitutional document be adopted, that would limit the integration in the future and would conserve the integration in its present status. The Civic Democratic Party disagrees with the growth of power of the European Parliament and rejects the increase of power of the European Commission. According to the CDP, the only legitimate bearer of the European integration as Europe of democratic national states is the Council of European Union. The CDP criticizes the shift from national level to the supranational level, requires strengthening of the role of national parliaments and suggests that the European Parliament receives the second chamber which would be composed of representatives of national parliaments. Further, the CDP disagrees with the fact that the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union would be incorporated into the Constitution for Europe. 6 Pospisil, op. cit., p

5 The Communist party of Bohemia and Moravia The Czech Communists usually have ambivalent attitudes toward the European Union affairs. On one hand, they see in the European integration a space for implementation of principles of social solidarity and of the European model of a social state, on the other hand, the Communists claim that they want to protect national interests. Similarly, the attitude of the Communists toward the Constitution for Europe is not very clear. The Communist leaders express mainly worries that the strong ones would dictate the weak ones and that this trend would increase. On the other hand the Communists say that the integration is an unavoidable historical process. The Communist published a material For a Democratic Europe (Manifesto of the KSCM), in which they suggest that besides the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union also a European Social Charter be adopted and that it should be part of the Constitution for Europe 7. The both Czech opposition parties, the CDP and the Communists, meet at the same platform in their approaches toward the limitation of the state sovereignty and protection of national interests, yet both these parties stress that they are approaching the issue of European integration from fundamentally different positions. Attitude of the President of the Czech Republic Vaclav Klaus is one of the sharpest opponents of the European Constitution. V. Klaus has been a leading figure of the Czech political arena since the fall of communism in Specialized in economy, he is a determined advocate of monetarism and Thatcherism. Before the Velvet Revolution, he was a research fellow in the Institute of Prognosis in Prague from which a group of researchers became, after the Velvet Revolution, political leaders, members of government and public figures of different political orientation. Vaclav Klaus was the first post-communist minister of finances and founder of the Civic Democratic Party in April Vaclav Klaus was the main architect of the project of Czechoslovak coupon privatization, but Slovakia did not share his emphasis on shock therapy of the fast and full privatization. Slovakia which as a result of the communist industrialization had an unbalanced economic structure, went through more difficult transition toward the market economy than the Czech lands. Different approach toward privatization was one the main factors that caused the split of Czechoslovakia and the establishment of two fully independent states on January 1, Vaclav Klaus as the chairman of the then strongest Czech political party, the Civic Democrats, and from June 1992 Czech Prime Minister, was one of the main actors of the separation game. Klaus served as the Czech Prime Minister also after the election in 1996 till his resignation in November 1997, and later, he became President of the Chamber of Deputies. All the time, he kept the chairmanship of the Civic Democratic Party. There have been disagreements between former Czech President Vaclav Havel and Vaclav Klaus about such issues as the expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia after WWII, the role of civic society and the role of the NGO s. 7 Pospisil, op. cit., p

6 Vaclav Klaus as a Czech President is Honorary Chairman of the Civic Democratic Party and despite he claims to be a President of the entire nation 8, he continues to be considered as the spiritual father of Civic Democrats and his views have a considerable influence on the Civic Democratic membership. President Vaclav Klaus and the present Social Democratic Prime Minister Jiri Paroubek, the Civic Democrats and the Social Democrats respectively, have fundamentally different positions toward many issues in which the Czech Republic is involved, such as social policy, retirement insurance, health care and health insurance, taxation system, privatization and other. Jiri Paroubek apologized officially for the persecution of anti-nazi Germans after WWII, but Vaclav Klaus criticized him for this gesture. Already during the candidacy of the Czech Republic for membership in the EU Vaclav Klaus expressed at different official occasions criticism focusing particularly on the oversized Brussels administration, on the Euro- bureaucrats who lost their national identities, and on the national interests not respected enough by the European Union structures. Particularly, Klaus criticized the socially oriented policy of the European Union, and repeatedly indicated the European Union as too leftist and socialist. These statements have been commented by the mass media in the Czech Republic and abroad and some commentators disliked the mentoring of a politician representing a country who just applied for joining the European Union. Even if many of Klaus remarks had a good reason and in the milieu of the European Union were not a novelty, still, the impression they made was not very favorable, particularly when some Klaus statements were quoted out of context or misinterpreted. Jacques Delors, President of the European Commission from 1985 to 1995, one of the leading architects of the transformation of the EU, was particularly critical to Vaclav Klaus 9. As will be quoted later in this article, Vaclav Klaus makes Delors responsible for the present status of the European Union. At present time, position of Vaclav Klaus toward European integration is more exposed than ever. During his Presidency, Czech Republic became member of the European Union and went through a referendum which endorsed this step. Considering the fact that even before the European Constitution was drafted Klaus criticized many aspects of the European Union, such deep transformation as the Constitution for Europe is, could not remain without comments and suggestions of the Czech President, who is a very visible participant in the debate on European Constitution. There is a question, however, whether to see his criticism as a presentation of official position of the head of the state or as just a personal contribution to intellectual debates. The most commented issues by Vaclav Klaus are limitation of the authority of national states in favor of the Union; change in the system of voting in the Council of the European Union and implementation of the qualified majority voting; the preamble which defines the idea of the Constitution and establishment of European military structures and common foreign and security policy. 8 Paroubek, J.: Prezident vsech obcanu a jina Evropska unie. Hospodarske noviny, July 20, Kreuter, J.: Nedorozumeni a zajmy na ceste Ceske republiky do rozsirene Evropske unie. In: Fajmon, op. cit., p. 70, 78. 6

7 For President, as Pospisil 10 interprets it, the principal question is whether to continue or stop the depth of the integration, and particularly of building a political union. The major problem that Klaus sees is according to Pospisil a conflict between the participative democracy within the national states, and the internationalism dictated from above by the European political elites and Brussels bureaucracy. The adoption of the Constitution would be an abandonment of the idea of a state as a building stone of the European continent in favor of one supra-national state. The recent thoughts of Vaclav Klaus can be documented by a large interview with the President on the Czech position in Europe, on his verbal duels with Prime Minister Paroubek and on multiculturalism, published in the leading Czech Daily Mlada Fronta Dnes on July 16, This large interview has been very frequently quoted and caused an agitated response by a number of politicians and political commentators. Klaus stresses that it is the highest time to formulate a clear position toward Europe and not to be passive and just copy the opinions of the others, what the Czech politicians are doing since several years ago. The last three Social Democratic Prime Ministers invested, according to Klaus, into the unsuccessful project of the European Constitution too much of political capital and now they do not feel comfortable to accept that the entire project just bankrupted, even if the vast majority of people think it did. The debate on the new arrangement of Europe is a very serious question and one of the political parties which by coincidence dominates the government coalition can not talk for us. 11 President Klaus argues that Prime Minister Paroubek does not want to search for a consensus and that he wants to push through his opinion which is an opinion of a minority, as according to a recent opinion pool just 3,7% of Czechs want to continue the campaign on the European Constitution. My opinion is that this opinion pool indicates that most of people just think that after the French and Dutch referenda it has no sense to continue an expensive campaign on the European Constitution and that it would be better to wait now. This attitude does not mean that these people eo ipso reject the Constitution for Europe. According to Klaus, the French and Dutch referenda have been a clear signal to reevaluate last 20 years of the European integration and the work of Jacques Delors, and an incentive to formulate another path. The idea of European citizenship is the first thing that should be taken back. There is no reason to introduce European citizenship as it is a vague and empty word without any meaning which is misleading the European Union. 10 Pospisil, op. cit., p. 154, Abbreviated by M. Pol. 7

8 In his remarks on national identity Klaus said, that he would not allow to be involved in a debate whether for example in the year 2154 a Czech would feel toward a Finn or a Turk the same way as an inhabitant of Colorado to an inhabitant of Utah. Such futuristic scenarios go beyond the political reality according to him. However, he does not support the use of European anthem and to illustrate an absurd situation, he shared his observation from his visit Nieder Ősterreich to receive an award for the European integration. There were flags of European Union, Czech Republic and of Nieder Ősterreich, but not of Austria. Vaclav Klaus characterizes himself as a born discussant who is strictly observing the national interests of the Czech Republic and respects the Presidential logic. Prime Minister Paroubek is in his eyes an egoistic and selfish person that does not care about his country at all and is interested only in himself and in the interests of his party. After the bomb attack in the London metro, President Klaus repeatedly expressed his opinion on the idea of multiculturalism. The concept of multiculturalism was popular in the Czech republic particularly after the collapse of communism as a specific reaction to the decades of isolation of the Czechs beyond the Iron Curtain, but there was not enough of deeper understanding of this complex issue. According to Vaclav Klaus, the ideology of multiculturalism is anti-liberal and is extremely collectivistic and extremely wrong. It is a tragic mistake of our Western civilization, it was imported here from outside and all of us pay a very high price for it. Klaus distinguishes migration of people on an individual basis which is a permanent part of human history and which is not a multiculturalism. Even the political emigration does not create the multiculturalism. The mass migration emerged according to Klaus as a false ideology, according to which there is a common human right to wander from place to place. This common human right oppresses elementary rights of citizens that live in the respective areas. This is a collectivism which is substantially wrong and bad. This trend is reversible and sooner or later the countries will require the immigrants to assimilate. It is not possible to allow the immigrants remaining fully members of the state that they had left. Multiculturalism is an ideology that says that you have the right to emigrate and to claim in your new country your own civilization and your own group or ethnic interests. The immigrants should fully accept their new country and if they don t like it, they should go somewhere else and not to try to change the new country according to their wishes. The entire world will have to reconsider this issue, the naïve ideas 30 years old are now over Reaction to Klaus statements on multiculturalism published Jiri Pehe, Director of the New York University in Prague: Pozor na silacke recepty. Hospodarske noviny, August 1,

9 Recently, President Klaus expressed his ideas in an article published in British Financial Times. He warned particularly against the European nationalism and suggested to forget about the term European citizenship. The membership in the European Union has to be motivated by a common determination of the member states to act in some specific areas together in a common interest. Polish President Aleksander Kwaśniewski in his response to this article 13 disagreed with Klaus suggestions. According to Kwaśniewski, abandoning the idea of a State Europe and building an Organization of European States instead would be a step back. Kwaśniewski thinks that Europe has to overcome present crisis by further integration and not by returning to the existing organizations, such as Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). In his speech given at the 12 th meeting of the Central European Presidents in Zagreb, Croatia, President Klaus recommended the European Union to abandon the European social model as soon as possible. This would be just for the good of the European Union, as the social model is either positive or relevant. 14 European identity: another impasse is a recent article 15 in which Klaus argues that the European Constitution is based on a hypothesis that a specific European identity does exist and that this European identity goes beyond and above the national identity. Klaus claims that he does not know any empirical evidence that whenever in the past a European identity existed. Whoever in the past tried to achieve something in this sense, learned a lesson and understood that it is not possible and has no sense. Klaus suggests further that the European identity does not exist today and it would be eventually needed just in case of a necessity to unify Europe which is not the case now. However, the identity, identification, is a necessary factor of a social cohesion, Klaus said. He quoted an essay from Emanuel Ottolenghi, Professor of the Oxford University, and paraphrased his question on whether the present pan-european doctrine could be a unifying factor of an emerging multicultural model based on rejection of nationalism and patriotism, and on building of identity based predominantly on the 13 Kwaśniewski kritizuje Klausovy vyroky o unii. Hospodarske noviny: September 5, The original of the article was not available when this article was written. 14 Klaus radi EU zbavit se socialniho modelu. Hospodarske noviny: September 8, Klaus, V.: Evropska identita jako dalsi slepa treti cesta? Na okraj eseje E. Ottolenghiho. Mlada Fronta Dnes: June 16,

10 abstract doctrine of human rights and other abstract values. Vaclav Klaus agrees with Ottolenghi that it would be not possible and joins his opinion, that the identity is a result of a very long historical process, it can not be a product of a laboratory experiments, complicated international treaties and seminars in Brussels. Present situation creates a irresolvable dilemma that can damage the entire European project, because the weakening of national identities and absence of anything to substitute them would result in a state with no identity, yet the people need to identify themselves. Klaus concludes his article by an appeal to rewrite the European Constitution and abandon the third ways that go nowhere. Another recent Klaus article that inspired positive and negative response called for using the time now for a new definition of European Union. 16 Klaus argues that the acceleration of the European integration in the last 20 years was achieved thanks to the gradual but very systematic abolishment of intergovernmental relations. Responsible for this development are particularly Spinelli and Delors, protected by Mitterrand and Kohl. These men considered themselves and even today they consider themselves to be an unmistakable, chosen avant-garde, immortalized by history. They are persuaded that they are entitled to guide the confused and even helpless crowds of common people who without them do not know what is good for them. The political elite, in contrary, knew and knows very well that the transfer of decision power from the national to the supranational level weakens the traditional democratic mechanisms that are inseparably connected with the national state, and that this transfer would increase substantially their personal power. This is why they struggled so much to achieve this transfer and this is why they are trying to achieve it even today. Further Klaus states that a series of failed referenda proved that the people of different nations understood well what was at stake, but this warning has not been taken seriously. Finally, the very fragile card castle inevitably collapsed, because it has been twenty years constructed without solid foundations and its purpose was just to be a castle for the political elite. The collapse was caused by the European Constitution by coincidence, as the same effect could produce any other momentum, for example the admission of Turkey or an undigested, unnatural and therefore artificial multiculturalism for which the primary entity is an ethnic or a cultural group and not a citizen. 16 Klaus, V.: Vyuzijme obdobi reflexe pro vymezeni jine Evropske unie. Lidove noviny: July 16,

11 The way how to stop the constructivists their Czech followers, is to listen to Giscard d Estaign, Amato, Dehaen, and the constructivism of the European majority which does not want an empty European identity, which does not want a massive centralization of the continent, which does not want further bureaucratization of their lives, which does not want decisions taken far from home and therefore without a control of those who decide about us. Further Klaus argues again that the idea to create a State Europe must be abandoned. This idea was according to him a main purpose of the Constitution even if a trick was used to hide it and the term community was used instead of federation. Klaus concludes that if we are fighting against the national nationalism, we should not create a European nationalism. What we need is a political system of liberal democracy which requires civic principles and the natural loyalty of people toward own nation and a with a basic feeling of national identity. We should create an Organization of European States in which the European states will be the members, and not the citizens of these states. Also, the term of European citizenship has to be abolished. As at many other occasions, Klaus requires that the decisions have to be consensual and not achieved by qualified majority, which stipulated several paragraphs of the European Constitution, Conslusions of Martin Louzek, Advisor to President Klaus Martin Loužek 17 argues that the Constitution represents a risk for smaller countries such as the Czech Republic. He points out that with the Constitution, the Union would be a legal subject and would thus acquire a characteristic of a state. He objects to the fact that the Constitution supports the socially oriented market principles. Further objections focus on the Article I-5, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution. Louzek argues that the Constitution speaks on national identity of member states, and not on national sovereignty of member states. Besides, Louzek thinks that despite the formulation on preservation of the basic functions of the state, the whole spirit and language of the Constitution is on limitations of the sovereignty of the member states. 17 Loužek, M.: Nebezpecna evropska ustava. In: Fajmon, Hynek (ed.),op. cit., pp Also Louzek, M.: Evropska ustava-konec statni svrchovanosti. Mezinarodni politika 2005/6, p

12 Louzek disagrees with the paragraph according to which citizens of the European Union would have the right to vote in the place they live according to the same conditions as the citizens of that particular state, and argues that this way the place of residence will be decisive for the right to vote, and not the citizenship. Regarding the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality Louzek supposes that in reality, the objections of national parliaments would depend on whether the Commission will take them in consideration or not. Louzek considers the terminology used in the Constitution to be terminology of a federation and sees the division of competences between the states and the Union as a substantial limitation of independence of national economy. 1.In the Constitution, the current consensual decisions would be replaced by qualified majority decision, which is according to Louzek another negative aspect of the Constitution. As one of the most problematic stipulations of the Constitution Louzek sees the Article I-25/paragraph 2, as President Vaclav Klaus or anyone else does not offer the solution. Vaclav Klaus is known as an economist and his statements on Czech national identity and on historical non-existence of a European identity are not as persuasive as his thoughts in the field of economics. It means that only the Commission, e.i. Government, would have the right to propose the laws, and no the deputies. Louzek did not hesitate to say that this stipulation is closer to a dictatorship than to a democracy. 18 Louzek also argues that the Commissioners will be not representatives of their states, because they should resign on the request of the European Commissioner. Louzek as critical about the fact that the position of the European Commissioner would close to the position of a Prime Minister as the European Commissioner would approve the election of the European Minister of Foreign Affairs elected by a qualified majority of the Council. Even if he does not say that explicitly, the author makes us to feel that he does not like the perspective of superiority of the Europeans law to the national law. He also emphasizes that the Constitution makes a space for theory of a magnetic core and a multiple speed Europe. In several paragraphs of the Constitution, Louzek identifies corporate spirit and social partnership which is according to him very problematic. Perhaps the only paragraph that Louzek sees as a positive is the paragraph on the balanced budget which should serve as an example to the national governments. On the other hand, the author has put in parenthesis the category of social rights including the right on education. Special attention is paid to the paragraph prohibiting the national discrimination as it could cause problems to the Czech Republic in respect of the restitutions of the property confiscated by the communists 19. The problem of the Charter of Fundamental Rights is, according to Louzek, not its content which appears in the constitutions of most of European countries anyway, but the fact that the Charter and the Constitution are superior to the laws if national states. 18 Louzek, op. cit., p Louzek, op. cit., p

13 Louzek is persuaded that the common politics in economy would cause a delay of the European Union behind the United States 20. He sees as a positive factor the free movement of persons, services, capital etc., but he is critical about the harmonization of the conditions of competition and emphasizes that the unification of requirements on environmental and work conditions would negatively influence the employment. In the paragraphs on social policy and employment policy, he identifies strong corporative elements and disagrees with this approach. Particularly, according to him, the chapter on the space of freedom, security and law (III/IV) would have fatal consequences. 21 Louzek disagrees with those who say that the Constitution for Europe reformulates to a large extent the stipulations of the current European Union treaties. He holds that the changes are of substance and the Constitution is mainly an introduction of a quasi- Federation, with a large portion of qualified majority decision that would replace present consensus. Particularly, the increased cooperation in the area of defense and foreign policy would transform the hard core into a federation 22. The arguments of Czech social democrats, who claim that the Constitution for Europe would not decrease the weight of the Czech Republic in the decision making process, is according to Louzek a demagogy. He argues that small European countries would loose considerably, and that for example the influence of the Czech Republic would decrease for 2/5 (from 2,2% to 3,7%) 23. Louzek asks why the small European countries such as Slovenia and Hungary which would loose much, supported the Constitution for Europe so enthusiastically, and supposes that their political elite examined just the qualitative aspects. He concludes that the best solution for small European countries would be to reject the Constitution for Europe, and that the adoption of the Constitution of Europe would be a definitive burial of the sovereignty of the Czech Republic 24. Czech national identity and the European Constitution: a historical perspective One of the Klaus strongest arguments is on the preservation of the Czech national identity. According to Klaus, the national identity is inseparably connected with the sovereignty of the Czech national state and the adoption of European Constitution and the creation of a State Europe would be a threat to the existence of both of them. This is a very strong and fundamental argument that eventually could trigger a vivid response of the Czechs and fuel the Czech rejection of the European integration. Is this really something that could happen? The Czech state was for a long period of four centuries, from 1526 to 1918, part of the Habsburg Empire. The struggle for our national and political recognition has been interpreted by many historians and writers as an exemplary success story 25. Czech history 20 Ibid. 21 Ibid., p Ibid., p Ibid, p Ibid., p Agnew, H. LeCaine: Origins of the Czech National Renascence. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1993; Hroch, M.: Social preconditions of national revival in Europe: a comparative analysis of the social 13

14 has, from this point of view, a strong charisma that is very deeply rooted in the mentality of most of Czechs. Considerable portion of responsibility for this charismatic aura has the romantic historiography of 19 th Century. Particularly, the Father of Czech Historiography Frantisek Palacky created a picture of Czech nation which even today is an important component of Czech culture and mentality. As recently a leading Czech medievalist and commentator of current events Dusan Trestik said, Palacky created the Czech nation. The Czech story includes a picture of genuinely peaceful and democratic Czechs who built a strong medieval state with a splendid culture and who in 15 th Century courageously fought against the entire Europe in defense of the Truth of Jan Hus. The flourishing nation suffered a major national tragedy in 17 th Century and during the Period of Darkness almost extinguished loosing its elite, culture, language and identity. Thanks to great efforts of national enthusiasts and National Awakening activists, the Czech nation was reborn. The story culminates by a successful declaration of independent Czechoslovakia in 1918 and election of a philosopher and humanist T. G. Masaryk President of Czechoslovakia. In the inter-war period, in 1920 s and 1930 s, the Czechs valued very highly the new Czechoslovakia. They saw their independent state as a logic and just fruit of their historical right, past glory, national suffering and oppression, and of high level of cultural and economic development. Independent Czechoslovakia became after 20 years of its existence an easy victim of Hitler and later a victim of Stalin. Under the Nazi occupation ( ) and then under the dominance of the Soviet Union ( ), the political conditions did not allow any independent research, exchange of thoughts and publication on the issue of modern Czech national identity. The Czechs never identified with the communist version of national identity and preserved the old, patriotic, romantic and beautiful picture of Czech national identity that was a source of both hopes and despair. Considering previous paragraphs, we could expect that the Czechs will now mobilize to fight against the possible loss of national sovereignty and for preservation of national identity, as they struggled such a long time to achieve it and enjoyed it so little. In decisive moments of national history, the Czechs usually have a strong tendency to seek support in history and to quote the historical roots of Czech statehood. From the end of WWII, in many European countries the questions of national identity, nation state and sovereignty have been examined, discussed and interpreted in the context and confrontation with the challenges of the globalizing world. The Czechs are considerably behind in this respect. Now, the Czechs bombarded by arguments on preservation of Czech national identity, found themselves facing the major historical challenge of European Constitution. The formulation of what is the modern Czech national identity, is missing, and the only what we have, is the many decades old vision that is certainly deeply rooted in our mentality, but feels to be an anachronism in the context of challenges of the integrating Europe. composition of patriotic groups among the smaller European nations. New York: Columbia University Press,

15 What is the attitude of the Czechs toward their national identity and national state today? ` The Czech reaction to this issue is indifferent and it is not a high priority topic for them now. Therefore, I do not expect under present socio-cultural situation in the country any major response to President s Klaus arguments on possible loss of national identity and sovereignty of our national state. More than 77% of Czech citizens participating in referendum voted just two years ago for the entry into the European Union. These people would have to be now persuaded to reverse their attitude and to vote the opposite way. According to Petr Drulak, the Director of the Institute of International Relations in Prague, the loudest opponents of the Constitutional Treaty advocate other values are the values of the majority of the Czech society. 26 The result of the Czech referendum on entry into the European Union in 2003 confirmed that the membership in the EU belonged to the values of the majority of Czech society. Making this decision, the Czech society joined the European Union philosophy, according to which a nation state is not the only possible guarantor of democracy. 27 Conslusion 1. President Vaclav Klaus is using the term of national identity only in general and unspecified meaning and did not offer any new, modern concept of Czech national identity. He is known as an economist and his statements on Czech national identity and on historical non-existence of a European identity are not as persuasive as his thoughts in the field of economics After the collapse of communism, there was a chance that the Czech national identity would be rooted in the traditions of the Masarykian 1 st Republik, as the charismatic personality of T. G. Masaryk was considered a perfect symbol of reestablished democracy in the country. 3. The question of national identity soon became marginal among other problems that were for Czechs of higher priority at that time. To use the old approaches toward our own national identity was not possible any more. History, political philosophy, philosophy, anthropology and other scholarly disciples made in the meantime a considerable progress toward new interpretation of history, more objective and free of myths. 26 Drulak, P.: Ceska debata o euroustave: nemistnost racionality a impotence politiky. Mezinarodni politika 2005/6, s Ibid. 28 Pehe, J.: New and True Europeans. Project Syndicate, June 20, 2005; Pehe, J.: Nehrajme si s evropskymi besy. Mlada Fronta Dnes, June 21, 2005; Pehe, J.: Prezident konkretni reseni nenabizi. Lidove noviny, July 18,

16 4. In , the concept Czech national identity rooted in Masarykian Czechoslovakia suffered by the split of Czechoslovakia, as the idea of Czechoslovak state was labeled as a problematic one. 5. The break up of the Habsburg monarchy is not interpreted as an undoubtedly positive act any more. After the lessons from the history of 20 th Century, the multinational Habsburg empire is seen today also with its positive aspects as stabilizing factor in Central Eastern Europe The projects to create nation-states in Central and Central East Europe always failed and ethic cleansing give this term a bitter taste. The fact that an unsolved national question in Central and Central Eastern Europe that stood at the origin of two World Wars, is another strong component of the Czech historical selfperception. 7. In , when the Slovak national identity went through a period of a revival, the idea to build the new Czech national identity on the heritage of the old Czech medieval state did not find any considerable response. 8. At this time, Czech history can not help the Czechs to formulate their modern national identity and national statehood. The efforts in this direction are an anachronism and they do not address the Czech society. 9. The Czech nation does not have any modern definition of its national identity and the search for it is at present time an impasse. 10. The issue of national identity and national state is for the Czechs connected with disillusion, Czech pettiness and with the ambition to be compatible with the most advanced Western European nations. Even this segment of Czech mentality could be satisfied within the framework of the European integration. I am persuaded that the citizens of the Czech republic will not change their basic consent with the European integration. I am convinced that Vaclav Klaus project of Organization of European States have very little chance to succeed. 29 Among the new member states of the European Union, history of subject nations living in large multinational states under dominance of other ruling nations has Slovakia, Poland, Slovenia, Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, to some extent to the Compromise of 1867 Hungary. Further, Malta and Cyprus could be also included in this group. 16