The long arm of the law
Not for long. Last week, the government yet again sat to negotiate with the man many regard as nothing more than a hooligan in a suit. Yet when this time the negotiations faltered, and Lepper and his allies once again started to blockade Poland's roads, the government moved fast. Police units were out in strength, and with the use of water cannon and riot police, blockades - and peasants - were forcibly removed.
The whole way in which Lepper has become a national political figure in the space of six months says a lot about the state of politics today. On the one hand, undoubtedly Lepper taps into a significant body of opinion among farmers, who have always been frustrated by their inability to cope with the demands of increased competition to their inefficient production methods, not only from foreign imports, but also from an increasingly efficient breed of domestic farmers who have managed to reorient their production into processed products for export.
On the other hand, many of these farmers feel let down by successive parties controlling the Agriculture Ministry. After 10 years of democratic rule, every possible political permutation has controlled that ministry and shown that at the end of the day there is no magic wand to solve agricultural problems. Yet a significant body of farmers continue to believe that to be the case, and hence the popularity of men such as Lepper who indeed do promise quick-fix solutions for all.
The other side of the rise of Lepper - as well as other radical union protesters, such as miners who last week also paralyzed ministries through a sit-in strike - is the continuing fall in the opinion polls of the government. Many observers are starting to view the current debate on the political scene not so much in terms of left vs. right, but more in terms of the style of political leadership - a division that cuts between party lines.
Put simply, it is the debate whether government should seek to establish social peace through negotiating a consensus between competing pressure groups and interest factions, often sacrificing the letter of the law to do so; or whether they ought to seek to establish social order through upholding the rule of law, even if to do so cuts across special interest groups and means saying no to radical economic demands.
The truth is that the former viewpoint is the one that has tended to dominate all governments since the collapse of communism in 1989. That has partly been a function of the political weakness of many administrations in that time, oftentimes minority governments or those dependent on a parliamentary majority consisting of a variety of colorful factions and party grouplets.
When governments have had working majorities, such as the post-communist governments of 1993-1997, their ideological base acted to restrict their ability to act tough against recalcitrant social groups, as well as their ability to use party pressure to discipline communist union leaders who otherwise under a Solidarity administration would have been only too pleased to make trouble. Now, under a government led by Solidarity Election Action (AWS), where the unionist mind-set that sees everything in terms of bargaining and compromise is uppermost, there has been real difficulty in establishing the smack of firm government on social protesters.
Yet the events of last week, when the government finally decided to get tough, may mean that the tide is turning. Why? For a start, there has been constant pressure from the Freedom Union (UW), especially Deputy Prime Minister Leszek Balcerowicz, to pursue a vision of politics that places leadership and the rule of law above all else: not for nothing is Balcerowicz a genuine admirer of Margaret Thatcher, much to the annoyance of many of his more damp party colleagues. There is also a substantial body of politicians within AWS itself who see the folly of being nice as a guiding principle of governance. Most significantly, however, there is the realization from Marian Krzaklewski, AWS leader, that further erosion of the government's credibility will impact significantly on his election chances in the 2000 presidential race. Privately, Krzaklewski recognizes the need to exert the force of the law, but publicly still fears for his public image were he to openly support repression, however justified, of the masses.
There is hope that slowly, the political class is seeing the light on the question of how to exert leadership. One suspects that even the Democratic Left Alliance (SLD), especially under the leadership of strongman Leszek Miller, would not have tolerated the goings-on of the last few weeks. If the next election is run on the issue of "who governs?" that will be the true mark of a coming of political age.
Marek Matraszek is the Warsaw Director of CEC Government Relations. He can be e-mailed on director@cec.com.pl
The whole way in which Lepper has become a national political figure in the space of six months says a lot about the state of politics today. On the one hand, undoubtedly Lepper taps into a significant body of opinion among farmers, who have always been frustrated by their inability to cope with the demands of increased competition to their inefficient production methods, not only from foreign imports, but also from an increasingly efficient breed of domestic farmers who have managed to reorient their production into processed products for export.
On the other hand, many of these farmers feel let down by successive parties controlling the Agriculture Ministry. After 10 years of democratic rule, every possible political permutation has controlled that ministry and shown that at the end of the day there is no magic wand to solve agricultural problems. Yet a significant body of farmers continue to believe that to be the case, and hence the popularity of men such as Lepper who indeed do promise quick-fix solutions for all.
The other side of the rise of Lepper - as well as other radical union protesters, such as miners who last week also paralyzed ministries through a sit-in strike - is the continuing fall in the opinion polls of the government. Many observers are starting to view the current debate on the political scene not so much in terms of left vs. right, but more in terms of the style of political leadership - a division that cuts between party lines.
Put simply, it is the debate whether government should seek to establish social peace through negotiating a consensus between competing pressure groups and interest factions, often sacrificing the letter of the law to do so; or whether they ought to seek to establish social order through upholding the rule of law, even if to do so cuts across special interest groups and means saying no to radical economic demands.
The truth is that the former viewpoint is the one that has tended to dominate all governments since the collapse of communism in 1989. That has partly been a function of the political weakness of many administrations in that time, oftentimes minority governments or those dependent on a parliamentary majority consisting of a variety of colorful factions and party grouplets.
When governments have had working majorities, such as the post-communist governments of 1993-1997, their ideological base acted to restrict their ability to act tough against recalcitrant social groups, as well as their ability to use party pressure to discipline communist union leaders who otherwise under a Solidarity administration would have been only too pleased to make trouble. Now, under a government led by Solidarity Election Action (AWS), where the unionist mind-set that sees everything in terms of bargaining and compromise is uppermost, there has been real difficulty in establishing the smack of firm government on social protesters.
Yet the events of last week, when the government finally decided to get tough, may mean that the tide is turning. Why? For a start, there has been constant pressure from the Freedom Union (UW), especially Deputy Prime Minister Leszek Balcerowicz, to pursue a vision of politics that places leadership and the rule of law above all else: not for nothing is Balcerowicz a genuine admirer of Margaret Thatcher, much to the annoyance of many of his more damp party colleagues. There is also a substantial body of politicians within AWS itself who see the folly of being nice as a guiding principle of governance. Most significantly, however, there is the realization from Marian Krzaklewski, AWS leader, that further erosion of the government's credibility will impact significantly on his election chances in the 2000 presidential race. Privately, Krzaklewski recognizes the need to exert the force of the law, but publicly still fears for his public image were he to openly support repression, however justified, of the masses.
There is hope that slowly, the political class is seeing the light on the question of how to exert leadership. One suspects that even the Democratic Left Alliance (SLD), especially under the leadership of strongman Leszek Miller, would not have tolerated the goings-on of the last few weeks. If the next election is run on the issue of "who governs?" that will be the true mark of a coming of political age.
Marek Matraszek is the Warsaw Director of CEC Government Relations. He can be e-mailed on director@cec.com.pl
