|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: Germany
German opposition parties launch xenophobic campaign for national
elections
By Ulrich Rippert
10 April 2002
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email the
author
Following its passage through the lower house of the German
parliament at the beginning of March, Germanys new immigration
law was discussed in the second chamber (Bundesrat) on March 22.
The debate ended in uproar and sensation, unprecedented for Germanys
second chamber of parliament.
Representatives from the federal states governed by the opposition
Union partiesthe conservative Christian Democratic Union
(CDU) and Christian Social Union (CSU)voted unanimously
against the immigration bill, already passed by the Bundestag
(lower house). As Klaus Wowereit (German Social Democratic PartySPD)the
incumbent president of the upper house, according to the principle
of rotationcalled for the vote of the federal state of Brandenburg
to be announced, Manfred Stolpe (SPD prime minister of Brandenburg)
voted for the legislation and his deputy, Interior Minister Schönbohm
(CDU), voted against it. However, because the federal constitution
requires a unanimous decision on issues from each of the federal
states, Wowereit checked once again, ruled the prime ministers
vote as confirmation of his states consent to the legislation
and declared the bill passed.
Immediately, opposition Union politicians sprang to their feet,
cried Breach of the constitution!, demanded a break
in the session and the resignation of the president of the upper
house. Finally they left the chamber, voicing loud protest. The
loudest was the notorious CDU right-winger and prime minister
of Hessen, Roland Koch, who won the state election in Wiesbaden
three years ago on the basis of a xenophobic campaign against
the so-called double-citizenship scheme.
This kind of parliamentary tumult has not occurred since the
beginning of the 1970s, when Franz-Josef Strauß (CSU)the
political godfather of the opposition Unions candidate for
chancellor, Edmund Stoiber (CSU)described his political
opponents as rats and flies.
One day after the latest tumult in the Bundesrat it became
clear that the apparently spontaneous eruption of rage and indignation
had been carefully prepared the previous evening. From then on,
both the voting behaviour of the state of Brandenburg and the
reaction of the upper house president were entirely predictable.
At a gathering in Saarbrücken two days later, Saarlands
Prime Minister Peter Müller (CDU) admitted this quite frankly,
saying: Of course it was all a showbut a legitimate
show! This seemingly incidental detail is not without significance
and reveals the disdain with which the right wing of the CDU is
prepared to treat parliamentary bodies. While they forcefully
accuse their political opponents of breaching the constitution,
they dont hesitate to use the upper house as a platform
for shameful political manoeuvres.
Although the SPD had incorporated almost all the CDU/CSUs
critical points in the revised text of the immigration law and
Federal Interior Minister Otto Schily signalled willingness for
even more concessions, chancellor candidate Stoiber whipped the
Union parties into a united front in opposition to the proposed
bill. Under all circumstances, he wanted to prevent State Interior
Minister Schönbohmwho had expressed a positive attitude
towards the main points of the law at an earlier stage of consultationfrom
changing his opinion at the last moment and giving consent. In
the course of the upper house session, media reporters counted
no fewer than 18 attempts by Stoiber, Koch and other CDU/CSU functionaries
to pressure Schönbohm in private talks to stick to his declared
intention to reject the legislation.
Kurt Kister of the Süddeutsche Zeitung aptly described
the behaviour of the Union, which entered the parliamentary session
with the equivalent of a finished script: Their behaviour
descended to its lowest point with the statement from the Bundestrat.
On the other hand, the scene played by Roland Koch made it clear
once again why cynics predict such a great future in politics
for this man. In ancient Rome, people in the forum were hired
for a few sesterces to strut in front of the senate and shout
traitor, liar, criminal at
a senator designated by their sponsor. This is exactly how Koch
behaved after the widely anticipated performance of Wowereit.
With the indignation of a Roman hired minion, Koch cursed into
the cameras. It was all an act, like so much of this aggravating
session.
The opposition Unions move to the right
Since then there has been considerable argument over whether
Wowereits ruling of Brandenburgs split vote was constitutional
or not. Expert opinion on the matter is extremely divided and
the Union has already announced its intention of appealing to
the constitutional court if Federal President Johannes Rau signs
the bill.
But a more fundamental question concerns the political evaluation
of the debacle in the upper house.
Stoiber, the Unions chancellorship candidate, maintains
that he is concerned with improving the law in the
parliamentary mediation committee. But this is merely a delaying
tactic. In reality this committee has sat de facto for two years
since work on the law began. No other legislation has ever been
drawn up in such close cooperation with the opposition Union parties.
The government commission worked for months on end under the
direction of Rita Süßmuth, a leading CDU politician.
Before a year had passed, she presented a number of proposals
that were far more liberal than the currently existing draft law.
A commission of the Union parties under the leadership of Peter
Müller, the CDU executive member, also tabled a draft proposal
whose central points were adopted by the Red-Green government.
After this, Stoiber and his Bavarian interior minister, Beckstein,
demanded that the text of the law should expressly declare an
intention to limit immigration. SPD-Green Party politicians
consequently changed Paragraph 1 of the draft law appropriately.
The call for a mediation committee was only superficially a
call for changes to the text of the law. Stoiber was
far more interested in exerting his influence over the SPD and
Greens, knowing full well that the Greensin spite of their
readiness to compromisewould not always give their blessing
to the SPDs rightward drift once the election campaign was
under way. Any crisis in the SPD-Green coalition could only improve
the Unions election chances.
Stoiber, Beckstein, Koch and others in the CDU/CSU are currently
orchestrating a movement to the right by the Union parties. Their
express aim is to make hostility to foreigners an election campaign
issue and stir up feelings of xenophobia. Although opinion on
the matter varies within the Union, so far no one from the more
moderate sections of the coalition has dared to question at any
serious level the course being taken. The right wing of Stoibers
forces seems to have been given free play.
The decision to organise a xenophobic election campaign has
far-reaching consequences. It is aimed at stirring up the most
backward social layers and moving the whole political spectrum
further to the right. As social misery continues to mount, the
Union seeks to channel increasing despair in an openly racist
direction. The Unions campaign against the immigration law
was already heading in this direction, encouraging neo-Nazi and
skinhead thugs to attack immigrants with the battle cry Foreigners
Out! and set fire to asylum-seeker hostels.
Stoibers offensive is not only irresponsible, it is politically
criminal. His brand of right-wing populism brings together two
tendencies. Already in his seventies and as prime minister of
Bavaria, he has long embodied the national-conservative wing of
the Union. Historically centred around the figure of Franz-Josef
Strauß, this tendency emerged directly out of the Nazi regime.
It combines German jingoism with elements of social reform policy,
scarcely differing from the SPD on some points.
In view of the mounting economic crisis, it is becoming increasingly
difficult to hold society together on the basis of social harmony.
Therefore, Stoiber is now trying to mobilise societys most
oppressed layers with the aid of crass right-wing slogans, even
though this meets with scepticism and disapproval from broad sections
of the ruling elite. Following developments in Italy and the recent
mass demonstrations against Berlusconi, many fear that politics
will move into the streets and a general radicalisation of society
will take place.
The second element in Stoibers right-wing populist offensive
is represented by his 25 years younger colleague, Roland Koch.
This political heir of CDU extreme right-winger Manfred Kanther
is deeply involved in the CDU party donation scandals, has lied
to parliament, and owes his successful election as prime minister
to a xenophobic election campaign. He represents a layer of society
that became influential as a result of the recent boom in share
prices and now seek to defend their privileges in every possible
way, including criminal means. His aggressive arrogance stems
from the fact that his political conceptions have never met with
any serious resistance from the working class.
Cowardice of the SPD
The reason why the right-wingers in the CDU/CSU are able to
flaunt themselves in this way stems, above all, from the political
cowardice of the SPD. Among the leading figures of this party
there is literally nobody with the courage to stand up to Stoibers
right-wingers and to restrain and cut down to size bloated demagogues
like Koch. Rarely before has a party prostituted itself in this
way, allowed itself to be seduced and held hostage by its political
opponent.
Why the well rehearsed drama in the upper house and the manoeuvring
in relation to Brandenburg? Why not let the bill be defeated in
the state council and then make the Union right-wingers responsible
for its demise and bring a fight against their xenophobic challenge
into the open? Why this pitiful kowtowing to the CDU/CSU, always
in the hope of avoiding a confrontation by offering further concessions,
only to win a slap in the face?
The motivating force behind the servile politics of the SPD
is not hard to uncover. The social democratic functionaries are
part of the same political caste to which Stoiber, Koch &
Co. belong. In face of the increasingly obvious effects of the
economic crisis and the intensification of social conflicts, they
feel threatened by the growing exasperation of broad sections
of the population and are striving for a closer alliance with
the Union.
The obsequious politics of the SPD in relation to the CDU/CSU
are being accompanied by cuts in social services and attacks on
basic democratic rights. It is unwilling under any circumstances
to openly oppose the CDU/CSU and their politics of hostility towards
foreigners, because it is afraid this will mobilise precisely
the social forces which are the brunt of its policies and which
it seeks to keep under control.
Federal Interior Minister Otto Schily is the living personification
of this political stance. At the same time as giving in to the
Unions every demand, altering the immigration bill to satisfy
the right-wingers on every occasion, referring to Bavarian Interior
Minister Beckstein (CSU) as his friend, and rejecting every demand
from the refugee support organisations, he is simultaneously enforcing
a drastic curtailment of civil rights and toughening of state
powers.
Where will this lead? In a country where, as every child knows,
the social crisis of the thirties and unemployment of six million
had disastrous consequences, the declaration by the Union that
it intends to make xenophobia a theme in the elections must set
alarm bells ringing. It is time to oppose the racist demagogues
and unite the defence of foreign workers and refugees with the
campaign against unemployment, welfare cuts and attacks on basic
rights.
See Also:
German Social Democrats and Greens pass
xenophobic immigration law
[9 April 2002]
Second package of anti-terror
laws rushed through German parliament
[15 January 2002]
German government
bans Turkish Islamic group
[19 December 2001]
German government attacks
fundamental democratic rights
[3 November 2001]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |