We treat minorities differently and have a different approach to the rights of disadvantaged citizens, says Petr Kaniok, a political scientist at the MU Faculty of Social Studies, who also works at SYRI (National Institute for Research on Socioeconomic Impacts of Diseases and Systemic Risks), commenting on Czech attitudes towards the European Union (EU), which the Czech Republic joined on 1 May 2004.
This year, the Czech Republic is celebrating 20 years of membership in the European Union. Could you explain the significance of this event and perhaps tell us a little about its background?
Czechoslovakia expressed its interest in joining the European Communities in December 1989, just a few weeks after the Velvet Revolution. Negotiations and the accession process itself began after the break-up of Czechoslovakia, in the first half of the 1990s. The Czech Republic had a huge amount of work to do – adopting EU law, carrying out a series of structural reforms and negotiating the terms of accession. The credit for this goes to the entire political representation at the time, including Václav Klaus and Miloš Zeman. The mood in society was optimistic, which had a lot to do with the narrative that joining the EU would solve almost all problems, and that it would mainly be a tool for the painless modernisation of the country. It was mainly the economic benefits that were emphasised, and of course, people listened. After all, the result of the referendum on EU membership was clear.
In retrospect, can you tell us who contributed the most to the Czech Republic’s accession to the EU?
Certainly the entire political class at the time, both the ODS-led and the ČSSD-led governments. If there was a relatively broad consensus on anything – the Communists and the far-right Republicans notwithstanding – it was on EU accession and good progress in negotiations with the European Commission. The need to speed up accession was clearly recognised by both the ODS and the ČSSD under the so-called tolerance clause, which was a document that extended the much-criticised “Opposition Agreement” between the two main political parties at the time. Of course, we shouldn’t forget the very good diplomatic work done by Libor Sečka and Pavel Telička, without whom politicians wouldn’t achieve much.
What has EU membership brought to the Czech Republic? How is it reflected in the lives of ordinary citizens and in international politics?
EU membership is clearly a positive thing, even if the optimism that everything would somehow work out by itself was quickly sobered up after accession. Of course, there are compromises to be made; sometimes the Czech Republic is in the minority and has to go along with the will of the majority of EU member states. Nevertheless, membership has brought the country economic prosperity and the opportunity to participate in European governance, as well as for its people to travel, study and learn from others. Given Czechia’s position at the heart, or perhaps the crossroads, of Europe, there is no alternative to EU membership. I see no other arrangement than a multilateral organisation like the EU – which also protects smaller countries in a number of ways – that would provide better opportunities for the Czech Republic and its citizens.
What reputation does the Czech Republic have in the EU? Has our recent presidency made an impact?
If there is one thing the current government can be praised for, it is for improving the Czech Republic’s image among its EU partners. The cabinet of Andrej Babiš, which treated the EU like a kind of cash withdrawal machine that could otherwise be safely ignored, left Czechia in a kind of isolation. This has certainly improved. The presidency of the EU Council has been a success, despite the Babiš government’s poor preparations, and it has certainly contributed to the Czech Republic’s improved standing in the EU. This is very important in the EU because a country’s reputation determines its ability to form coalitions and is one of the main sources of a member state’s strength.
Are attitudes towards the EU changing over time? In light of the Ukraine crisis, will the role of the EU and its image strengthen?
Attitudes certainly evolve and go through certain ups and downs. This is determined by the way the EU is talked about, especially by politicians who tend to blame the EU for every problem. This was seen, for example, during the eurozone crisis, when confidence plummeted – even though the EU was partly to blame for the way it handled it – and during the migration crisis when Czech politicians in particular scored cheap points and often misled the public about the EU’s role.
How is the EU perceived by the general public today compared to twenty years ago? How does it benefit the people?
Most ordinary people should see – the question is whether they recognise – the economic benefits and the overall rise in living standards. This is largely due to the fact that the Czech economy benefits from the common market and European integration. At the risk of repeating myself, given our location and the nature of our economy, we can’t exist as some kind of isolated, self-sufficient society shunning the outside world. The companies that employ people are also clear beneficiaries of EU membership. But the more subtle benefits are just as important. The EU makes us treat minorities differently, and makes us think differently about the rights of disadvantaged citizens. Our society has certainly become more sensitive since we joined the EU, even though it may not look like it.
Are we Europhobic?
No, I wouldn’t say that. Czechs are perhaps more critical of the EU than people in other countries, as confirmed by ongoing surveys such as Eurobarometer. But I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing; our scepticism has never really translated into serious consideration of leaving the EU. Not to mention that for a long time, there was no one to lead the Czech public on this issue as for 20 years, the pro-EU parties have not been able to create a comprehensible narrative of European integration and Czech membership. Czech euro-optimism consists mostly of endless repetition of slogans and empty platitudes, even if it means well. This is often ignored and the Eurosceptics are solely blamed for Czech reticence. As for the Eurosceptics themselves, of course, they have it easier – being against something is easier to sell in politics, not to mention that the EU is far from perfect. But the pro-EU camp has a lot of room for improvement.
How do we actually perceive EU politics and the European Parliament elections?
The EP elections are considered to be second-rate, and past experience has shown that Czech politicians and voters pay even less attention to them than the rest of the EU. Voter turnout is well below the EU average, around 15-20 percentage points. But I have a feeling that this will change this year. There are issues that the public understands and that are also quite polarising, such as the Green Deal and its implications, migration and the EU’s role in the war in Ukraine. In addition, we can expect the opposition to use all its strength and resources to sell this year's election as a referendum on the government. So the mobilisation effort will be huge and I think this will be reflected in higher turnout, more media interest and more attractive campaigns.