January 29, 2023 - 11:21am
Czech presidential elections ended on Saturday with a crushing victory for former NATO chief Petr Pavel, who won 58% of the second-round vote ahead of controversial ex-prime minister and current opposition leader Andrej Babiš.
While the Czech president performs a largely ceremonial role, this election was seen as a bellwether for Central and Eastern European politics in a new era of war. The debate focused on the country’s NATO commitments — Babiš caused international uproar by suggesting he would refuse to send Czechs to defend Poland or the Baltic states if they were attacked — and even more significantly, it showed the yawning chasm now separating the region’s pro-establishment and populist politicians.
And just as many Republicans in the USA now see a need to move out of the shadow cast by Donald Trump, so too may Babiš’s resounding defeat lead Czechs opposed to the country’s pro-EU internationalist consensus to seek out a less divisive leader.
It would be hard to find a more pro-establishment president than Pavel. A member of the Communist Party before Czechoslovakia’s Velvet Revolution in 1989, Pavel switched to become a firm advocate of integration within the Western international order. On many issues, from his belief that the Czech Republic should adopt the euro, to his staunch opposition to Russian influence, Pavel is at the vanguard of the nation’s pro-Western orthodoxy.
This movement views Czech anti-EU nationalism with horror. Both Pavel and prime minister Petr Fiala have implied that those opposed to EU membership and support for Ukraine are “extremists” — during the presidential campaign, Pavel even suggested that as head of state he would refuse to appoint members of the eurosceptic SPD party as ministers, citing national security concerns. These politicians portray the most fundamental questions facing the country as out of the bounds of polite discussion.
This sleight of hand is possible only thanks to the controversial nature of their great enemy. Loathing for Babiš among more well-educated and urban parts of Czech society is on a par with perceptions of Trump in the USA. After first-round voting earlier this month, defeated progressive candidate Danuše Nerudová endorsed Pavel by telling supporters that “there is a great evil here, and its name is Andrej Babiš.”
Such aversion isn’t attributable to any ideological conviction on Babiš’s part. Unlike Hungary’s prime minister and fellow “populist” Viktor Orbán, Babiš is not a man of firm beliefs. In fact, he is a much truer “populist” in the derogatory sense of the word — he adapts his priorities to public sentiment and wins votes by provoking establishment politicians and the media.
While conceding defeat, Babiš put a positive spin on things, pointing out that he received more votes alone than the current five-party coalition government did when it beat his ANO party in the last general election in 2021. But after successive losses, those in his own camp may now wonder whether their talisman has become a distraction from the real issues facing the country.
Like Trump, Babiš has dominated by making his own personality the centre of the political solar system. But in Central Europe, as in America, social divisions are becoming too fundamental for such wacky wildcards to represent anti-establishment politics. Babiš’s defeat may now leave the door open for a more serious intellectual force to challenge the Czech Republic’s consensus.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeOh dear. A little explanation is due here. But where to start?
Okay, on one hand, we have general Pavel. Although he is total a unknown in domestic politics – he is a paratrooper who made it to one of the top military-political positions in NATO. (Chair of the NATO Military Committee is the head of the NATO Military Committee, which advises the North Atlantic Council on military policy and strategy. The CMC is the senior military spokesperson of the 30-nation alliance and principal advisor to the Secretary General.)
So, if nothing else, he must have some balls, and he can’t be stupid either. And he also must have some good life principles, such as the conviction that defending one’s country is a good thing to devote one’s life to. He is also very pro-EU, which is a mixed blessing since the current French-and-German-led political body keeps creating more probllems than solutions. But in general (pun intended), most Czechs expect him to become an even-keeled leader in turbulent times (read “in war”).
With Babiš we are dealing with a billionaire whose career is shady every step of the way; eg nobody knows where he got the first couple dozen millions to start his business (he claims ihe obtained them from an undisclosed group of his Swiss former classmates). Also, he is on tape for some of the most brazen lies you can imagine – like swearing in Parliament, on the life od his children that he doesn’t know who owns certain company… when police investigation revealed later that at that very time he quasi-donated that company to his children to be able to milk the EU of some two million dollars in subsidies. He is also a court-certified informer for the Czechoslovakian communist police.
Another achievement of his is that he sent his mentally challenged son (schisophrenia) under the supervision of a convicted criminal to the Russian-occupied Crimea to prevent him from testifying in the case above (because Crimea was one of the few European territories that would not extradite him back to Czech Republic).
And more recently, in a televised presidential debate, he goes on record saying clearly, several times, that he would not approve sending troops to Poland and the Baltics if the were militarily attacked. (Czech President is a formal position in most respects, BUT his is the Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces). Our closest allies are incensed and the outgoing President has to assure them in person that it is not the Czech official stance. Babiš than claims that he was TRICKED by the debate host into saying so.
If this sounds too ludicrous, too unbelievable to be true, go check it out. It is all open record.
Now you know why most rational Czechs voted against him. And would vote for a horse if it were the countercandidate (thanks Caligula for inspiration).
And if you are now wondering about the opposite – why on earth so many voted FOR Babiš, then know that in his time as prime minister he massively bribed the pensioners and the poor with extra subsidies and bonuses (despite warnings that he is ruining the budget). And now the current government is clearing up his mess introducing budgetary austerity measures to the displeasure of many.
Thank you. This would have made a better article on unherd.
Disagree, since that wasn’t the writers point – it was that Babiš is an unprincipled populist, and it’s easy to understand that entails a lack of ethics – and that a principled populist would achieve more success. Unherd readers are intelligent enough to understand what’s being stated without a graphic Daily Mail style of bias.
While I appreciate O.R.’s personal insights and greater detail, these wouldn’t be worthy of an actual Unherd article – but that’s why I value comments from informed readers.
I do look forward to an equine candidate at the next election – can a horse be a person and a valid candidate for election in our new identity universe?
Disagree, since that wasn’t the writers point – it was that Babiš is an unprincipled populist, and it’s easy to understand that entails a lack of ethics – and that a principled populist would achieve more success. Unherd readers are intelligent enough to understand what’s being stated without a graphic Daily Mail style of bias.
While I appreciate O.R.’s personal insights and greater detail, these wouldn’t be worthy of an actual Unherd article – but that’s why I value comments from informed readers.
I do look forward to an equine candidate at the next election – can a horse be a person and a valid candidate for election in our new identity universe?
Thank you. This would have made a better article on unherd.
Oh dear. A little explanation is due here. But where to start?
Okay, on one hand, we have general Pavel. Although he is total a unknown in domestic politics – he is a paratrooper who made it to one of the top military-political positions in NATO. (Chair of the NATO Military Committee is the head of the NATO Military Committee, which advises the North Atlantic Council on military policy and strategy. The CMC is the senior military spokesperson of the 30-nation alliance and principal advisor to the Secretary General.)
So, if nothing else, he must have some balls, and he can’t be stupid either. And he also must have some good life principles, such as the conviction that defending one’s country is a good thing to devote one’s life to. He is also very pro-EU, which is a mixed blessing since the current French-and-German-led political body keeps creating more probllems than solutions. But in general (pun intended), most Czechs expect him to become an even-keeled leader in turbulent times (read “in war”).
With Babiš we are dealing with a billionaire whose career is shady every step of the way; eg nobody knows where he got the first couple dozen millions to start his business (he claims ihe obtained them from an undisclosed group of his Swiss former classmates). Also, he is on tape for some of the most brazen lies you can imagine – like swearing in Parliament, on the life od his children that he doesn’t know who owns certain company… when police investigation revealed later that at that very time he quasi-donated that company to his children to be able to milk the EU of some two million dollars in subsidies. He is also a court-certified informer for the Czechoslovakian communist police.
Another achievement of his is that he sent his mentally challenged son (schisophrenia) under the supervision of a convicted criminal to the Russian-occupied Crimea to prevent him from testifying in the case above (because Crimea was one of the few European territories that would not extradite him back to Czech Republic).
And more recently, in a televised presidential debate, he goes on record saying clearly, several times, that he would not approve sending troops to Poland and the Baltics if the were militarily attacked. (Czech President is a formal position in most respects, BUT his is the Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces). Our closest allies are incensed and the outgoing President has to assure them in person that it is not the Czech official stance. Babiš than claims that he was TRICKED by the debate host into saying so.
If this sounds too ludicrous, too unbelievable to be true, go check it out. It is all open record.
Now you know why most rational Czechs voted against him. And would vote for a horse if it were the countercandidate (thanks Caligula for inspiration).
And if you are now wondering about the opposite – why on earth so many voted FOR Babiš, then know that in his time as prime minister he massively bribed the pensioners and the poor with extra subsidies and bonuses (despite warnings that he is ruining the budget). And now the current government is clearing up his mess introducing budgetary austerity measures to the displeasure of many.
I could not understand what this article is about – which is a shame as I would have like to know.
The writer will not say what the policy is of each man and what that means – but contrasts them to others, and Trump, Oban, and mythical populists, and to whatever…. Is it me or did it mean naything to anyone who does not know these politicians and Nation?
Like if someone wanted to speak of a football team they did it entirely by explaining how they were in relation to other teams and games played that you knew nothing about – just tell us facts…….
Reading the article, I got the sense that support for NATO and fierce opposition to Russia played a role. Not much else though.
I found this to be a fascinating article. The author tells us Babis is a populist without a fixed set of values. He’s basically a chancer who opposes whatever the Czech Establishment proposes. He’s like Trump in that he’s a showman and iconoclast, but, unlike Trump, he lacks a coherent policy platform.
But Babis lost heavily to an ultra-Establishment candidate. The author’s theory is that Babis was just too extreme for most voters, but that many voters also aren’t enamored of the EU. The author suggests if a more moderate, principled populist appears then that person will likely be a serious challenge to the heavily pro-EU faction in Czech politics.
For me, this article restates what’s obvious in US and UK politics: people desperately want middle-of-the-road, common sense politicians (yes, the left will call such people “right wing extremists”). People don’t want extreme ideology from the left or right.
My favorite part of this article, though, was the photo at the top. There’s a glum Babis, presumably just having lost the election. And beside him is a smiling kid wearing, of all things, a hat with a Nike logo. Yes, Mr. Babis, globalism backed by multinational corporations is a real thing, and I think it might just have kicked your a**.
Good summary – this was my take too. I don’t know why Elliott couldn’t discern this in the article.
Good summary – this was my take too. I don’t know why Elliott couldn’t discern this in the article.
Reading the article, I got the sense that support for NATO and fierce opposition to Russia played a role. Not much else though.
I found this to be a fascinating article. The author tells us Babis is a populist without a fixed set of values. He’s basically a chancer who opposes whatever the Czech Establishment proposes. He’s like Trump in that he’s a showman and iconoclast, but, unlike Trump, he lacks a coherent policy platform.
But Babis lost heavily to an ultra-Establishment candidate. The author’s theory is that Babis was just too extreme for most voters, but that many voters also aren’t enamored of the EU. The author suggests if a more moderate, principled populist appears then that person will likely be a serious challenge to the heavily pro-EU faction in Czech politics.
For me, this article restates what’s obvious in US and UK politics: people desperately want middle-of-the-road, common sense politicians (yes, the left will call such people “right wing extremists”). People don’t want extreme ideology from the left or right.
My favorite part of this article, though, was the photo at the top. There’s a glum Babis, presumably just having lost the election. And beside him is a smiling kid wearing, of all things, a hat with a Nike logo. Yes, Mr. Babis, globalism backed by multinational corporations is a real thing, and I think it might just have kicked your a**.
I could not understand what this article is about – which is a shame as I would have like to know.
The writer will not say what the policy is of each man and what that means – but contrasts them to others, and Trump, Oban, and mythical populists, and to whatever…. Is it me or did it mean naything to anyone who does not know these politicians and Nation?
Like if someone wanted to speak of a football team they did it entirely by explaining how they were in relation to other teams and games played that you knew nothing about – just tell us facts…….
Good for the Czechs!
Why? Tell us what about their politics is good, so I can figure out what this was about.
I wonder, do millennials understand jokes about bouncing Czechs?
I wonder, do millennials understand jokes about bouncing Czechs?
Why? Tell us what about their politics is good, so I can figure out what this was about.
Good for the Czechs!
Pavel’s election just reinforces the lessons of the past year:
This is the end of Putin’s dream of destabilizing Europe, and creating a new “Russian empire.”
–Gas is lower than ever.
–NATO is more unified than ever.
–Tanks are on the way, to be followed by F-16s and longer range HIMARs.
–Iran’s drone factory just got bombed by Israel.
–Putin is still stuck in Bakhmut (yes, really!)
Looks like the main result of 24 Feb 2022 will actually be the fall of Putin, Khameini and Assad.
Do you want to support Ukraine or oust Putin? You sound pretty hawkish.
Hawkish? How close do you live to the Russian empire? Comfortably far I gather.
To live within the Russian military reach means that wanting a sane person leading that country is just a question of self-preservation. We, Czechs, have 40 years of living under the Russian yoke, and we totally understand why the Ukrainians are defending themselves so fiercely.
Rather oddly, you’ll find that some of the anti war ‘peacemakers’ commenting on Unherd don’t seem to have any empathy for the experience in Eastern Europe, or don’t care as it won’t affect them. But I don’t understand the logic of the latter either, since the Ukrainians, and their supporters in Eastern Europe, are doing us in the west a great service by bleeding Russia dry with their sacrifices. History will hopefully acknowledge this in due course.
Is that how you see it?
I am, if you don’t mind, very sceptical about American intentions in all this as well as russia and china’s. I am very aware that there were NO weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and the debacle in Afghanistan was disgraceful. The msm media has plenty on big bad russia. This is supposed to be ‘unherd’ so do you want to consider the American part in all this or what? Don’t mind me if I’m reluctant to get pulled into ww3.
Now. I don’t know wtf happened on here at the weekend but I know some seriously weird shit happened. I stayed because it was so f*****g weird, your comment section was reviewed on mum’s net as a ‘cess pit’. This could be a good thing this place.
I feel like I’m talking to some f*cking weird organised collective. This is honestly the weirdest f*cking place I’ve ever posted.
Is that how you see it?
I am, if you don’t mind, very sceptical about American intentions in all this as well as russia and china’s. I am very aware that there were NO weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and the debacle in Afghanistan was disgraceful. The msm media has plenty on big bad russia. This is supposed to be ‘unherd’ so do you want to consider the American part in all this or what? Don’t mind me if I’m reluctant to get pulled into ww3.
Now. I don’t know wtf happened on here at the weekend but I know some seriously weird shit happened. I stayed because it was so f*****g weird, your comment section was reviewed on mum’s net as a ‘cess pit’. This could be a good thing this place.
I feel like I’m talking to some f*cking weird organised collective. This is honestly the weirdest f*cking place I’ve ever posted.
At no point did I express anti-Ukraine sentiment because I support the Ukraine. I’m sceptical of American intent here though. WWIII will affect us all, Czechs and everyone else. I’m worried about the Overton window moving here and objectives changing from Ukraine support to overthrowing Putin.
” American intent ” forget that, EU intent is what you are looking at.
” American intent ” forget that, EU intent is what you are looking at.
Rather oddly, you’ll find that some of the anti war ‘peacemakers’ commenting on Unherd don’t seem to have any empathy for the experience in Eastern Europe, or don’t care as it won’t affect them. But I don’t understand the logic of the latter either, since the Ukrainians, and their supporters in Eastern Europe, are doing us in the west a great service by bleeding Russia dry with their sacrifices. History will hopefully acknowledge this in due course.
At no point did I express anti-Ukraine sentiment because I support the Ukraine. I’m sceptical of American intent here though. WWIII will affect us all, Czechs and everyone else. I’m worried about the Overton window moving here and objectives changing from Ukraine support to overthrowing Putin.
Ukraine will never be safe as long as Putin remains in power.
Nether will Czechia, or any other nation on Russia’s borders.
Whether that can be done through the impending Russian defeat is still a real question, however.
Saddam survived his debacle for a quite a few years, although it left Iraq a basket case.
Putin wants to ” regain ” the old CCCP, incl ALL former buffer states so he can ‘ defend ” the motherland against attacks from Western stated.All former Russian colonies have voted to join Nato and the EU.
You’re assuming the dictator that replaces Putin will be more friendly.
They know Putins motives are just like hitlers because every person we don’t like is just like hitler. Trump was hitler for 4 years. But in reality this will turn into another Vietnam because after the lovely tanks get sent, the planes will go and of course then our boys will have no choice to go. After all we still have geniuses from the previous feckless wars in charge instead of being tarred and feathered and run out of town.
But wasn’t the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan another “Vietnam?”
So please explain why Putin’s invasion of Ukraine (with far more people and far more weapons than Afghanistan) is not another “Vietnam?”
Or does this only apply to western countries, so it’s perfectly fine for Putin?
But wasn’t the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan another “Vietnam?”
So please explain why Putin’s invasion of Ukraine (with far more people and far more weapons than Afghanistan) is not another “Vietnam?”
Or does this only apply to western countries, so it’s perfectly fine for Putin?
I’m assuming that, as long as Putin remains in power, there is no hope for a permanent peace.
They know Putins motives are just like hitlers because every person we don’t like is just like hitler. Trump was hitler for 4 years. But in reality this will turn into another Vietnam because after the lovely tanks get sent, the planes will go and of course then our boys will have no choice to go. After all we still have geniuses from the previous feckless wars in charge instead of being tarred and feathered and run out of town.
I’m assuming that, as long as Putin remains in power, there is no hope for a permanent peace.
Putin wants to ” regain ” the old CCCP, incl ALL former buffer states so he can ‘ defend ” the motherland against attacks from Western stated.All former Russian colonies have voted to join Nato and the EU.
You’re assuming the dictator that replaces Putin will be more friendly.
Hawkish? How close do you live to the Russian empire? Comfortably far I gather.
To live within the Russian military reach means that wanting a sane person leading that country is just a question of self-preservation. We, Czechs, have 40 years of living under the Russian yoke, and we totally understand why the Ukrainians are defending themselves so fiercely.
Ukraine will never be safe as long as Putin remains in power.
Nether will Czechia, or any other nation on Russia’s borders.
Whether that can be done through the impending Russian defeat is still a real question, however.
Saddam survived his debacle for a quite a few years, although it left Iraq a basket case.
Do you want to support Ukraine or oust Putin? You sound pretty hawkish.
Pavel’s election just reinforces the lessons of the past year:
This is the end of Putin’s dream of destabilizing Europe, and creating a new “Russian empire.”
–Gas is lower than ever.
–NATO is more unified than ever.
–Tanks are on the way, to be followed by F-16s and longer range HIMARs.
–Iran’s drone factory just got bombed by Israel.
–Putin is still stuck in Bakhmut (yes, really!)
Looks like the main result of 24 Feb 2022 will actually be the fall of Putin, Khameini and Assad.
Maybe, just maybe, people voting in a “largely ceremonial” i.e. largely powerless, presidential election tend to go for a stable conservative figure? It’s like comparing QE2 with Boris Johnson.
Not exactly, a Czech President can pursue largely independent foreign politics, reject ministerial nominations for any reason, he selects and approves members of the central bank, the Constitutional Court, and is in many other ways a very influential figure in Czech politics. Far cry from a British monarch.
Not exactly, a Czech President can pursue largely independent foreign politics, reject ministerial nominations for any reason, he selects and approves members of the central bank, the Constitutional Court, and is in many other ways a very influential figure in Czech politics. Far cry from a British monarch.
Maybe, just maybe, people voting in a “largely ceremonial” i.e. largely powerless, presidential election tend to go for a stable conservative figure? It’s like comparing QE2 with Boris Johnson.