HZDS AND MECIAR: CAN'T LIVE WITHOUT HIM?

C O N F I D E N T I A L BRATISLAVA 000761 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 08/13/2014 TAGS: PGOV PINR LO SUBJECT: HZDS AND MECIAR: CAN'T LIVE WITHOUT HIM? Classified By: CDA Scott N. Thayer for reason 1.4(b). ¶1. (C) Summary. When former Prime Minister Vladimir Meciar lost the presidential election in April, internal criticism by other members of his Movement for a Democratic Slovakia (HZDS--see footnote) came out into the open. Analysts and journalists began to speculate about whether party leaders would challenge Meciar,s top position. In meetings with poloffs, HZDS MPs Sergej Kozlik and Eduard Kolesar expressed different opinions about the direction of the party, but they both affirmed its future lies with Meciar. Rumors abound that the minority government, particularly the SDKU party, wishes to cooperate more closely with HZDS leaders other than Meciar. Nonetheless, HZDS representatives said emerging new leaders are not popular enough to replace him. End summary. Meciar Maintains Party Support -------------- ¶2. (U) After former Prime Minister Vladimir Meciar lost the presidential election in April, he refused to shake hands with winner Ivan Gasparovic, the speaker of parliament during his last government. That spurred negative statements from within HZDS about Meciar's behavior and ability to lead the party after a second unsuccessful bid at the presidency. Some analysts and journalists speculated that other party leaders would challenge Meciar,s position as chairman, but HZDS quickly labeled press stories about problems within the party as exaggerated. ¶3. (C) Sergej Kozlik, a veteran HZDS MP and former Deputy Prime Minister, denied that Meciar had lost the support of the party hierarchy in Bratislava or in the regions. He told poloffs that a change in leadership was impossible before the next elections simply because voters would not accept a HZDS ticket without Meciar as the top candidate. Kozlik added that Meciar,s staunch supporters expected such antics (as the handshake refusal) from him. Though a Meciar loyalist, Kozlik stated that Gasparovic,s win was the best outcome for the country, claiming Meciar,s presidency would have been &disruptive.8 He expressed hope that HZDS participation in the European Parliament would help rehabilitate Meciar,s reputation and the image of the party, without the need to replace Meciar. New Leaders in HZDS Lack Appeal -------------- ¶4. (SBU) Over the past two years, HZDS split twice over the direction of the party and Meciar,s leadership style. After these defections, the politicians surrounding Meciar were less experienced and less appealing to voters. At the last party congress in June 2003, party Vice-Chairman for Foreign Relations and current Deputy Parliamentary Speaker Viliam Veteska was elected leader of the party caucus. The congress elected Tibor Mikus the &shadow8 prime minister. Several MPs from coalition parties have told us that both are gaining more influence within the party and maintain good working relationships with coalition parties. ¶5. (C) Even though he is one of the more visible HZDS politicians, Veteska ranks low in polls surveying popularity and credibility. Kozlik stated that Veteska does not have the natural charisma to lead HZDS. He added that Tibor Mikus, who openly criticized Meciar after the election, displays more leadership ability and has stronger potential to become Meciar,s rival. As the &shadow8 prime minister, he reads government reports daily, while Meciar appears disinterested in current government and parliamentary activities. This year the Speaker of the Parliament withheld a portion of Meciar,s annual salary due to poor attendance. However, Kozlik stated that at this time no politician could garner the needed support to successfully campaign against Meciar. You Can,t Live With Him, You Can,t Without Him -------------- - ¶6. (C) According to Olga Gyarfasova, Senior Research Fellow of the Institute for Public Affairs, HZDS is in a dilemma. The party is irrevocably linked to Meciar's populist appeal and his past scandals. Although HZDS seems to be steering away from nationalistic politics, Gyarfasova said, without Meciar HZDS would not win the five percent of the vote needed to enter parliament. She commented that HZDS has never established a solid doctrine or platform to keep or attract voters without Meciar. Future of the Party Lies with Meciar -------------- ¶7. (C) Political analysts such as the daily SME's Marian Lesko and Christian Democratic Movement's (KDH) Michal Dyttert have told us PM Dzurinda's Slovak Democratic and Christian Union (SDKU) is pursuing closer cooperation with HZDS leaders other than Meciar, with the ultimate goal of a SDKU-HZDS coalition after 2006 parliamentary elections. However, SDKU central office director Kamil Homola insisted a SDKU alliance with Meciar was out-of-the-question, and he did not foresee Meciar ceding control of his party. He also pointed out different core values, such as SDKU's strident pro-American stance versus HZDS's isolationist, nationalist tradition. Pavol Haulik of the MVK polling agency told emboffs that SDKU leaders had been leaning toward Meciar in the second round of presidential elections, but got the clear message that he is still unacceptable for the majority of Slovak voters. ¶8. (C) HZDS MP Eduard Kolesar, a former HZDS youth leader and first time MP, told poloffs that the future of party still lies with Meciar, but also includes closer relations with coalition partners. He mentioned that in Banska Bystrica, the regional capital of central Slovakia, the Hungarian Coalition Party (SMK) withdrew from its cooperation agreement with Robert Fico's Smer ("Direction") party and plans to work with HZDS in December 2005 regional elections. He added this was unimaginable five years ago. Kolesar stated that he was representative of those in HZDS who believed a more cordial relationship with the coalition was necessary, even if HZDS lost a section of its electorate. He predicted that HZDS would continue to lose popularity, but would win between 12 and 15 percent of the vote in 2006 parliamentary elections. ¶9. (C) Regarding future alliances, Kozlik said &everything is open8 for discussion. He envisioned HZDS as a centrist party that could form a government with Robert Fico,s Smer or with the parties on the right. He explained that a coalition government with Smer would require a third party, without which the two leaders, Meciar and Fico, would always be locked in discord. On the other hand, Kolesar opposed entering government with Smer, stating that its leaders do not play by any rules. For example, Smer most likely double-crossed President Schuster by pressing for the referendum for new elections to be called on the same day as the April presidential election. After Schuster complied, Smer surprisingly endorsed Gasparovic for president instead. Comment -------------- ¶10. (C) Since the 2002 parliamentary elections, all attempts at cooperation between the largest opposition parties HZDS and Smer have failed, both because of ideological differences and personality conflicts between Meciar and Fico. HZDS has voted with the coalition on a number of important domestic and foreign policy issues, including maintaining a military presence in Iraq. Party leaders seem to see their chance to get back into government with the right-of-center parties, not with Smer. They understand that having Meciar as party chairman and top candidate is both a liability and an asset. Certainly Meciar will head the HZDS ticket in 2006; as HZDS declines in popularity, he is their only hope to deliver votes in the next regional and national elections. The question is whether he will then be willing to step aside so that others can make a deal for a government role. Footnote: The official name of Meciar's party is now People's Party - Movement for a Democratic Slovakia (LS-HZDS). The "LS" was added after the now-extinct off-shoot People's Union (LU) formed. For simplicity's sake we continue to use the acronym HZDS. THAYER NNNN