Centre for Eastern Studies NUMBER 288 | 10.10.2018 www.osw.waw.pl The Free State of Bavaria and its party: the CSU faces an electoral test Kamil Frymark The Christian Social Union (CSU) has ruled Bavaria continuously for sixty years. The CSU’s domination of the province’s political scene, together with its influence on federal policies through its partnership with the CDU in the Bundestag, has made the party one of the most effective groups in Europe. In the medium term Bavaria will have to face challenges connect- ed with the transformation and digitisation of industry, which could undermine the province’s current economic model. In addition, the CSU is being confronted on the political scene by Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), a grouping which has a similar profile to the CSU in several aspects. The elections on 14 October 2018 could permanently change the balance of power in Bavaria’s Landtag, lead to a serious weakening of the CSU’s dominance in Bavaria, and affect Germany’s federal politics. The CSU owes its electoral success to a conservative profile combined with the province’s eco- nomic achievements, as well as the ability to adapt its programme to changing social trends. Voters see the party as both a guarantor of Bavaria’s economic success and the advocate of the interests of vulnerable social groups. However, the CSU is undergoing a transformation which may result in it losing its status as a mass party appealing to all social groups. These changes are structural in nature; they result primarily from the aging of its traditional elec- torate and the inflow into Bavaria of residents from other German provinces. This process is overlapping with a strong polarisation within German society (including Bavaria) regarding its approach to the migration crisis. The biggest beneficiary of these changes has been the AfD. A good result for this party in the elections to the Bavarian parliament could permanently change the balance of political forces there. The CSU would be unable to defend an absolute majority, and it would have to seek coalition partners in order to form further governments. The CSU is the only province-level party with to a great extent has been subordinated to the federal representation, and its road towards creation of regional structures and efforts to federal-level politics led through its success in win support for them in successive provincial the province1. From the beginning the other elections. The CSU has been present in federal groups in the Bundestag needed to build up politics since the creation after the parliamen- a political position at the federal level, which tary elections in 1949 of its joint parliamen- tary group with the CDU in the Bundestag. The CDU’s coalition with the CSU (and the FDP) 1 Local political parties operate in various provinces (such was essential to the formation of Konrad Ade- as the Brandenburger Vereinigte Bürgerbewegungen / Freie Wähler, Bürger in Wut, Freie Wähler in Bavaria nauer’s first cabinet in 1949–1953. The CSU in Brandenburg, Südschleswigscher Wählerverband), became quite a disciplined part of the Chris- but they do not participate in federal politics. OSW COMMENTARY NUMBER 288 1 tian Democrats’ group (while creating its own after a threat by the CDU’s chairman, Helmut provincial party), which resulted in the con- Kohl, that his party would be ready to create solidation of the close cooperation between local structures in Bavaria, the CSU withdrew its them. The consequence was that the CSU has decision after three weeks. participated in all the CDU governments (1949– 1969, 1982–1998 and since 2005). However, no chairman of the CSU has ever been chosen The creation of two parties would lead to as the Federal Chancellor, although twice the the CDU establishing local structures in CDU/CSU’s choice for that position has fallen to Bavaria and drain away some of the CSU’s a politician from Bavaria – Franz Josef Strauss in voters in provincial and federal elections. 1980, and Edmund Stoiber in 2002. The value of the CDU/CSU alliance A split would mean losses for both parties. For the CDU, the lack of the CSU’s support would In the Bundestag, the CSU makes up a joint mean less political strength at the federal level parliamentary group with the CDU. Within this and make it more difficult to build coalitions; so framework, the CSU deputies also make up far the CSU have won between 10% and 20% a provincial group, which de facto is a party support for the joint Christian Democrat group within a party. Its chairman is usually one of in parliamentary elections3. Moreover, the ex- the CSU’s most influential politicians and a con- pectation that the CDU will collaborate with tender for one of the two main functions in the the CSU in the Bundestag has also encouraged party, either the president or prime minister of conservatives from other provinces to vote for Bavaria. Every few years the threat of the CDU the CDU. However, the effects of a split would and CSU separating and becoming independent be more painful for the CSU. The creation of within the Bundestag arises, but due to their two parties would lead to the CDU establish- mutual interest in maintaining the status quo, ing local structures in Bavaria, and drain away this is not a realistic prospect. In the 1970s, as some of the CSU’s voters in provincial and fed- fundamental policy differences and personali- eral elections. This would make it significant- ty conflicts began to arise, some members of ly harder for the CSU to form one-party gov- the CSU began to demand that they leave the ernments in Bavaria, and would likely lead to common group in the Bundestag, and also that the end (or a significant reduction) of its pres- they should consider running as independents ence in the Bundestag. This would weaken the in parliamentary elections in other provinces2. CSU’s influence on federal policy, especially if The CSU has also raised some of these objec- it refused to participate in CDU-led govern- tions again more recently, but this has primarily ments, and also reduce its electoral subsidies. served as a way of ‘raising the stakes’ in coalition The CSU would become a primarily regional negotiations with the CDU, and of disciplining party, which neither the party’s members nor the party and getting it to knuckle under to its its voters want. In the Bundestag, the provincial leader. The most serious crisis in relations be- group would probably disintegrate, some of tween the parties occurred in 1976, when the the Bavarian party activists would cross over to Christian Democrats were in opposition. This the CDU, and the CSU would become margin- led to the CSU voting to split the group, but alised. The CSU used to be the third or fourth biggest political force in Bonn (alternating with 2 The discrepancy was brought about by what the CSU leadership saw as the overly leftist programme of the CDU, as well as the CDU’s support for the normalisation 3 In the current term, the CSU has 46 deputies, whereas of relations with Communist Poland in the 1970s. the CDU has 200. OSW COMMENTARY NUMBER 288 2 the FDP), the main adversary of the SPD, and the CDU. The main lines of dispute between the a driver of German public debate (notably in sister parties now concern migration, domes- the Bundestag debate between the SPD chair- tic security and European policy issues. In the man Herbert Wehner and Franz Josef Strauss in past, the policies disputed included Germany’s 1975). A CSU standing alone at the federal level Eastern policy, the attitude to the US, and the would be much less influential; the risk of the issue of whether Germany should have nucle- CDU coming to an agreement with the Greens ar weapons, something Franz Josef Strauss did and the FDP without the CSU would rise. not rule out4. The CSU’s political presence in The establishment of local structures by the the Bundestag not only allows the realisation of CSU in other provinces to strengthen its rep- projects which are important from the point of resentation in the Bundestag would be lengthy, view of the Bavarian electorate, but also gives costly and extremely difficult, not only because it access to the nationwide media and a pres- of the existing structures of the CDU, but also ence in different constituent bodies at the fed- in the light of the rise of the AfD. eral level5. This translates to national popularity for individual politicians in Bavaria and builds Bavaria first! a sense of the party’s strength. It also strength- ens their advantage over other groups in the In the German federal system, Bavaria plays Bavarian state parliament, and makes it difficult a special role – not only as one of the most im- for the opposition to take power in Bavaria. portant states, generating around 20% of Ger- many’s GDP, and as leader of the sixteen con- stituent Bundesländer in negotiations between The CSU’s most important objective is the provinces and the federation (for example, to maintain its one-party rule in Bavaria. regarding federal subsidies in connection with This is also assisted by initiatives at the the provinces’ burden caused by the migration federal level. crisis). It is also the most active defender of the provinces retaining their competence (such as in the fields of education and security), as well The CSU’s most important objective is to main- as the author of solutions which are then ac- tain its independent rule in Bavaria.