Bickering At Bonn

Press, Volume C, Issue 29672, 16 November 1961, Page 14

Bickering At Bonn

For eight weeks allies and friends of Western Germany were treated to what Germans themselves described as “an unworthy “ scuffle for power ” while the republics future w r as in the balance. The wrangling has been compared with the manoeuvres of France’s Fourth Republic or of the Weimar Republic. The situation was not easy, because the election of September 17 gave no party a mandate. Dr. Adenauer’s Christian Democrats, with 242 seats, were eight seats short of an absolute majority. The other major party, the Social Democrats, had 190 seats. The Free Democrats, led by Dr. Monde, made a notable advance and won 67 seats to hold the balance of power. The Free Democrats at first sought as the price of support the resignation of Dr. Adenauer, and indeed, were pledged not to take part in a government led by him. But the aged Chancellor was not ready to step down even after a clear rebuff by the electorate. His enemies said he had an obsession for power, his friends that he felt he ewed it to his country and it* allies to remain at least until the Berlin issue was resolved. Probably both explanations were partly correct.

Dr. Adenauer’s obstinacyappeared to make dealings with the Free Democrats impracticable, so he turned, either genuinely or in a feint, to the Social Democrats. This caused some Free Democrats to press their leader. Dr. Mende, who apparently came to the conclusion that, election promise or no election promise, his party would have to enter a Government coalition under Dr. Adenauer. The Free Democrats’ suitender was not unconditional; they sought a written undertaking that Dr. Adenauer would retire in time to let a successor prepare for the next elections in 1965. Dr. Adenauer then found that the agreement he had made with the Free Democrats was not acceptable to some members of his own party, who thought that policy and administration would be too much at the mercy of a small party. Some said this was too high a price to pay to retain Dr. Adenauer as Chancellor; but the Christian Democrats respected Dr. Adenauer and his ability too much to force him to go. In the end, a slight abatement of the Free Democrats' rigid terms was accepted. However, Mr von Brentano, the

Foreign Minister, decided that he had had enough. In a dignified statement Mr von Brentano said that a Minister assumed responsibility towards the whole Parliament and not towards any particular group. He added that he intended to take no further part in government. Mr von Brentano is the one prominent political personage of Bonn who has not lost personal stature in the bickering of the last eight weeks. When Dr. Adenauer accepted the Free Democrats’ terms, the way was open to him to ask Parliament for a vote of confidence. It was said in Bonn that Dr. Adenauer would have stood out for better terms if he had not believed that the West German President, Mr Luebke, was ready to exercise his constitutional powers to nominate a Chancellor—who would not be Dr. Adenauer. In Parhament, Dr. Adenauer won his vote of confidence by a mere eight votes. About 50 members of the Christian Democrat-Free Democrat coalition either voted against him or abstained. So ended a sorry eight weeks. “The Times”, commenting that while the world was struggling on the brink of a serious crisis over Germany, German politicians had indulged in an inept and dangerous struggle for power, said: “ Clearly Dr. Adenauer’s “judgment has failed him “in this situation. This is “ the more damaging because part of the price “for his magnificent “achievements is a weakness in the upper politi“cal structure of Germany “engendered by his pater- “ nalism. Any coalition “which is now patched up " between his party and the “ Free Democrats will in- “ evitably be a rather flimsy “ affair, lacking the con- “ fidence of the country and “ of its leaders ”.