German Reunification

GERMAN REUNIFICATION:

PROBLEMS AND RESEARCH METHODS

In the worldwide arena of comparative politics, the reunification of Germany in 1990 was a pivotal point in time. With the players coming from opposite ends of the political and economic spectrum, the reunification set the stage for major changes both in Germany and the entire European community. These changes offered an important model which comparitivists continue to use in order to examine questions and issues raised by the integration of such different societies and governments. One such crucial political puzzle involves a question still extremely relevant today: how does a formerly totalitarian nation leave behind every social and cultural aspect of their past government in order to evolve into a democratic state? Similarly, another key issue involves transition as well: how would a previously communist economy be converted to capitalism вЂ" and essentially dive into a completely unfamiliar competitive environment вЂ" without collapsing under the strain? These questions provide two different lenses through which an observer can scrutinize the reunification of Germany in order to gain an understanding more broadly applicable to the field of comparative politics.

The process of democratization was a source of swift and indelible social, political, and cultural change for the East and West Germans alike. In East Germany, the process involved the systematic breakdown of their former government, and the permanent transition and consolidation of West German policies and power. For many, the political landscape of the Europe they grew up with no longer existed; with the way things had been, there simply were no “Trabbis” вЂ" a standard-issue East German automobile вЂ" on the other side of the iron curtain (Reimann 1998, 1988). Yet despite the expectation of swift equalization, the transition had a profound impact on daily lives on both sides of the not-so-forgotten Wall. At the time, Helmut Kohl’s Ten Point Plan and policies of unification were a remarkable political success, securing his re-election in 1990. He famously promised that unification would create “flourishing landscapes” in the new East German LÐ"¤nder at virtually no cost to the West Germans (Hefeker 2003, 109). However, on top of the massive economic problems that arose in eastern Germany soon, if not immediately, afterward, reunification has led to long-lasting socioeconomic cleavages between East and West Germans (Edinger 1998, 180).

The possible ways to examine the impact of democratization on the citizens of a country going through it are seemingly infinite. After all, can one truly quantify the effect of the change on an individual? The social aspects of the transition and the implications the change held for culture and identity were more intricate than the actual process itself, and more likely to come across unforeseen consequences. Even the question of how the nations should go about with unification was a cause of disagreement. The choice between the two directions of unification was most evident in the constitution, between Article 23 and Article 146 of the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG). The difference, at its core, was the choice between accession and gradual integration (Quint 1997, 47-55). German unification ended up taking place via Article 23, as East Germany acceded to the FRG. The effects were extreme вЂ" overnight, it seemed that “eighteen million former GDR citizens found themselves governed by a legal regime of which they knew next to nothing and which fit many of their needs poorly at best” (Reimann 1998, 1989).

Studies made by comparitivists on the reunification and its social and cultural connotations employed a host of approaches. Polling and comparison are basic yet fairly effective ways of seeking and observing public sentiment. When both East and West Germans were asked by political leaders in the mid-nineties to give up a work-free holiday to fund a new social insurance program, two out of three East Germans questioned demonstrated their disillusionment by nominating the Day of German Unity, October 3rd, as the day they would give up (Edinger 1998, 181). Saturated public sentiment against the unforeseen financial pitfalls of unification caused West Germans to joke about how Erich Honeker, the builder of the Wall, should have been given the Federal Republic’s highest decoration for “keeping the East Germans off our neck for so long”, where in the past, their sentimental cries for unification centered around their “brothers and sisters in the East” (Edinger 1998, 181). The social and cultural consequences of unification were even investigated by observation of topographic and cadastral maps and questionnaires collected by research institutes. The change in the political landscape of Germany made itself visible even in the actual rural landscape, as West Germany privatized the socialist agriculture of the East (Vogeler 1996, 432). As the unification followed the triumphant path of Article 23 and straightforward accession, it was evident that in almost every way, the FRG pursued a policy of rapid and radical Westernization of the East (Reimann 1998, 1989).

Researchers sought to answers to various questions relating to the social and cultural consequences of unification. How would the East Germans respond to the transplant of new systems and values? What would the impact be on the culture and identity of both the East and the West? The research questions pursued by comparitivists demonstrated how far and how deep the changes brought upon the East and West Germans affected society and public opinion, and these questions can be applied to broader scenarios in regard to transplanting cultures or societal ideals. The dissonance between the institutional changes and the changes in relation to the public was seen through the unfulfilled expectation of equalization for the East Germans, when in fact for decades following, East Germans would suffer a lower average income, more unemployment, and lack the inherited capital and economic mobility the West Germans possessed (Edinger 1998, 1989).

In fact, it is this economic disparity that is another great political puzzle raised by the unification of Germany in 1990. The questions pertaining to the communist-to-capitalist economic transition of East Germany were straightforward to ask but daunting to answer: how, how fast, and what are the consequences? These are the questions studied and quantified by researchers extensively in