What Iceland’s election tells us about post-crisis European politics

dusseldorf

Iceland was supposed to be different.Iceland Flag IconEuropean_Union

In allowing its banks to fail, neo-Keynesian economists have argued, Iceland avoided the fate of Ireland, which nationalized its banks and now faces a future with a very large public debt.  By devaluing its currency, the krónur, Iceland avoided the fate of countries like Estonia and others in southern Europe trapped in the eurozone and a one-size-fits all monetary policy, allowing for a rapid return to economic growth and rapidly falling unemployment.  Neoclassical economists counter that Iceland’s currency controls mean that it’s still essentially shut out from foreign investment, and the accompanying inflation has eroded many of the gains of Iceland’s return to GDP growth and, besides, Iceland’s households are still struggling under mortgage and other debt instruments that are linked to inflation or denominated in foreign currencies.

But Iceland’s weekend parliamentary election shows that both schools of economic thought are right.

Elections are rarely won on the slogan, ‘it could have been worse.’ Just ask U.S. president Barack Obama, whose efforts to implement $800 billion in stimulus programs in his first term in office went barely mentioned in his 2012 reelection campaign.

Iceland, as it turns out, is hardly so different at all — and it’s now virtually a case study in an electoral pattern that’s become increasingly pronounced in Europe that began when the 2008 global financial crisis took hold, through the 2010 sovereign debt crisis in the eurozone and through the current European-wide recession that’s seen unemployment rise to the sharpest levels in decades.

Call it the European three-step.

In the first step, a center-right government, like the one led by Sjálfstæðisflokkurinn (Independence Party) in Iceland in 2008, took the blame for the initial crisis.

In the second step, a center-left government, like the one led by Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir and the Samfylkingin (Social Democratic Alliance) in Iceland, replaced it, only to find that it would be forced to implement harsh austerity measures, including budget cuts, tax increases and, in Iceland’s case, even more extreme measures, such as currency controls and inflation-inducing devaluations.  That leads to further voter disenchantment, now with the center-left.

The third step is the return of the initial center-right party (or parties) to power, as the Independence Party and their traditional allies, the Framsóknarflokkurinn (Progressive Party) will do following Iceland’s latest election, at the expense of the more newly discredited center-left.  In addition, with both the mainstream center-left and center-right now associated with economic pain, there’s increasing support for new parties, some of them merely protest vehicles and others sometimes more radical, on both the left and the right.  In Iceland, that means that two new parties, Björt framtíð (Bright Future) and the Píratar (Pirate Party of Iceland) will now hold one-seventh of the seats in Iceland’s Alþingi.

This is essentially what happened last year in Greece, too.  Greece Flag IconIn the first step, Kostas Karamanlis and the center-right New Democracy (Νέα Δημοκρατία) initially took the blame for the initial financial crisis.  In the second step, George Papandreou and the center-left PASOK (Panhellenic Socialist Movement – Πανελλήνιο Σοσιαλιστικό Κίνημα) overwhelming won the October 2009 elections, only to find itself forced to accept a bailout deal with the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund.  In the third step, after two grueling rounds of election, Antonis Samaras and New Democracy returned to power in June 2012.

By that time, however, PASOK was so compromised that it was essentially forced into a minor subsidiary role supporting Samaras’s center-right, pro-bailout government.  A more radical leftist force, SYRIZA (the Coalition of the Radical Left — Συνασπισμός Ριζοσπαστικής Αριστεράς), led by the young, charismatic Alexis Tsipras, now vies for the lead routinely in polls, and on the far right, the noxious neo-nazi Golden Dawn (Χρυσή Αυγή) now attracts a small, but significant enough portion of the Greek electorate to put it in third place.

The process seems well under way in other countries, too.  In France, for examFrance Flag Iconple, center-right president Nicolas Sarkozy lost reelection in May 2012 amid great hopes for the incoming Parti socialiste (PS, Socialist Party) administration of François Hollande, but his popularity is sinking to ever lower levels as France trudges through its own austerity, and polls show Sarkozy would now lead Hollande if another presidential election were held today.

It’s not just right-left-right, though. The European three-step comes in a different flavor, too: left-right-left, and you can spot the trend in country after country across Europe — richer and poorer, western and eastern, northern and southern. Continue reading What Iceland’s election tells us about post-crisis European politics

Final Icelandic election results

althingiJust a quick post to note the final results of Saturday’s Icelandic parliamentary elections.Iceland Flag Icon

As expected, the center-right will return to power, with the top two parties, the Framsóknarflokkurinn (Progressive Party) and the Sjálfstæðisflokkurinn (Independence Party) widely expected to form a governing coalition, thereby returning to power in as wide a swing in Saturday’s election as the swing against them in the April 2009 elections.

Although both parties will hold 19 seats each in the 63-member Alþingi, Iceland’s parliament, the Independence Party’s leader Bjarni Benediktsson will likely become prime minister instead of the Progressive Party’s Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson, though that’s far from clear, even today, with both leaders discussing options to form a government with Iceland’s president.

Until last week, Gunnlaugsson seemed very likely to become prime minister, riding a wave of popularity over his party’s stance in opposition to reimbursing the British, Dutch and other governments that, in turn, reimbursed non-Icelandic citizens who lost their savings when IceSave collapsed along with Iceland’s entire banking system.  Only a couple of weeks ago, Benediktsson was facing a coup attempt within the Independence Party over his own leadership.  As the campaign closed, however, the Independence Party made up much of its lost ground, though they have finished just 3% higher than their historical low of 23.7% in the 2009 election and the Progressives jumped 9.6% from the previous election:

iceland

The Independence Party, in particular, has long dominated Icelandic politics since independence from Denmark in 1944, and it was in charge of running the country in the decades leading up to the 2008 banking crisis — its leaders at the time, prime minister Geir Haarde and former prime minister and Icelandic central bank president Davíð Oddsson were widely blamed at the time for the collapse and for establishing the conditions that led to the collapse.

The government which followed, led by Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir and the Samfylkingin (Social Democratic Alliance), in alliance with the Vinstrihreyfingin – grænt framboð (Left-Green Movement), represented the first government since the 1950s not dominated by the Independence Party.  While it leaves office with, I think, a fairly strong record of having strengthened women’s right, returned Iceland’s economy to GDP growth and massively lowered unemployment to under 5%, Icelandic voters remain relatively strained, even five years after the crisis.  GDP growth has returned thanks only to capital controls and the massive devaluation of the krónur, inflation has erased much of those gains for typical Icelandic households, many of which struggle under debt loads denominated in foreign currencies.

Sigurðardóttir’s government also probably suffered considerably for spending too much time on a push for a new Icelandic (‘crowd-sourced’) constitution and on bringing Iceland into the European Union, a project that is now likely to fall apart.  On Saturday, the Social Democratic Alliance lost 16.9% and the Left-Green Movement lost 10.8% from their 2009 result — it means that the Left-Green lost 50% of its 2009 support and the Social Democrats lost about 57% of its 2009 support.