Thousands of citizens participated in the control Health care problems as well. Campaign in the German Historical Museum in Berlin: On June 18, students discussed with the motto "Round table - GDR civil rights activists school" Contemporary witnesses about life in the GDR. Photo: dpa
As institutions for the transition to new form of society and government, round tables had already existed in Poland and Hungary before the Central Round Table was also established in the GDR and set up hundreds of round tables at local and regional levels. On December 7, 1989, at the invitation of the Federation of Evangelical Churches in the GDR, 15 representatives from seven opposition groups (SDP, Democratic Awakening, Democracy Now, Initiative Peace and Human Rights, New Forum, Green Party, United Left) met with just as many representatives of the SED and the four bloc parties (CDU, LDPD, NDPD, DBD) at the central round table in Berlin (). After the Independent Women's Association and the Green League as well as the FDGB and VdgB had received voting rights by the second meeting, the number of votes in both camps increased to 19 each (). This formation was maintained until the end. Since December 22nd, government representatives have also appeared at the table, but only to provide information during the treatment about the factual problems assigned to their areas. Prime Minister Modrow, on the other hand, only accepted the Central Round Table as political factor in January 1990 (). Loss of authority by the state In contrast to the central round table, those responsible for the state were mostly present at the local and regional tables from the beginning. A few mayors and district council chairmen even have voting rights. The government representatives of the Modrow government and later the district representatives of the de Maizire government for the dissolution of the Ministry of State Security (MfS) also took part in the meetings of the district tables. Similar to the Central Round Table, it was not until the loss of authority of state institutions and the disintegration of the capacity to act of the councils and popular representations at all levels in January 1990 that the Modrow government actually recognized the activity of round tables in the regions. However, they received little acceptance from the de Maizire government. The Central Round Table met until March 12, 1990 in total 16 times. In this very short period of time, numerous decisions were adopted covering all policy areas ().It had total of 17 working groups with the classic functions of parliamentary committees. A working group dealt with the most pressing issues in the social and health sector. On January 18, 1990, the Round Table decided to separate the two areas. Since then, working group has dealt exclusively with health policy issues, proposals, proposals and resolutions (). The total number of full members and advisors at the Central Round Table was 276, some of whom were doing workload that was running out of reserves (). The greatest achievement, especially by the opposition, was that the state security apparatus was disbanded against the will of the Prime Minister. The table also made sure that the decision to allow free elections was successfully implemented and thus paved the way for free elections (). Although the Central Round Table dealt with the health system in more detail only twice in two sessions, it made most of the relevant resolutions on social and health policy (). For example, at its 8th meeting on January 18, 1990, it made an urgent decision on the situation in the health sector. In it, the round table called on the Council of Ministers to align the share of health and social services in the distribution of the state budget to the standard of comparable developed industrialized countries and to decisively and immediately (to improve) () the material and social conditions of the medical staff (). Many unsolved problems The regional and local round tables met an average of nine to 20 times in the course of their existence and usually met for between eight and twelve hours (). Many of these bodies created special working groups. The round table of the Halle district, for example, founded an ad hoc commission on health care (box), which addressed the deficiencies in medical facilities that had hitherto been visible and perceptible, but were publicly concealed. Thereupon the round table of the district of Halle proposed first possible solutions to the council of the district. The district doctor's office reacted immediately with an immediate action plan. In some places separate tables have been set up for certain topics; In Leipzig, for example, there was separate round table on health care at the district level (). But the time of three to maximum of seven months was short period of time in which many topics and problems could be discussed, but often not resolved quickly or conclusively. The most important tasks of the 15 district tables consisted in the urgently needed accompaniment of the work of the citizens' committees to dissolve the district structures of the Ministry for State Security, in the discussion of district-specific topics and the preparation of the elections.The district round tables also played particularly important role in the transition from the central administration of the SED dictatorship to the federal structure of the united Germany. The round tables of the districts and, above all, the municipalities controlled the state administrations, worked in connection with investigative committees to educate people against human rights, but primarily concerned themselves with local economic and supply issues, with specific problems relating to the environment and the education system on site. In some places, such as in the Monday rounds in Oschatz, the discussions began in view of the precarious medical care with the topic of health care (). Lesson in democracy As neutral observer, Uwe Thaysen registered an advancing professionalization of this work at the time: At (central) rounds Tisch, fascinating seminar on the rule of law and democracy theory was held at the same time. () On the one hand, the participants in the round tables convincingly demonstrated the validity of parliamentary rules (). On the other hand, contrary to all myths, all potential weaknesses of parliamentarianism, such as highly differentiated power struggles, lack of transparency, insufficient accountability of decisions and lobbying, were found in the committee (). This certainly also applies to the local and regional round tables. The "Berlin Central Round Table" met from December 1989 to March 1990 in Niederschönhausen Castle. Photo: dpa
The State Security Service sat at the table in many committees. At the Central Round Table alone, at least 15 participants, including prominent representatives of their groups or parties, had worked for the MfS before autumn 1989. Without doubt, these contacts could no longer be used by the state security service at the time of the round table. The fact that these former connections affected their voting behavior when it came to the issue of the dissolution of the State Security Service should at least be taken into account (). Since the third meeting of the Central Round Table, it was clear that three church representatives would moderate the deliberations permanently and together. Her acceptance as facilitator resulted primarily from her experience in democratic dialogue and her training in building consensus. The moderators did not see themselves as representatives of their own interests, but as mediators responsible for the whole, helpers for conversations and reminders to be peaceful (). However, the Christian will for consensus and balance at the round table has sometimes prevented important or more intensive disputes.This also applied to the round tables of the municipalities, counties and districts led by church representatives. But there were also number of tables at which the conversation leader changed continuously. For example, the church representative in Dessau refused permanent moderation on the grounds that everyone at the table should savor the joys and sorrows of the president of democratic parliament (). The power vacuum is used The central round table did not want parliamentary one or assume government function, but rather be part of public control according to its self-image. He therefore called for the ecological, economic and financial situation to be disclosed right from the start of his work and, furthermore, to be informed in good time before important legal, economic and financial policy decisions and to be included in the decision-making process (). The information from government representatives took this into account, even if only to limited extent. After the demonstrations in front of the Volkskammer on January 11, 1990, the storming of the MfS headquarters in Berlin on January 15, 1990 and the forced declaration by the Modrow government to dissolve the Ministry of State Security not only expanded the functions of the Central Round Table, but also left its self-image position far behind. At this time power vacuum developed, whereupon the Central Round Table on January 28, 1990 approved the formation of government of national responsibility. The parties and political groups of the Round Table that were not previously represented in the government sent representatives to the cabinet who, as ministers without business area, were given seat and vote in the Council of Ministers and are actively involved in the work of the Council of Ministers, especially in the preparation of important, fundamental decisions should (). However, they had no decision-making power over the government apparatus, but they legitimized the Modrow government all the more. Since then, there has been no talk of resolution or dismantling concept on the part of the opposition, but rather of co-responsibility in the government, which was initially rejected. Gorbachev's approval of German reunification in February 1990 also had far-reaching consequences for the Central Round Table: it had lost its political counterpart in the GDR; Appeal addressees of the round table for an increasing number of problems were no longer primarily East Berliners, but more and more Bonn authorities (). The legally enforceable guarantee of social standards resolved on March 5, 1990 and explicitly called the Social Charter was clearly addressed to the government in Bonn (). It also contained section on the right to health care, which included, among other things, the guarantee of equal opportunities for citizens in the use of medical services (). Politics as matter for citizens The Central Round Table was kept open for German reunification quite early on. The only question left is the timing, the associated conditions and expectations (). The latter was demonstrated, for example, by the Social Charter, which called for German unity to be implemented in its positive principles by means of mutual reform process of both German social security systems (). When the Central Round Table met for its last session on March 12, 1990, it had long since lost its legitimacy and thus its political significance. This became clear most recently with the result of the Volkskammer election, from which the Alliance for Germany, which relied on rapid unification, emerged as the clear winner. At the municipal, district and district level, many actors understood the round tables as advisory and control bodies vis-à-vis the people's representatives and their rats. Since January 1990, at the latest, as result of the implementation of central government regulations, the representatives of the new political groups present at the round tables felt compelled to include them in their work. Most of the tables deliberately did not relieve the representatives of the people and councils from their responsibility for coping with everyday life, number of them also deliberately and unlike the Central Round Table, until the end, refused to participate in their non-democratically legitimized power. The round tables became synonymous with fr discursive rather than positional political style. The tables are unique as instruments of system transformation and the control of crisis situations in society as whole (). Above all, they confirm that, after decades of dictatorship, people were able to organize themselves independently, to discuss problems competently and objectively and to look for possible solutions together. Thousands of GDR citizens took part in the round tables Politics had become matter for the public. How this article was quoted: Dtsch Arztebl 2009; 106 (): A 140913 Address of the author Dr. Francesca WeilHannah-Arendt-Institute for Totalitarian Research eV at the Technical University of Dresden01062 DresdenLiterature on the Internet: www./lit2709 1.
Kloth HM: From "folding paper" to free voting . The Democratization of the GDR 1989/90 and the “Election Question”, Berlin 2000; 518.
2.
Thaysen U: The round table or: Where was the people? The GDR's way to democracy. Opladen 1990; 43.
3.
Thaysen U, Kloth M: The round table and the disempowerment of the SED. Resistance on the way to free choice. In: Materials of the Enquete Commission “Coming to terms with the history and consequences of the SED dictatorship in Germany”, Volume VII / 2. Baden-Baden 1995; 1712.
4.
Hahn A: The round table. The people and power - political culture in the last year of the GDR. Berlin 1998; 124.
5.
Herles H, Rose E (Ed.): From Round Table to Parliament. Bonn 1990; S. 76.
6.
Thaysen U: The round table. loc. cit .; 102.
7.
Thaysen U, Kloth M: The round table and the disempowerment of the SED. loc. cit .; 1796.
8.
Hahn A: The round table. loc. cit .; 123.
9.
Herles H, Rose E (ed.): From the round table. loc. cit .; P. 75.
10.
Winter F (Ed.): The moderators of the round tables. Evangelical Church and Politics 1989. Leipzig 1999; 18.
11.
Judge M: The peaceful revolution. loc. cit .; 1437.
13.
Thaysen U: The round table. loc. cit .; 103.
15.
Thaysen U, Kloth M: The round table and the disempowerment of the SED. loc. cit .; 1798.
17.
Ziegler M: Round table and political culture in Europe. In: Society for the Promotion of Comparative State-Church Research e. V. (Ed.): The Square of the Churches at the Round Tables, series of publications by the Institute for Comparative State-Church Research, issue 11. Berlin 2000: 69.
18 .
Radeloff A: A detailed overview. Round table of the city of Dessau. In: Winter F (Ed.): The moderators. loc. cit .; 113.
19.
Ziegler M: It was necessary to act as moderator. In: Winter F (Ed.): The moderators. loc. cit .; 54.
20.
Thaysen U: The round table. loc. cit .; 91.
23.
Herles H, Rose E (Ed.): From the round table. loc. cit .; 243.
24.
Thaysen U (Ed.): The Central Round Table of the GDR. Verbatim protocol and documents, Volume I: Aufbruch. Opladen 2000; XV.
25.
Neubert E: Our Revolution - The History of the Years 1989/90. Munich, Zurich 2008; 337.
26.
White R: The place of the churches at the round tables. In: The place of the churches. loc. cit .; 22nd
4
0
Do you want a website?