Easter crisis

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Easter Crisis ( Danish: Påske crisis ) began in March 1920, which was drawing to a close, and was sparked by the question of the division of Schleswig . On the one hand stood the left-liberal cabinet Zahle II , supported by the Social Democrats , on the other hand King Christian X. and the bourgeois opposition.

The Easter crisis marks an important point in the Danish monarchy and constitutional history.

Background and course

Voting result in Schleswig 1920

The Treaty of Versailles provided for referendums in Schleswig , for which the area had been divided into two zones. The voting led to today's German-Danish border , i. H. a divided Schleswig. The first zone comprised the area of ​​today's Sønderjylland , the second zone today's southern Schleswig . In the first zone there was a large majority for Denmark, in the second zone a large majority for Germany. The Zahle II cabinet accepted this division, but Christian X. did not want to accept it: The king wanted to incorporate Flensburg as the center of Northern Schleswig Denmark, whereas Zahle refrained from doing so in order to avoid future border disputes with Germany. After the king had unsuccessfully asked Zahle to call for new elections - which should result in an annex-friendly majority in the Danish parliament - he called on the prime minister to resign and, after his refusal, dismissed him.

Since 1909, minority cabinets have ruled the Danish kingdom, which is why the parliamentary principle introduced in 1901 in Denmark could not be consolidated during this time. King Christian X., who had initially rejected parliamentarianism, nevertheless formally relied on this principle when he called on the Zahle II cabinet to resign on March 29, 1920. The cabinet's refusal was followed by the king's dismissal, even though parliament had not previously given a vote of no confidence due to the parliamentary Easter holidays . Instead of the left-liberal Zahle cabinet, the king appointed a conservative interim government. After the threat of the Social Democrats and Communists to call for a general strike and proclaim the republic, the king resigned his position and set up a compromise government, "in view of the fate of foreign rulers". The right-wing liberal Venstre emerged as the strongest force from the subsequent elections , followed by the Social Democrats, but the question of annexing Central Schleswig was definitely off the table. The Easter crisis could thus be resolved.

Impact and Evaluation

The most important consequence of the Easter crisis was that the parliamentary monarchy in Denmark finally prevailed. Since then, the role of the Danish king, as in the other European hereditary monarchies, “has been reduced to the function of advising, warning and encouraging”.

In the Easter crisis, according to Werner Kaltefleiter , Christian X sought “to use the opportunities that arose from the fragmentation of the party system in order to efficiently maintain his constitutional influence on the formation of a government.” The parties had “[t] spit their opposites "Immediately found together," when the task was to secure the restriction of monarchical power. "

Danish diplomat Bo Lidegaard writes in A Short History of Denmark in the 20th Century that the Easter Crisis produced three winners, three losers, and one survivor. The Zahle cabinet won on the border issue, but had to surrender power to Venstre, which won the Folketing elections - with the right-wing liberal Neergaard II government on the mirror side . The Social Democrats would have lost their influence over the government, but gained respect as the ultimate kingmaker. The king and the monarchy survived the crisis, which was not a matter of course for the European democracies of the time.

literature

Web links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ See Lange.
  2. ↑ See Baltzersen 2009.
  3. ↑ See Kaltefleiter 1970, p. 91 f .; Bohn 2001, p. 109.
  4. ↑ Lange 2005.
  5. ↑ Kaltefleiter 1970, p. 92 f.
  6. ↑ Kaltefleiter 1970, p. 93.
  7. ↑ Lidegaard 2009, p. 93.