Senate Momper

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Senate Momper
Senate of Berlin
Walter Momper
ruling mayor Walter Momper
choice 1989
Legislative period 11.
education March 16, 1989
The End January 24, 1991
Duration 1 year and 314 days
predecessor Senate Diepgen II
successor Senate Diepgen III
composition
Party (s) SPD and AL
minister 14th
representation
Berlin House of Representatives
72/138
Opposition leader Eberhard Diepgen ( CDU )
Walter Momper and Tino Schwierzina (May 6, 1990)

The Senate Momper officiated from March 16, 1989 to January 24, 1991, initially as the government of West Berlin and, after German reunification, on October 3, 1990 together with the East Berlin magistrate Schwierzina as the government of the new state of Berlin . After the surprising victory in the election for the House of Representatives on January 29, 1989 , the red-green coalition between the Berlin Social Democrats (SPD) and the Alternative List for Democracy and Environmental Protection (AL) replaced the previous CDU / FDP government under Eberhard Diepgen . Mayor was Walter Momper ( SPD ). The SPD / AL alliance was the second red-green state government in Germany after the Börner III cabinet in Hesse (1985 to 1987). The fall of the Berlin Wall marked a turning point both for Berlin and in the twenty-month term of office of the Senate . From the unification of Germany and Berlin, the Momper Senate held office for more than three months together with the Schwierzina magistrate as the entire Berlin government. After ongoing conflicts, the AL got out of the coalition on November 15, 1990, two weeks before the planned new elections for the House of Representatives . The occasion was an evacuation of occupied houses initiated by Interior Senator Erich Pätzold (SPD) . In the first general Berlin election to the House of Representatives on December 2, 1990 , both the SPD and the AL suffered heavy losses.

requirements

The CDU / FDP Senate under Eberhard Diepgen

Eberhard Diepgen (1989)

In the former SPD stronghold of West Berlin, the CDU has had the strongest parliamentary group in the House of Representatives since 1975 and the governing mayor since 1981. The Social Democrats, who achieved their second-best result in Berlin's post-war history with 61.9 percent in the 1963 election, had suffered losses in almost every poll since that election. After Richard von Weizsäcker was elected Federal President in 1984, Eberhard Diepgen ruled a CDU / FDP Senate . Diepgen, who was seen as a not very charismatic technocrat and puller , was clearly confirmed in the elections for the Berlin House of Representatives on March 10, 1985 . In the House of Representatives, the CDU was represented with 69 seats, the SPD received 48, the Alternative List 15 and the FDP 12 seats.

The exposure of the Antes scandal dragged on for the entire 10th legislative period. Until the change of government in 1981, it was the SPD that got stuck in the so-called “red swamp” or “Berlin felt” from the Garski affair to the Kreisel affair and others. However, even Richard von Weizsäcker could not change the network of relationships between the public and private sectors in the island city, who in his government statement had strongly criticized the established system of taking advantage and patronage of office as the "spoil politics of the parties". On the contrary, the system of corruption under the CDU government still solidified. The personal, extremely close network of a group of high-ranking CDU politicians, on which Diepgen's position was based, now turned out to be part of this system. CDU Building Senator Klaus Franke and FDP Environment Senator Horst Vetter had to take off their hats, and Interior Senator Heinrich Lummer also had to give up his office because of an earlier collaboration with the NPD . The CDU trivialized the scandal and saw itself in the role of a victim of a “dirt and trash campaign”.

Election campaign

Despite all the scandals, Diepgen was relatively popular in Berlin, even if he was considered rather pale and far from enjoying the same admiration as von Weizsäcker, Willy Brandt or Ernst Reuter . Various surveys showed that between the top candidates Eberhard Diepgen and Walter Momper, around 60 percent of Berliners would have chosen Diepgen if they had been able to vote for the governing mayor directly. It benefited from a dense series of major events on the occasion of the 750th anniversary celebration in 1987 and when West Berlin was the European City of Culture in 1988 , which seemed to outshine the political problems of Berlin and the affairs of the CDU. The CDU relied entirely on the mayor's bonus . Most of the election posters showed a portrait of the governing mayor with the campaign slogan “He needs Berlin”, later “He wants Berlin”.

The SPD, on the other hand, avoided personalizing the election and did not particularly highlight its top candidate Walter Momper, leader of the SPD parliamentary group since March 1985 and party chairman since June 1986, in the election campaign. It concentrated on traditionally social democratic areas of politics. From 1987 campaigns began to fix rent , to design the land use plan , to promote equality for women and to oppose the health policy of the CDU / FDP coalition in Bonn.

The election campaign became more and more empty of content as election day approached. The slogans on the election posters seemed interchangeable and sometimes incomprehensible: "Happy new Berlin" (CDU), "Berlin is freedom" (SPD) or "A happy 1993" (FDP). Only the AL aggressively took up issues that were important to the population, but trusted the alternative milieu and shied away from costly advertising measures. Shortly before the election, the right-wing extremist party Die Republikaner, which was emerging for the first time, polarized and polemicized with xenophobic and authoritarian TV spots and an event that was dominated by Federal Chairman Franz Schönhuber and accompanied by violent counter-demonstrations.

The attitude of the SPD and AL to a red-green coalition before the election

Since the loss of reputation of the CDU / FDP federal government under Helmut Kohl was apparently unstoppable in the Federal Republic , a change in mood was emerging and a red-green majority in the federal election in December 1990 seemed possible, an SPD / AL government in Berlin would have as a test case for a red-green federal government can serve. Because before the election it seemed almost inconceivable that the SPD and the Alternative List would be able to catch up about twelve percentage points behind the CDU / FDP government, the AL and even more so the Social Democrats went into the election campaign without a possible joint coalition to have seriously checked.

Given the forecast outcome of the election, it was easy for the SPD to rule out an alliance with the AL and so reassure frightened voters. The AL, on the other hand, had resolved to declare its willingness to cooperate with the Social Democrats after rejecting a possible coalition or even just a toleration in the run-up to the 1985 election to the House of Representatives . The special island location of West Berlin had led the AL to take a special approach to the Federal Greens. So it was particularly strongly located in the left - alternative spectrum of the city, classic environmentalists , however, had not played a special role. In addition, the AL was formally independent of the federal party, even if it took on the role of a regional association. The disputes between the Realos , who aimed to participate in government, and the Fundis , which focused on fundamental opposition and which dominated and threatened to split the federal party in the 1980s, never played such an important role in the AL. Instead, the AL was considered to be relatively homogeneous, at the same time decidedly left-wing regional association, which gave grassroots democratic decision-making processes a particularly high priority.

Polls before the election

date CDU SPD AL FDP REP
01/25/1989 41% 36% 11% 7%
approx. 01/25/1989 40% 36% 10% 8th % 3%
01/10/1989 43% 34% 11% 9%
approx. 12/28/1988 43% 38% 10% 6%

Despite the distress of the Berlin CDU due to the Antes scandal, surveys by the CDU / FDP coalition forecast a clear majority just three weeks before election day. Only a few days before the election began a head-to-head race between the political camps , but still with a black and yellow majority and the CDU clearly ahead of the SPD.

According to an Infas survey on behalf of the SFB magazine Kontraste , the situation on the job market was the most important issue for 24 percent of those surveyed, environmental protection for 23 percent and housing construction for 20 percent. Two weeks earlier, a survey commissioned by Stern had shown that rents and housing shortages were the top priority, followed by foreigners and university overcrowding.

Election to the House of Representatives on January 29, 1989

Second
votes 		Mandates
CDU 37.7 55
SPD 37.3 55
AL 11.8 17th
REP 7.5 11
FDP 3.9 -

The election to the House of Representatives on January 29, 1989 caused surprises in several respects: The CDU, whose victory had been considered certain, suffered a heavy defeat and collapsed 8.7 percentage points with 37.7 percent of the vote. The SPD, on the other hand, increased by 4.9 percentage points to 37.3 percent and, with 55 parliamentary seats, achieved as many mandates as the CDU. Together with the alternative list, which has also been strengthened (11.8 percent, +1.2 percentage points), this resulted in a clear majority for red-green, as the FDP - also surprisingly - the previous coalition partner of the CDU with 3.9 percent (−4 , 6 percentage points) clearly missed re-entry into the House of Representatives. The third result, which had not been predicted in any way and which was noted with horror, was the entry of the Republicans, who immediately received 7.5 percent of the vote and thus eleven seats.

Coalition formation

Coalition negotiations

The Rathaus Schöneberg , until 1991 seat of the mayor and the Senate and the House of Representatives until 1993

On the evening of the election, Walter Momper declined a renewed offer of the alternative list to cooperate with the remark that it was "not capable of governing". So a recorded directly after the election grand coalition from. On the other hand, the SPD and the AL had achieved a clear majority with strong gains, while the previously ruling coalition had been clearly voted out. An SPD / CDU alliance as the only alternative to the one with the AL therefore had no majority at the SPD base, especially since surveys said that only 17.2 percent of Berliners wanted such a government, while 23.9 percent were for Red Pronounced green.

After a few days, informal talks took place on the part of the SPD, Walter Momper, the Kreuzberg district mayor Gerd Wartenberg and the former state chairman Jürgen Egert, as well as Bernd Köppl , Harald Wolf and Renate Künast for the alternative list . Hans-Christian Ströbele , one of the most prominent AL members, exponent of the left wing of the party and spokesman for the federal party in 1990/91, was only present at a few meetings. The AL Delegate Council criticized this type of discussion, as it contradicted its basic democratic principle, but finally approved the preliminary negotiations. A general assembly of members, the highest decision-making body of the party, voted on February 11, 1989 with over 1000 attendees with a majority of 99.8 percent in favor of official coalition negotiations. The AL entered the coalition negotiations that began on February 13, 1989 without any discernible strategy or preparation. The only basis for negotiations was the entire AL program, which was tailored to an opposition faction and made up of a collection of individual claims.

Walter Momper conducted coalition talks with Eberhard Diepgen parallel to the negotiations with AL. Addressing the AL, he formulated the recognition of the state's monopoly of force, the rights and presence of the Allies in Berlin and Berlin's ties to the federal government , which he made a precondition for a coalition, as “touchstones” . It was not easy for the AL to approve, since the issues involved were controversial within the party. With the approval, Momper succeeded on the one hand in disciplining the AL from the outset and on the other hand being able to justify his own change of course.

The coalition agreement was in place at the beginning of March 1989. The AL was able to prevail in the coalition agreement, especially in the area of ​​ecological urban renewal, which became a key concept of the coalition. It turned out to be problematic that the 30 or so most controversial questions were included in the coalition agreement as “review orders”, so important points of dissent were postponed unresolved.

The result of the negotiations was approved at a general meeting of members of the AL on March 11th and 12th, 1989 with an astonishingly clear majority of 80 percent of the votes and in an almost euphoric mood. There was no chance of motions to tolerate an SPD minority government instead of entering into a coalition (Harald Wolf and Birgit Arkenstette from the Left Forum had introduced this proposal as a minority vote of the negotiating commission) or to initiate renegotiations with the SPD (this motion was brought in by Dieter Kunzelmann and others). Also on March 12, a special party congress of the SPD approved a coalition with the AL.

Members of the Senate

Anne Klein, one of eight women in the Senate

Only after the substantive negotiations had been fully completed did those about the sections of the departments begin . The AL claimed the environmental department and received it as the Senate Office for Urban Development and Environmental Protection. The women's department was also important to the alternative list. In return, she decided not to provide a mayor, i.e. a deputy head of government. Ingrid Stahmer, Senator for Health and Social Affairs, took over this function from the SPD. The AL received the third senate office for education, vocational training and sport. Thus, all the classic departments went to the Social Democrats. The AL had not made any claims in this regard, as it “simply did not trust itself”, says Christian Ströbele. Hilde Schramm became Vice President of the House of Representatives, the AL also provided four state secretaries and, in Ingvield Kiehle, a deputy Senate press spokeswoman.

With the exception of the former Health Senator Erich Pätzold , who now became Senator for the Interior, and the new Senator for Economic Affairs Peter Mitzscherling , Senate Director (State Secretary) for Labor from 1974 to 1980, the SPD refrained from considering former Senate members. The new head of the Senate Chancellery , Dieter Schröder , had experience as a Senate Councilor and was most recently professor of international law. The mayor and senator for health and social affairs Ingrid Stahmer was previously a city ​​councilor , the senator for justice, Jutta Limbach , was a law professor at the Free University . Finance Senator was Norbert Meisner , previously head of studies at the youth welfare organization and representative of the left wing of the party, building senator Wolfgang Nagel was until then the spokesman for building policy for the SPD parliamentary group and editor at the German Institute for Urban Studies . The journalist Anke Martiny-Glotz moved from the SPD's Bonn party executive to Berlin as the Senator for Culture , while the Social Scientist and Vice President of the Free University Barbara Riedmüller-Seel became the Senator for Science . Horst Wagner , Berlin's IG Metall chairman from the right wing of the SPD, took over the Senate Office for Labor, Transport and Enterprises, and Heide Pfarr , a former law professor and vice-president of the University of Hamburg , became Senator for Federal Affairs . So most of the Senate members had little administrative experience.

At the general meeting of members of the AL, the actual personnel debate only began after the coalition agreement had been approved. Heidi Bischoff-Pflanz , leader of the parliamentary group and recognized figure of integration on the left, was in discussion for the office of Senator for Women, Youth and Family, but she refused. Finally, an agreement was reached on three largely unknown specialist politicians, none of whom were parliamentary groups or even just AL members and should therefore not bring any internal party conflicts into government work. Michaele Schreyer , an economist, employee of the Green parliamentary group and the only female senator who was a member of the (West German) Greens, took over the important cross-departmental department for urban development and environmental protection . The women's department was occupied by the lawyer and former research assistant of Waltraud Schoppe in the Bundestag, Anne Klein , who prevailed in a tough argument against the AL women's politician Helga Hentschel . The Berlin deputy chairwoman of the GEW, Sybille Volkholz , became senator for education, vocational training and sport . Both were non-party. The left-wing coalition skeptic Harald Wolf was entrusted as a member of the executive committee with the task of strengthening coordination between the party, parliamentary group and senators.

With eight female and five female senators as well as the governing mayor, the Senate Momper was the first German state government with a female majority. The senators of both parties met before each senate meeting at Heide Pfarr's for a so-called "witch's breakfast".

The House of Representatives elected the new Senate on March 16, 1989. As a special feature of Berlin, each Senator had to be elected individually by the House of Representatives.

List of Senators and State Secretaries

Department senator Political party State Secretaries
ruling mayor Walter Momper SPD Dieter Schröder ( Head of the Senate Chancellery , SPD)
Mayoress Ingrid Stahmer SPD
Senator for Health and Social Affairs Ingrid Stahmer SPD Armin Tschoepe ,
Ursula Kleinert
Senator for Justice Jutta Limbach SPD Wolfgang Schomburg
Senator for Schools, Vocational Education and Sports Sybille Volkholz independent for AL Hans-Jürgen Kuhn (AL),
Jürgen Dittberner
Senator for Science and Research Barbara Riedmüller-Seel SPD Hans Kremendahl (SPD)
Senator for Labor, Transport and Enterprises Horst Wagner SPD Gerhard Schneider
Senator for Finance Norbert Meisner SPD
Senator for Construction and Housing Wolfgang Nagel SPD Hans Görler (SPD)
Senator for Economics Peter Mitzscherling SPD Jörg Rommerskirchen (SPD)
Senator for the Interior Erich Pätzold SPD Detlef Borrmann
Senator for Urban Development and Environmental Protection Michaele Schreyer The Greens for AL Klaus-Martin Groth (independent for AL)
Senator for Federal Affairs Heath parish SPD
Senator for Cultural Affairs Anke Martiny SPD Hanns Kirchner
Senator for Women, Youth and Family Anne Klein independent for AL Helga Hentschel (AL),
Gerd Harms (AL)

Public reactions

Hans-Christian Ströbele (1987)

Since the alternative list insisted on the greatest possible transparency from the start, the public was always well informed about the status of the coalition negotiations. During the coalition negotiations, demands based on individual interests were brought to the AL in large numbers by initiatives and institutions from the left-alternative milieu. There was no lack of advice from West Germany either. Among other things, Jutta Ditfurth , an exponent of the Fundis and federal party spokeswoman for the Greens until December 1988, who relied on opposition work , refused to participate in government. On the other hand, the Realo Otto Schily , who switched to the Social Democrats in November 1989, recommended that the SPD “remain very tough” on the question of touch stones. Schily tried, like the absolutely willing coalition spectrum within the AL around the group "Green Panthers on the Go", to use the opportunity to reform the party in their favor. After Ströbele's speech at the Federal Assembly of the Greens in Duisburg in March 1990, in which he described a red-green coalition in Berlin as a "chance of the century", the delegates supported the Berlin coalition course with a large majority.

The CDU fought the red-green coalition vehemently in advance. Diepgen referred to the emerging government alliance as the "coalition of madness". In the event that the stimulating figure Christian Ströbele should become Justice Senator, he announced a referendum against the Senate. A union-related “Initiative Do not endanger the future of Berlin” organized a demonstration on Kurfürstendamm against the planned “Coalition of Perdition”, in which around 1000 demonstrators took part. The Berlin Union received support from the federal party. So their general secretary Heiner Geißler conjured up a gloomy scenario of a left-wing council system and unaffordable social benefits. The member of the Bundestag Eduard Lintner insinuated that there was "love-making in the direction of the GDR" and that Berlin "threatens to become ungovernable and will ultimately be handed over to violent demonstrations". Rudolf Seiters criticized "the voters were deceived, lied to and cheated" because Momper had always ruled out a coalition with the AL before the election. In a CDU paper with the title “SPD: betrayal of the voter” it was said polemically about Hilde Schramm : “As the daughter of Hitler's armaments minister Speer, she deals with the past in the AL.” In a recent hour in the Bundestag , the FDP chairman saw Otto Graf Lambsdorff the city on the "way to independent political unity Berlin", thus following the ideas of the GDR.

The city's dominant Springer press ( BZ , Bild , Die Welt , Berliner Morgenpost ) has always stood firmly on the side of the CDU. However, in view of the harsh, sometimes irrational criticism of a possible red-green Senate, which had already been expressed during the coalition negotiations, the Morgenpost spoke of low blows for the CDU. Conservative supraregional media such as the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung predicted an economic decline in Berlin in the event of a red-green government being formed before the negotiations began. The liberal-critical, pad weak Tagesspiegel was the Senate Momper against benevolent. During the coalition negotiations, the small taz built up a euphoric mood of optimism in the left-alternative milieu about the possibility of a red-green coalition.

Franz Schoser , general manager of the German Industry and Trade Conference , advised an investment freeze, as Berlin might be on the way to a completely different economic system. The Berlin Chamber of Commerce and Industry spoke of a “whole bundle of dirigistic measures” in the coalition agreement, but without being able to name them more precisely. On the other hand, its president described Heiner Geissler's assertion that a red-green Senate would ruin the economy as "public opinion".

The work of the red-green Senate until November 1990

The first months of the coalition

Until the summer of 1989, the cooperation between the SPD and AL was characterized by a common will to resolve the conflict. Contrary to the opposition's expectations that there was no majority for Red-Green and that voters felt cheated, polls in May 1989 showed that both the SPD and the AL would continue to win in a new election, the CDU and Republicans compared to the January election would lose.

The first test assignment that led to a conflict between the SPD and AL was the dispute about the continuation of the expansion of the Rudolf-Virchow hospital while simultaneously giving up the Charlottenburg University Hospital, a project of the previous CDU / FDP Senate that the AL wanted to reverse . Another point of contention was the construction of a power line, also initiated by the Diepgen Senate, to connect Berlin to the West German power grid. Since the general assembly of the AL gave the senators an imperative mandate to reject the project and not to discuss any compromises, the coalition threatened to break for the first time. The base also strictly rejected the establishment of a new border crossing on Schichaustraße for ecological reasons. In all three cases, the senators and the parliamentary group disregarded the vote of the base in order to continue the coalition without this having been sanctioned by the party. Thus, future orders of the general assembly took on the character of verbally radical empty formulas that could no longer develop a threatening effect against the SPD. On the other hand, after initial concerns, the Social Democrats approved a bill introduced by the AL to introduce a municipal right to vote for foreigners .

As early as March 1989, in its new role as the ruling party, the Alternative List came into conflict with the left-wing alternative milieu, more precisely with the autonomous scene, when several houses in Kreuzberg were occupied and cleared with the consent of the AL senators. The AL acted in a similar way when, on May 1, 1989 , violent street battles broke out in Kreuzberg, despite the police's de-escalation strategy .

The Senate caused violent protests with ecologically justified, extremely unpopular measures. Tempo 100 was introduced on an approximately six-kilometer section of the AVUS , which until then was the only motorway route without speed limit in Berlin . The Berliners felt this as a profound interference in their attitude towards life, as they had previously perceived it as a symbol of freedom to be able to accelerate after the transit route through the GDR behind the Dreilinden border crossing . The ADAC mobilized counter-demonstrations in the evening for a long time. The blocking of the Grunewald located Havelchaussee for private vehicle traffic, the introduction of 30 kph zones in residential areas and the widespread establishment of bus lanes were accompanied by protests. The bus lanes on Kurfürstendamm in particular were fiercely fought by the CDU, among others. The introduction of an environmental card for the Berlin transport company did not trigger any protests .

From the late summer of 1989, a phase of mutual distrust between the SPD and AL began. A turning point in the coalition mood marked the fruitless ten-week strike by educators of day care that a collective agreement had demanded and improved working conditions. In this longest strike in post-war Berlin history, the AL stood on the side of the educators, while the SPD refused to negotiate with the strikers. In light of the growing tension in the Senate, the weekly meetings of the political groups played an increasingly important role. While the coalition committee soon failed, this switching point became the actual foundation of the cooperation from autumn 1989.

Relations with the GDR before November 9, 1989

It was characteristic of the relationship of the Alternative List to the GDR and the division of Germany that the Vice-President of the House of Representatives, Hilde Schramm, refused on May 25, 1989 to utter the ritual warning words with which the House of Representatives had been opened since 1955: “I express our indomitable will that Germany and its capital Berlin must be united in peace and freedom. ”Even in broad circles of the SPD, talk of reunification has long been considered a lie of life. While some leading green of the federal party, such as Petra Kelly , Gert Bastian , Lukas Beckmann , Wilhelm Knabe or Milan Horáček , sometimes even Antje Vollmer , particularly close contact and the Greens total among all West German parties, the most intense relations with the opposition circles in the GDR were wont , especially the influential Kreuzberg district association of the AL was extremely SED-friendly. This went so far that Dirk Schneider , from Kreuzberg , a member of the Bundestag from 1983 to 1985, was considered a "permanent representative of the SED in the green parliamentary group" among green members of the Bundestag. After the fall of the Wall, Schneider, who worked specifically against the opposition in the GDR, and the former Kreuzberg district mayor candidate, Klaus Croissant , were exposed as employees of the Ministry for State Security . Regardless of the position towards the opposition and the assessment of human rights in the GDR, the acceptance of the German dual statehood by the Greens and AL was hardly controversial.

On June 19, 1989, Walter Momper met Erich Honecker in East Berlin . This meeting, for which lengthy negotiations on diplomatic and protocol issues were necessary, was supposed to be the acid test of the German and Berlin policy of the red-green coalition. The Berlin SPD, which previously had constant contact with the SED , made radical proposals at this meeting. So she offered to integrate West Berlin more closely into the GDR economy and at the same time to abolish the special subsidies of the federal government. In addition, negotiator Harry Ristock went so far as to recognize the wall as an “opportunity” for West Berlin to “live in peace”. Since he emphasized his ties to the Federal Republic despite all his concessions, the SED reacted cautiously. Honecker rejected the proposal of a joint application by East and West Berlin for the Olympic Games with reference to an application from Leipzig. However, Momper achieved relief for travel by West Berliners to East Berlin and the surrounding area. In view of the rapid pace of development over the next few months, the importance of this meeting dwindled to an inconsequential side note in history.

Even before the fall of the wall, clear changes were noticeable in Berlin. In Poland had by Solidarity , the conditions changed, and creates new freedoms. Since Berlin was not only close by, but visitors from Eastern Europe could stay in the city for 30 days without a visa according to an order from the Allied Command , Poles poured into West Berlin en masse. Most noticeable were the changes caused by the “Poland Market” not far from Potsdamer Platz and the many import-export shops on Kantstrasse near the Zoo train station . Added to this was the steadily growing number of emigrants from the GDR, to whom West Berlin often seemed more familiar than West Germany and who therefore moved here in large numbers. 37,000 newcomers within a year and at last 500 in one day began to push the city to the limits of its absorption capacity. The AL wanted to treat the emigrants from the GDR like asylum seekers from other countries, which was out of the question for Momper.

Despite all the changes, the Senate stuck to its political line of always negotiating with the SED and scarcely taking notice of the opposition in the GDR. This rigid stance was guided by the fear that West Berlin would run into serious problems if there were unrest in the GDR and a possible intervention by the Soviet Union . The policy, which was solely related to the official state organs, led, for example, to AL Environment Senator Schreyer signing a contract on the disposal of West Berlin hazardous waste at a landfill in Voretzin , Brandenburg , although the latter made mockery of all environmental guidelines and environmental groups in the GDR vigorously protested. Momper himself viewed the founding of the Social Democratic Party in the GDR (SDP) on October 7, 1989 as an ineffective disruptive element.

On October 29th, Günter Schabowski , spokesman for the Central Committee of the SED , inaugurated Walter Momper in plans for generous travel arrangements. Since Momper knew that this would mean hundreds of thousands of visitors, he set up a project group “Preparing for increased visitor and travel traffic from East Berlin and the GDR”. At lunchtime on the day the Berlin Wall opened, Momper learned that the SED Central Committee would adopt new travel regulations that day and put the Berlin public transport company on alert. As surprising as the timing and manner of the opening of the Wall on November 9, 1989, the Senate did not find it completely unprepared.

The fall of the wall as a turning point

The fall of the berlin wall

The chairman of the GDR Council of Ministers, Hans Modrow , Federal Chancellor Helmut Kohl and Walter Momper during the opening of the Brandenburg Gate on December 22, 1989

With the opening of the Wall on November 9, 1989, local and world politics coincided for the last time, as under Ernst Reuter during the Berlin blockade or under Willy Brandt during the construction of the Wall, the governing mayor was also a foreign politician before Berlin became a normal federal state. On the day after the fall of the Berlin Wall, Parliament was unable to agree on a joint resolution because the AL strictly insisted on the German dual state and the term reunification should not appear in the text, as this was a "reactionary project". When Momper, Diepgen and the President of Parliament Jürgen Wohlrabe stepped onto the balcony of the Schöneberg Town Hall together with Bonn guests of honor Helmut Kohl , Hans-Dietrich Genscher and Willy Brandt , the speech of the Chancellor and the dissonant singing of the Deutschlandlied were lost in a whistle concert of the assembled crowd .

The opening of the Wall made Walter Momper known in Germany and even around the world as the "man with the red scarf", who is constantly on television, and increased his popularity considerably. He was traded as a possible future SPD chairman and candidate for chancellor . If Momper confirmed the two-state status immediately after the fall of the Berlin Wall, then, given the experiences on site and the tumultuous events, he quickly turned to a reunification course. With that he came into contradiction to the federal party, because the chancellor candidate Oskar Lafontaine rejected the rapid unification of the two German states. Since Lafontaine increasingly sidelined the SPD with this stance, in May 1990 the media even discussed a change of the top candidate in the current election campaign from Lafontaine to Momper.

Joint work with the East Berlin magistrate

The Red Town Hall, seat of the East Berlin magistrate

The changed situation quickly confronted Berlin with completely new problems, such as the greatly increased volume of traffic. On the weekend after the fall of the Berlin Wall alone, around two million people streamed into West Berlin, S-Bahn and U-Bahn overflowed, and stations had to be closed. The establishment of numerous new border crossings put additional strain on the traffic routes. To deal with these problems, a joint regional committee was set up to coordinate West and East Berlin. But German reunification and with it the unification of Berlin still seemed a long way off. So Diepgen was aiming for 1995. But the development accelerated noticeably above all due to the urge for a rapid currency union and the unchecked flow of emigrants to the West.

The first free local election on May 6, 1990 brought the SPD 34.0 percent of the vote in East Berlin , while the CDU only 17.7 percent. Due to the strong results of the SED successor party, the PDS (30.0 percent), which were considered unable to form a coalition, a grand coalition was formed there, the Schwierzina magistrate . As in the first free Volkskammer election on March 18, 1990 with the surprisingly clear victory of the CDU and later in the Bundestag election on December 2, 1990, the citizens' movement no longer played a major role, Alliance 90 received 9.9 percent of the vote, the Greens List 2.7 percent. The model of a third way between capitalism and socialism favored by the citizens' movement in a continuing GDR evidently found no approval among the voters.

Demonstration of the AL for reunification in front of the Brandenburg Gate: Have fun with the reunification ! Just watch out!

On June 12, 1990, under the direction of Walter Momper and Tino Schwierzina, the first joint meeting of the Senate and Magistrate ("Magi-Senate") took place in the Red City Hall. After that, the meetings took place alternately in the Rotes Rathaus and in the West Berlin Rathaus Schöneberg , in the end only there because of the better technical conditions. The two presiding mayors as well as the 13 senators and city councilors each faced each other on an equal footing. Senate and magistrate bills were submitted jointly by the responsible senator and the city council before the resolution was passed. The subordinate administration had to be standardized and the different developments since 1948 had to be adapted to one another. A magistrate's office was set up in the magistrate based on the already existing senate chancellery. Coordinated structures should also promote the final unification of the city administration. According to the unification treaty between the GDR and the Federal Republic of Germany, the Senate and Magistrate under Tino Schwierzina (SPD) officially ruled as a dual government from the day of reunification on October 3, 1990 until the election of a joint city government. In view of the rapid development after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the unification of Berlin into one city, a new election for the House of Representatives was scheduled for the day of the Bundestag election, December 2, 1990.

It became problematic for the Senate when, at the beginning of 1990, both Finance Minister Theo Waigel and the financial policy spokeswoman for the SPD in the Bundestag, Ingrid Matthäus-Maier , questioned the Berlin funding, which made up half of the West Berlin budget, including the Berlin allowance . because with the wall its foundation had also ceased to exist. Although, according to Walter Momper, Helmut Kohl promised not to touch the Berlin funding, the federal cabinet decided in early 1991 to gradually reduce it by 1994.

The end of the coalition

The coalition crisis escalated

Renate Künast (far right, January 17, 1990)

The new problems caused by the fall of the wall intensified the crisis of the red-green alliance considerably. Berlin had lost the role of an “urban biotope” overnight and had moved from the outermost periphery to the focus of German politics and the most diverse interests. The foundations of the reform-oriented “conflict alliance” between the SPD and AL had changed radically, the previous policy could not be continued without interruption, so that the number of critics of the coalition within and outside the parties grew steadily. Walter Momper himself was, as he later confessed, secretly of the conviction that the coalition with the AL was too unstable for the tasks at hand, but saw no alternative in a grand coalition. Decisions were increasingly made in a small group of people around Walter Momper. Above all, Germany and unification policy attracted the Senate Chancellery and almost closed the AL, which, however, also showed little interest in this field of politics. This style of leadership was also criticized within the SPD.

When the Alternative List spoke out against the sale of a large area on Potsdamer Platz to Daimler-Benz , this was one of the rare cases in which it received broad approval in the press, among urban planners and in parts of the SPD. Walter Momper and Senator for Construction Wolfgang Nagel had continued the negotiations that had already begun before the fall of the Berlin Wall, without addressing the situation that had changed in the meantime, agreed a low sales price and informed neither their parliamentary group nor the coalition partner adequately. Therefore, Senator for Urban Development Schreyer refused the necessary countersignature and put through an urban development competition to design the area. When it was time to sign the purchase agreement in the House of Representatives, the SPD passed it with the votes of the CDU and against the AL, although the coalition agreement expressly forbade the parliamentary groups to vote with changing majorities. Also in the summer of 1990, Michaele Schreyer fought against the building permit for a nuclear test reactor from the Hahn-Meitner Institute . A decision on this controversial issue, which was another crucial test for the coalition, was never reached.

Success had won the AL by a class action in nature conservation, environmental impact assessment for public projects, an Energy Conservation Act , integration classes for disabled and non-disabled children, the establishment of a control center for same-sex lifestyles and a national anti-discrimination law introduced. However, all of the inspection orders of the coalition agreement had been decided against the ideas of the AL. In March 1990, the group leader of the AL, Heidi Bischoff-Pflanz , resigned out of disappointment at the increasing number of failures within the government alliance. Renate Künast was elected her successor , whose close cooperation with the SPD parliamentary group leader Ditmar Staffelt kept the coalition alive. In June 1990 the break of the coalition was on the agenda of the general assembly of the AL, but a two-thirds majority opted for an unconditional continuation. A wave of party withdrawals and internal party distancing from the coalition reached its peak in autumn 1990, when Harald Wolf, Birgit Arkenstette and Astrid Geese, among others, left the party in September and other activists around Heidi Bischoff-Pflanz in November.

Exit of the AL from the coalition

Occupied houses on Mainzer Straße in 1990

On November 14, 1990, Interior Senator Erich Pätzold (SPD) had 13 houses on Mainzer Strasse in Friedrichshain that had been occupied since April 1990 evacuated with one of the most massive police operations in Berlin in the post-war period . There was fierce street battles. Pätzold had neither informed the AL about the eviction in advance nor allowed it to mediate during the action.

As early as November 15, a good two weeks before the new election, which had already been scheduled, the AL terminated the coalition. The three senators resigned on November 19, although they did not agree with the parliamentary group and the AL board. Heide Pfarr took over the Senate Office for Education, Vocational Training and Sport from Sybille Volkholz, Norbert Meisner took over the Senate Office for Urban Development and Environmental Protection from Michaele Schreyer and Ingrid Stahmer took over the Senate Office for Women, Youth and Family from Anne Klein. A motion of no confidence planned by the parliamentary group and the executive committee of the AL against Momper was not tabled due to pressure from the party base.

The break in the coalition came suddenly and for many observers suddenly, but it was only the end of the increasingly conflict-ridden government cooperation. In retrospect, Harald Wolf described it as a problem for the AL that there was not a single, particularly serious point of dispute between the governing parties, such as the nuclear policy in Hesse, but numerous smaller disputes, so that the exit from the government was less convincing to convey to the public. The decision to break the coalition was made easier by the knowledge that new elections would take place two weeks later anyway. The House of Representatives had already stopped its work for this legislative period. The termination of the cooperation had obviously tactical reasons: The Alternative List recommended itself to its dissatisfied regular voters with the break, for the same reason, in this case the consideration of middle-class constituencies, it suited the SPD.

Election to the House of Representatives on December 2, 1990

Second
votes 		West
Berlin 		East
Berlin 		Mandates
CDU 40.4 49.0 25.0 101
SPD 30.4 29.5 32.1 76
PDS 9.2 1.1 23.6 23
FDP 7.1 7.9 5.6 18th
AL 5.0 6.9 1.7 12
B'90 4.4 1.3 9.8 11
REP 3.1 3.7 1.9 -

With the election to the House of Representatives on December 2, 1990 , democratic elections were held in all of Berlin for the first time since 1946. As a special feature, it was held on the same day as the federal election , in which the West Berlin population was able to take part for the first time. According to the four-power agreement , only the House of Representatives had been able to delegate so-called Berlin MPs who were not entitled to vote to the Bundestag. Interest in the election to the House of Representatives was higher in Berlin than in the Bundestag election because it was considered decided, while a close result was expected in the House of Representatives election. Despite the exit from the coalition, the AL did not rule out renewed cooperation with the SPD after the election.

Like the result of 1989, the clear outcome of the 1990 election was a big surprise. Both the SPD and the AL suffered significant defeats. In the western part of Berlin, compared to 1989, the two parties lost 7.8 and 4.9 percentage points respectively, here the CDU came to 49 percent compared to 29.5 percent for the SPD. Throughout Berlin, the SPD got 30.4 percent, the CDU 40.4 percent, although in the east it clearly lagged behind the SPD. The alternative list and a list association Bündnis 90 / Greens / UFV, an electoral alliance made up of the East Greens, Bündnis 90 and the Independent Women's Association , ran for elections separately and received a total of 9.2 percent of the votes. After the election, they formed a common parliamentary group, and in 1993 they merged. With the PDS, which received 9.2 percent of the vote, AL and SPD had competition in the left-wing camp. However, the SED successor party did not yet play a major role in this election in West Berlin, where it received only 1.1 percent compared to 23.6 percent in the eastern part of the city. Some former left AL members such as Dirk Schneider, Harald Wolf or Klaus Croissant ran for the PDS. Schneider and Wolf moved into the House of Representatives via the state list. The FDP returned to the House of Representatives with 7.1 percent. Republicans failed at 3.1 percent as expected at the five-percent hurdle .

Grand coalition and further development

Walter Momper congratulates Eberhard Diepgen after the election to the House of Representatives on December 2, 1990.

Since black and yellow did not achieve a majority, there was a grand coalition under Eberhard Diepgen ( Senate Diepgen III ). Before Diepgen, Max Brauer in Hamburg and Hinrich Wilhelm Kopf in Lower Saxony only succeeded in returning to the post of Prime Minister in the 1950s after being voted out of office. Momper, who bitterly declared red-green to be the "obsolete model", was not a member of the new Senate, but initially remained state party leader.

With the Senate Momper, the second red-green coalition after the one in Hesse broke up prematurely. However, at this point in time, there had been an alliance of the SPD and the Greens in Lower Saxony ( Schröder I cabinet ) since June 21, 1990, and a traffic light coalition in Brandenburg since November 1, 1990, with the participation of Alliance 90 ( Stolpe I cabinet ). Since in 1989/90 around 850 new, generally politically oriented members joined the AL, while almost 700 mostly left-wing party members resigned, the party's profile as a distinctly left-wing national association was put into perspective. This development, which was intensified in the next legislative period by the merger with the East Berlin Alliance 90, and the experience in government and administration promoted a structural reform that pushed back the grassroots democratic elements of the AL after 1990. It was not until eleven years after the first red-green experiment that there was again short-term government cooperation between the SPD and the AL in Berlin, now called “Bündnis 90 / Die Grünen”. After the break of the grand coalition under Eberhard Diepgen, Klaus Wowereit formed a red-green minority government ( Senate Wowereit I ), which was tolerated by the PDS. This red-green Senate had only until 17 January 2002 inventory and, after the election to the House of Representatives on 21 October 2001 a red-red replaced Senate under Wowereit ( Senate Wowereit II ).

See also

literature

  • Berlin coalition agreement between the SPD and AL of March 13, 1989 , published by the SPD Berlin, Berlin 1989
  • Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Schüren, Marburg 1993, ISBN 3-89472-079-4
  • Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin 1989–1990 . In: Joachim Raschke: The Greens. How they became what they are . Bund, Cologne 1993, pp. 809-822, ISBN 3-7663-2474-8
  • Eckhard Jesse : The election to the Berlin House of Representatives on December 7, 1990. The correction of the 1989 correction . In: Journal for Parliamentary Questions 22 (1991), pp. 390–405
  • Walter Momper : Borderline case. Berlin in the focus of German history . Bertelsmann, Munich 1991, ISBN 3-570-02284-6
  • Wilfried Rott : The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . CH Beck, Munich 2009, ISBN 978-3-406-59133-4
  • Horst W. Schmollinger: The election for the Berlin House of Representatives on January 29, 1989. A surprising change in the party system . In: Journal for Parliamentary Questions 20 (1989), pp. 309–322
  • Michaele Schreyer : Red-Green - A discontinued model? The lessons from Berlin . In: Ralf Fücks (Ed.): Can the Greens still be saved? Rowohlt, Reinbek 1991, ISBN 3-499-13017-3

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 367.
  2. ↑ a b Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 382.
  3. ↑ Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 383.
  4. ↑ Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 377 ff.
  5. ↑ Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 381.
  6. ↑ Horst W. Schmollinger: The election to the Berlin House of Representatives on January 29, 1989. A surprising change in the party system . In: Journal for Parliamentary Issues 20, p. 311.
  7. ↑ a b c d Horst W. Schmollinger: The election to the Berlin House of Representatives on January 29, 1989. A surprising change in the party system . In: Journal for Parliamentary Issues 20, p. 312.
  8. ↑ a b "We have made a decision" . In: Die Zeit , No. 5/1989.
  9. ↑ Horst W. Schmollinger: The election to the Berlin House of Representatives on January 29, 1989. A surprising change in the party system . In: Journal for Parliamentary Questions 20, p. 310.
  10. ↑ a b c d e Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 33.
  11. ^ A b c Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin 1989–1990 . In: Joachim Raschke: The Greens. How they became what they are . Cologne 1993, p. 810.
  12. ^ Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin 1989–1990 . In: Joachim Raschke: The Greens. How they became what they are . Cologne 1993, p. 809.
  13. ^ Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin 1989–1990 . In: Joachim Raschke: The Greens. How they became what they are . Cologne 1993, p. 809 f.
  14. ↑ survey on behalf of the Springer publishing house ; Results according to taz of January 26, 1989, Local Part Berlin, p. 17.
  15. ↑ Infas survey on behalf of the SFB ; Results according to taz of January 26, 1989, Local Part Berlin, p. 17.
  16. ↑ Infas survey on behalf of the SFB magazine Kontraste ; Results according to taz of January 11, 1989, local part Berlin, p. 17.
  17. ↑ survey on behalf of Stern ; Results according to taz of January 11, 1989, local part Berlin, p. 17.
  18. ↑ a b taz , January 11, 1989, local section Berlin, p. 17.
  19. ^ A b c d Eckhard Jesse: The election to the Berlin House of Representatives on December 7, 1990. The correction of the 1989 correction . In: Journal for Parliamentary Questions 22 (1991), p. 391.
  20. ^ Reinhard Appel : The rulers of Berlin since 1945 . Edition Q, Berlin 1996, ISBN 3-86124-288-5 , p. 343.
  21. ↑ a b c d Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 29.
  22. ^ A b c Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin 1989–1990 . In: Joachim Raschke: The Greens. How they became what they are . Cologne 1993, p. 811.
  23. ^ Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 30.
  24. ↑ a b c d e f g h Gudrun Heinrich: Rot-Grün in Berlin 1989–1990 . In: Joachim Raschke: The Greens. How they became what they are . Cologne 1993, p. 812.
  25. ^ Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 54.
  26. ↑ Horst W. Schmollinger: The election to the Berlin House of Representatives on January 29, 1989. A surprising change in the party system . In: Journal for Parliamentary Issues 20, p. 321.
  27. ^ A b Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 36.
  28. ^ Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin 1989–1990 . In: Joachim Raschke: The Greens. How they became what they are . Cologne 1993, pp. 812, 816.
  29. ↑ a b c d e Gudrun Heinrich: Rot-Grün in Berlin 1989–1990 . In: Joachim Raschke: The Greens. How they became what they are . Cologne 1993, p. 814.
  30. ↑ a b c d Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin 1989–1990 . In: Joachim Raschke: The Greens. How they became what they are . Cologne 1993, p. 819.
  31. ↑ Senate Momper (1989–1991) on berlin.de, accessed September 23, 2017
  32. ^ A b Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 32.
  33. ↑ Hubert Kleinert : Rise and Fall of the Greens - Analysis of an Alternative Party . Bonn 1992, ISBN 3-8012-0180-5 , p. 105.
  34. ↑ a b c spines lost . In: Der Spiegel . No. 8 , 1989 ( online ).
  35. ↑ The Gray Panther of Alternatives . In: Der Spiegel . No. 11 , 1989, pp. 15 ( online ).
  36. ↑ Set table . In: Der Spiegel . No. 10 , 1989 ( online ).
  37. ↑ Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 402.
  38. ↑ a b c d Wrestling about papers, posts and people . In: Die Zeit , No. 12/1989.
  39. ↑ Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 399.
  40. ^ Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 37.
  41. ↑ a b A Front of Prejudice . In: Die Zeit , No. 12/1989.
  42. ↑ a b c d e f Gudrun Heinrich: Rot-Grün in Berlin 1989–1990 . In: Joachim Raschke: The Greens. How they became what they are . Cologne 1993, p. 813.
  43. ↑ Fifty days without stumbling . In: Die Zeit , No. 19/1989.
  44. ^ A b Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 41.
  45. ^ Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 56.
  46. ^ Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 43 f.
  47. ↑ Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green coalition in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 39.
  48. ↑ a b c d Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 406.
  49. ^ Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin 1989–1990 . In: Joachim Raschke: The Greens. How they became what they are . Cologne 1993, pp. 816, 818.
  50. ↑ a b Ehrhart Neubert : History of the Opposition in the GDR 1949–1989 . Ch. Links Verlag, Berlin, second, reviewed, expanded and corrected edition 2000, ISBN 3-89331-294-3 (Federal Agency for Civic Education, Series Volume 346), pp. 637 f., 667 f.
  51. ↑ Joschka Fischer : The red-green years. German foreign policy from Kosovo until September 11th . Kiepenheuer & Witsch, Cologne 2007, ISBN 978-3-462-03771-5 , p. 213.
  52. ↑ Hubert Kleinert: Rise and Fall of the Greens - Analysis of an Alternative Party . Bonn 1992, ISBN 3-8012-0180-5 , p. 112 f.
  53. ↑ a b c d Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 407.
  54. ↑ a b c d Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 408.
  55. ↑ Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 405.
  56. ↑ a b Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 410.
  57. ↑ a b c Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 412.
  58. ↑ Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 408 f.
  59. ↑ Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 409.
  60. ↑ Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 411.
  61. ↑ a b Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 420.
  62. ↑ Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 417.
  63. ↑ Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 418.
  64. ↑ Daniela Forkmann: Failed candidate for chancellor . VS Verlag, Wiesbaden 2007, p. 310.
  65. ↑ Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 419.
  66. ↑ Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 421.
  67. ↑ a b c Detailed results from the regional returning officer .
  68. ↑ a b Wilfried Rott: The island. A History of West Berlin 1948–1990 . Munich 2009, p. 425.
  69. ^ Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 8.
  70. ^ Walter Momper: Borderline case. Berlin in the focus of German history . Munich 1991, p. 163.
  71. ^ Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 44 f.
  72. ^ Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 46.
  73. ^ Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 46 f.
  74. ^ Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 47.
  75. ^ Berlin coalition agreement between the SPD and AL of March 13, 1989, published by the SPD Berlin, Berlin 1989, p. 6; Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 46.
  76. ^ A b c Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin 1989–1990 . In: Joachim Raschke: The Greens. How they became what they are . Cologne 1993, p. 821.
  77. ^ Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin. The alternative list under government responsibility 1989–1990 . Marburg 1993, p. 50.
  78. ^ Gudrun Heinrich: Red-Green in Berlin 1989–1990 . In: Joachim Raschke: The Greens. How they became what they are . Cologne 1993, p. 817.
  79. ↑ Michaele Schreyer: Red-Green - A discontinued model? The lessons from Berlin . In: Ralf Fücks (Ed.): Can the Greens still be saved? Reinbek 1991, p. 138.
  80. ↑ a b Eckhard Jesse: The election to the Berlin House of Representatives on December 7, 1990. The correction of the 1989 correction . In: Journal for Parliamentary Questions 22 (1991), p. 392.
  81. ↑ Eckhard Jesse: The election to the Berlin House of Representatives on December 7, 1990. The correction of the 1989 correction . In: Journal for Parliamentary Questions 22 (1991), p. 402.
This article was added to the list of excellent articles on June 6, 2011 in this version .