Weirdest Coalitions/Cooperation Agreements?

[VPH]

In light of Israel's centrist Blue and White announcing a vote-sharing agreement with right-wing, Liberman-led Yisrael Beiteinu, I was wondering what other coalitions or agreements throughout history have been seemingly unexpected or surprising in your opinion?

-The 28th Israeli government. Somehow pulling together Shas, Meretz, and Yisrael BaAliyah is an insane feat.

-The current Icelandic government, which somehow combines the left-wing Left-Greens, the center-right Independence Party, and the agrarian Progressive Party.

-(Failed) talks between the Liberals, NDP, and Bloc Quebecois in 2008 to oust the Tories. It just seems wild to me to even have the LPC and BQ in the same room for these discussions, let alone with some kind of agreement.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

The current Johannesburg municipal government. Basically the current mayor (who's more like a Prime Minister of the city) is a black Democratic Alliance member who is basically a hardline neoliberal and openly describes himself as a libertarian and a "capitalist crusader", yet he was elected in a coalition with the Marxist Economic Freedom Fighters. Just because they hate the ANC that much.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Often such arrangements are not strange at all, but instead reveal the reality beneath the play.

[Grand Wizard Lizard of the Klan]

Current Kukiz-PSL is on the one hand pretty weird but on the other seems pretty logical.

[VPH]

Often such arrangements are not strange at all, but instead reveal the reality beneath the play.

Yeah, I guess pragmatic concerns come first in reality, but they're strange from the outside if you're just comparing ideology or style in some cases.

[Oryxslayer]

Often such arrangements are not strange at all, but instead reveal the reality beneath the play.

Yeah, I guess pragmatic concerns come first in reality, but they're strange from the outside if you're just comparing ideology or style in some cases.

For example, both of the Syriza governments followed this line of thought. An alliance between a far right and a far left seems incredible at first glance, but then you realize that they were the United euroskeptic front.

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

Local government in Sweden has had a lot of "weird" coalitions aimed at ousting entrenched and self-serving one-party administrations.

The most famous example is Kalix in northern Sweden, where seven parties, consisting of among others the Left Party and the Moderates, joined together after the 1998 election to appoint the fist ever Green mayor in the country, ousting the Social Democrats which had ruled alone for three decades.

The coalition proved to be quite popular and continued for eight years, decimating the Social Democrats further at the following election in 2002.       

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Often such arrangements are not strange at all, but instead reveal the reality beneath the play.

Yeah, I guess pragmatic concerns come first in reality, but they're strange from the outside if you're just comparing ideology or style in some cases.

For example, both of the Syriza governments followed this line of thought. An alliance between a far right and a far left seems incredible at first glance, but then you realize that they were the United euroskeptic front.

Greece has an even weirder example from the 90's: the brief coalition between Synaspismos and New Democracy from 1989-1991. That's right, Synaspismos, which still included the ultra hardcore KKE, joined in with the conservatives.

[Don Vito Corleone]

-(Failed) talks between the Liberals, NDP, and Bloc Quebecois in 2008 to oust the Tories. It just seems wild to me to even have the LPC and BQ in the same room for these discussions, let alone with some kind of agreement.

Not just that, but the Liberals were led by Stéphane "Father of the Clarity Act and staunch anti-Nationalist" Dion!

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Just take a look at the history of Brazil.

[Insomnian]

The current Johannesburg municipal government. Basically the current mayor (who's more like a Prime Minister of the city) is a black Democratic Alliance member who is basically a hardline neoliberal and openly describes himself as a libertarian and a "capitalist crusader", yet he was elected in a coalition with the Marxist Economic Freedom Fighters. Just because they hate the ANC that much.

This is a shockingly accurate description of my political beliefs,  except over here,  the corrupt forever government is neoliberalism.

[DC Al Fine]

Just take a look at the history of Brazil.

Any notable examples come to mind?

[bigic]

The "red-black" coalition (crveno-crna koalicija) in Serbia during the 90s (1992-1993 and 1998-2000), consisting of post-communist Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS) and far-right Serbian Radical Party (SRS), might appear strange, but in fact both of these two parties are authoritarian, nationalist and anti-democratic.
A similar coalition is ruling Serbia from 2012. to this day, but instead of SRS there is Serbian Progressive Party, a "moderate" (read: opportunistic) SRS splinter party, and SPS also became more "moderate" after their fall in 2000.
The opposing coalitions (DEPOS, Zajedno, DOS, Alliance for Serbia) aren't beacons of ideological coherency either, and they are built for explicit purpose of opposing SPS-SRS, just SPS, or SNS-SPS.

[Coldstream]

Often such arrangements are not strange at all, but instead reveal the reality beneath the play.

Yeah, I guess pragmatic concerns come first in reality, but they're strange from the outside if you're just comparing ideology or style in some cases.

For example, both of the Syriza governments followed this line of thought. An alliance between a far right and a far left seems incredible at first glance, but then you realize that they were the United euroskeptic front.

Greece has an even weirder example from the 90's: the brief coalition between Synaspismos and New Democracy from 1989-1991. That's right, Synaspismos, which still included the ultra hardcore KKE, joined in with the conservatives.

Damn as soon as I saw the thread title I was going to mention this!

[Coldstream]

You get lots of Rainbow coalitions in local government, usually when there’s 1 dominant party and the remainder gang up to depose them. In Scotland there are Lab-Lib-Tory coalitions to oust the SNP.

An interesting one since 2019 is Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole  a new authority created in 2019 whose constituent parts had been large Tory since time began. But after the election an administration of Lib Dem’s, Labour, Greens, Independents, Poole People’s Party and Alliance for local living took over with a 1 vote majority, the latter two are generic localist parties but the independents include ex-Tories, Ex-UKIP and some who’d be described as to the left of Labour. But it raises the question of what happens if there’s a by-election - ie who from the governing parties would stand etc to prevent the Tories winning and regaining their majority.

[Tintrlvr]

You get lots of Rainbow coalitions in local government, usually when there’s 1 dominant party and the remainder gang up to depose them. In Scotland there are Lab-Lib-Tory coalitions to oust the SNP.

An interesting one since 2019 is Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole  a new authority created in 2019 whose constituent parts had been large Tory since time began. But after the election an administration of Lib Dem’s, Labour, Greens, Independents, Poole People’s Party and Alliance for local living took over with a 1 vote majority, the latter two are generic localist parties but the independents include ex-Tories, Ex-UKIP and some who’d be described as to the left of Labour. But it raises the question of what happens if there’s a by-election - ie who from the governing parties would stand etc to prevent the Tories winning and regaining their majority.

I recall that there was once a local authority with a Conservative-Labour (or maybe Labour-Conservative) anti-Liberal Democrat coalition. Would have been a while ago, maybe in the mid-aughts, but that should qualify and is a bit different from the other rainbow coalitions because there's no clear unifying ideology (the anti-SNP coalitions are unionist, anti-Conservative coalitions or anti-Labour coalitions are centre-left or centre-right, etc.)

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

You get lots of Rainbow coalitions in local government, usually when there’s 1 dominant party and the remainder gang up to depose them.

The government emerging from the Japanese general election of 1993 was the first non-LDP Japanese government in almost forty years and was a coalition of every non-Communist opposition.

[Coldstream]

You get lots of Rainbow coalitions in local government, usually when there’s 1 dominant party and the remainder gang up to depose them. In Scotland there are Lab-Lib-Tory coalitions to oust the SNP.

An interesting one since 2019 is Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole  a new authority created in 2019 whose constituent parts had been large Tory since time began. But after the election an administration of Lib Dem’s, Labour, Greens, Independents, Poole People’s Party and Alliance for local living took over with a 1 vote majority, the latter two are generic localist parties but the independents include ex-Tories, Ex-UKIP and some who’d be described as to the left of Labour. But it raises the question of what happens if there’s a by-election - ie who from the governing parties would stand etc to prevent the Tories winning and regaining their majority.

I recall that there was once a local authority with a Conservative-Labour (or maybe Labour-Conservative) anti-Liberal Democrat coalition. Would have been a while ago, maybe in the mid-aughts, but that should qualify and is a bit different from the other rainbow coalitions because there's no clear unifying ideology (the anti-SNP coalitions are unionist, anti-Conservative coalitions or anti-Labour coalitions are centre-left or centre-right, etc.)

I think you maybe thinking of Derby under Chris Williamson? As I recall it was basically because the Derby Labour group at that time were generally seen as one of the most right wing/Blairite in the country, with the local Lib Dem’s therefore running to their left on issues like pfi, library funding etc.

[Tintrlvr]

You get lots of Rainbow coalitions in local government, usually when there’s 1 dominant party and the remainder gang up to depose them. In Scotland there are Lab-Lib-Tory coalitions to oust the SNP.

An interesting one since 2019 is Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole  a new authority created in 2019 whose constituent parts had been large Tory since time began. But after the election an administration of Lib Dem’s, Labour, Greens, Independents, Poole People’s Party and Alliance for local living took over with a 1 vote majority, the latter two are generic localist parties but the independents include ex-Tories, Ex-UKIP and some who’d be described as to the left of Labour. But it raises the question of what happens if there’s a by-election - ie who from the governing parties would stand etc to prevent the Tories winning and regaining their majority.

I recall that there was once a local authority with a Conservative-Labour (or maybe Labour-Conservative) anti-Liberal Democrat coalition. Would have been a while ago, maybe in the mid-aughts, but that should qualify and is a bit different from the other rainbow coalitions because there's no clear unifying ideology (the anti-SNP coalitions are unionist, anti-Conservative coalitions or anti-Labour coalitions are centre-left or centre-right, etc.)

I think you maybe thinking of Derby under Chris Williamson? As I recall it was basically because the Derby Labour group at that time were generally seen as one of the most right wing/Blairite in the country, with the local Lib Dem’s therefore running to their left on issues like pfi, library funding etc.

Right, Derby in 2006-2008 was a Labour-Conservative coalition government with the Lib Dems as the main opposition. Then the Lib Dems led a minority administration 2008-2010.

[Peanut]

1940s Costa Rica comes to mind. The decade opened with the election of a President from a nominally far-right party which was supported by the Communist Party and the Catholic Church (both influential institutions back then) and closed with a minor Civil War with one faction (the leftist insurgents) (who were actually supported by American forces) receiving support among both wealthy elite and young people and another (the slightly less leftist government) supported by old people and some of the poor, though both forces' coalitions featured a mix of everything.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Also, the Historic Compromise in Italy (Christian Democracy with C&S from the Communists but no involvement from the non-Communist left) is a pretty weird concept if you're not familiar with postwar Italian history. Especially since, after it started to fall apart, the forces within DC that wanted to see it through to the bitter end were on the right of the party.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Also, the Historic Compromise in Italy (Christian Democracy with C&S from the Communists but no involvement from the non-Communist left) is a pretty weird concept if you're not familiar with postwar Italian history. Especially since, after it started to fall apart, the forces within DC that wanted to see it through to the bitter end were on the right of the party.

Yes! And of course Andreotti remained PCI (and then DS)'s main contact in the DC until the First Republic collapsed...

[DC Al Fine]

Also, the Historic Compromise in Italy (Christian Democracy with C&S from the Communists but no involvement from the non-Communist left) is a pretty weird concept if you're not familiar with postwar Italian history. Especially since, after it started to fall apart, the forces within DC that wanted to see it through to the bitter end were on the right of the party.

Could you elaborate for for the folks who aren't familiar with postwar Italian history?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Could you elaborate for for the folks who aren't familiar with postwar Italian history?

The Historic Compromise was an arrangement between the DC and the PCI by which the PCI would agree to support a DC minority government in exchange for a substantial influence over the policy direction of that government. It was negotiated over several years by the PCI's reformist General Secretary Enrico Berlinguer and Aldo Moro, a former DC Prime Minister on the left-wing (he was basically a socialist) of his party. For Berlinguer it was a chance to directly influence the direction of the government, to defend the State from far right extremists and to wean the PCI away from the Kremlin. For Moro it was a chance to end the DCs reliance on increasingly demanding boutique parties, to establish a government with a stable parliamentary majority, and to shift the policy agenda further to the left.

Giulio Andreotti was the man chosen to lead the new government. This was a bizarre choice on the face of it (he was famously close to the Vatican and was an ardent Cold Warrior even to the point of deep involvement - though this was not made public until the early 90s - in secret NATO-backed paramilitary operations), but was actually very logical: such a government would require extraordinary skill and tact in order to function and Andreotti was a man of extraordinary skill and tact. As a serious Political Catholic who believed in implementing Church social doctrine as State policy, he was also likely to have less objection to the sort of domestic policies the PCI were keen on: indeed, a few years earlier a government led by him dependent on right-wing minor parties had pushed through what was technically the most left-wing policy agenda of any Italian government. Andreotti was initially sceptical of the Historic Compromise but eventually, reluctantly, went along with it as the best of a series of bad options.

On the day that the new Andreotti government, backed by the PCI, faced its first Confidence vote, Moro was kidnapped by the extreme left terrorist organisation the Red Brigades. Andreotti refused to negotiate with the Red Brigades and Moro was murdered.

Moro was one of the lynchpins of the Historic Compromise and opinion in the DC began to turn against it after his murder, including on the DC Left. Andreotti, however, continued to support the Historic Compromise as the least worst option. When the DC voted to pull out of the Historic Compromise at Party Conference in 1980, most of the the DC Left (except some figures who had been close to Moro) backed the programme to leave, while Andreotti and his faction backed the motion to keep it going.

[urutzizu]

King Sihanouk allying with the Khmer Rouge against the Lon Nol during the Vietnam War. The avowed maoists holding him up as the "people's King" was quite a thing. Even more suprising was that the Alliance actually held up for a while after they won the war in 1975, with Sihanouk becoming the figurehead Monarch of an officially Communist Dystopia led by the "Prime minister" Pol Pot. After the Khmer Rouge went completely insane, he Resigned, but later, after the Vietnamese invaded, he allied again with them as the Government in Exile known as the "Coalition Government of Democratic Kampuchea" supported, this time, by the US, despite them killing 1/4 of Cambodias population and running a state which Kim Jong Un would likely regard as despotic. So a Maoist-Monarchist-U.S. alliance. What beauties the Sino-Soviet split can create.