Born from the division and fragmentation of existing political entities, splinter parties can significantly shape political landscapes and policy outcomes. They can be instrumental in forming coalition governments and negotiating policy objectives in exchange for support. In some cases, they serve as kingmakers, holding the balance of power and steering policy decisions.
Splinter parties emerge for a multitude of reasons, ranging from leadership conflicts to ideological differences, personal ambitions, or shifts in the political environment. They can upset the balance of power by adding new dimensions. But most importantly, splinters pose significant challenges for the parent parties.
Splinter parties overcrowd the pond
One of the foremost challenges is vote splitting, when the splinter party competes for the same voter base as the parent party, potentially weakening both and ultimately benefiting rivals. This can subsequently fragment the ideological base of the parent party, posing challenges to maintaining clear ideological lines and a cohesive identity.
The rise of splinter parties can intensify internal divisions within the parent party, triggering ideological battles and leadership disputes, and undermining party unity. Additionally, the resource drain in the parent party and the splinter parties’ ability to attract media attention may compromise the parent party’s competitive edge and call for an organisational overhaul. Generally, splinter parties almost always cause temporary or long-term challenges for parent parties.
We have identified three common scenarios in which splinter parties can cause the most problems for parent parties and ways to overcome them.
Scenario 1: Local or regional disagreements
In this scenario, splinter parties emerge due to disagreements over local or regional policies. These disagreements often stem from unique circumstances, such as varying economic conditions, cultural differences, or historical grievances in specific areas. As a result, factions within parent parties may feel that their local interests are not adequately represented, prompting them to form new local(ist) or regional(ist) parties to champion their causes.
First step: Assess the impact! This depends on the significance of that electoral base for the party’s overall performance. If this constituency plays a crucial role in the party’s vote share or represents a swing vote area, the immediate focus should be active canvassing and party promotion. This approach reassures voters about the party’s commitment to the stability and importance of the region in its priorities.
Prophylaxis: To prevent this scenario, parent parties must adopt a more decentralised approach to policy-making and engage in active dialogue with local leaders and grassroots activists. This approach fosters a sense of inclusivity and helps maintain party cohesion while accommodating diverse regional interests.
Examples: Canadian Bloc Québécois was formed by members of the former Progressive Conservative Party and the Liberal Party of Canada. Belgium’s dissolved People’s Union (VU) experienced splits that resulted in the formation of the hard right Vlaams Block (now Vlaams Belang – VB) and the centre-right New Flemish Alliance (N-VA).
Scenario 2: Policy shifts and ideological splits
In this scenario, political parties grapple with internal divisions driven by significant policy shifts or ideological realignments. These shifts can occur when a party moves too far from its core positions, prompting dissent among members who feel their party has abandoned its traditional principles. These policy shifts can be related, for example, to migration or social policy. As a result, splinter groups may emerge to represent what they feel is the party’s original ideological stance, be it to the left or to the right.
First Step: Check your voter data! Start with a data-driven analysis of voter sentiments for policy issues that have contributed to the split. Parties should assess the extent to which voters prioritise these issues and evaluate the potential impact of the division on their electoral base. This analysis helps parties make informed decisions regarding policy adjustments and party positioning.
Prophylaxis: To proactively prevent policy-related splits, it is essential to be aware of the delicate balance between voter priorities and the principles held by party members. While it’s crucial to be responsive to shifting voter preferences, parties should avoid adopting populist approaches solely to retain votes. Promoting alternative policy approaches that align with their core principles and evolving public concern fosters a sense of consistency and integrity while adapting to changing political landscapes.
Examples: Greek Popular Unity (LAE-AA) was formed as a splinter group following ideological disagreements within Syriza over austerity measures and negotiating the EU-IMF bailout. The Danish People’s Party (DF) emerged as a splinter group from the Progress Party (FrP) due to ideological differences and policy shifts regarding immigration and the European Union.
Scenario 3: Charismatic leaders and breakaways
We have seen this almost everywhere. A charismatic and ambitious leader emerges from the party and, instead of waiting for succession, decides to break away and create a splinter party. This is one of the most challenging scenarios, as people associate politics more with faces than policies.
First step: Assess the general sentiment! How do people feel about the leader in question and with what happened? If the public feels optimistic about the breakaway, this might cause vote splitting. It would be good to warn voters about the dangers of a potential vote split and call for unity. Some parties engage in smear campaigns, but this is risky and can backfire. Character assassination can generate sympathy votes.
Prophylaxis: To prevent charismatic leaders from leaving and forming successful splinter parties, parent parties have to establish open communication and set up conflict resolution mechanisms. It is also crucial to develop precise succession planning and talent management. The party can maintain continuity if charismatic leaders depart, by grooming and empowering emerging leaders.
Examples: Emmanuel Macron, a former member of the French Socialist Party, formed La République En Marche! (LREM), offering a centrist and pro-European alternative to traditional French politics. In Serbia, former president, Tomislav Nikolić and the incumbent, Aleksandar Vučić, broke away from the Serbian Radical Party (SRS) to form the current ruling Serbian Progressive Party (SNS).
One party that has survived different scenarios and five splinters is the Social Democratic Party (SDP) of Bosnia and Herzegovina. They are now back in government. We asked the SDP’s Secretary for Public Relations and Marketing, Vedad Hajdarević, how the party managed to survive.
“I believe it was our clear ideological identity and strong brand. Splinters can hurt, but we are still the original. Personality cults have expiry dates, yet there is only one SDP and it will continue standing”, he said.
To survive fractures, a party must have a solid base of clear ideology, members rooted in their communities, resources and inclusive policy-making. With all this in place, if splinter parties emerge, the parent party can do proper damage control through assessments and immediate response, which usually includes reorganisation, public relations and voter outreach.
