OneEurope 1/93 East-West Magazine HOW TO BUILD THE ...

projects.aegee.org

OneEurope 1/93 East-West Magazine HOW TO BUILD THE ...

support in the fight against communism by holding up a mirror to it and hindering all attempts to

increase its power behind the iron curtain. That way it was seen in this part of the world, too. For

this reason the people respected the foreign as well as the domestic policy of your countries.

But now we see this psychology changed by the fall of communism. The difficulties in Maastricht

are a consequence of the end of bipolarity. The people suddenly wish to pay more attention to

their own affairs, often at the expenses of the international holding-together of the democratic

countries. They are much less prepared to tolerate the necessary compromises of their

governments. And they don't understand that the east needs as much as attention as in the past.

The iron curtain has not just been a prison wall for those who lived east of it. At the same this

barrier of barbed wire and nuclear warheads protected the democratic world from communism.

And it was even more. The concrete hood clapped on communism kept the real problems in this

part of the world from being solved. Those problems on which the West had worked for half a

century lay quick-frozen on this side, waiting to emerge immediately in its full size after sudden

defrosting. And this ice had already contained highly corrupted pieces at the very beginning.

Today it is evident to see how the iron curtain protected the west from the results of a blow up as

we experience it today with bated breath. For this reason many yearn for the simply bipolarity of

the world in which stability would be guaranteed on the expenses of the eastern half of the

continent.

Fortunately for us east of Elbe and Sumava this balance cannot be reobtained. On the other hand

it doesn't mean that we were to let things run freely and not find for a new equilibrium. Sometimes

I hear talk about denationalisation of security policy, the return of the times before the Versailles

Treaty, before World War I or even the battle at Mohacs. [...]

Recently, during a visit in Scandinavia the question of Königsberg (Kaliningrad) arose. One

speaks of the extent of American units leaving Europe, GATT in Uruguay has come to a halt. A

large question mark pose Russia and the Ukraine concerning their position in the European

system. Throughout the post communistic world numerous latent ethnic conflicts exist close to

break out. The war in Yugoslavia is not just a tragedy for the local peoples and a demonstration

of the world community's impotence, but a dangerous growth which - without proper surgery -

could spread out easily.

Yugoslavia represents the typical example for which neither our thinking of crushing the Jalta

system nor our international organisations were prepared. A hypothetical decomposition had

already been spoken of during Tito's lifetime. The question sounded like this: What will be after

Tito? But until the break down of the bipolar world nothing was possible. When the slumbering

disease finally found its way the world approached it by stiffened means. Day by day the screens

told of horrible crimes against children and whole cities, and when the demonstrators took to the

streets the politicians lost patience. Right at the beginning I warned that the Balkan, or the

Yugoslav problem must be solved homogeneously. Yet the winner was the salami-tactics.

In futile attempts I and others well acquainted with the subject matter like Lawrence Eagleburger

tried to make clear that an untimely recognition of Croatia would result in an explosion in Bosnia

Hercegovina if there was no pressure put on the remaining Yugoslavia by the international

community. And, should there be a change on the Balkan or parts of it, bringing in the Islamic

world would rise the danger of a great Lebanon. Should the later not take place then we must be

prepared to take the Vietnamese risk in order to prevent former Yugoslavia to turn into a second

Lebanon. But if we act consequently then there will be hope for a way out that excludes both

other options as mentioned above. This will be impossible without homogeneous decisive action

of the world community and the determination to make use of all opportunities in the worst case.

In order to counteract future crises we have to look into the priorities of today's world and learn to

understand them. The modern world, symbolised by the computer, is based on two apparently

contradictory tendencies: On the one hand the longing for greater integration and universality, on

the other hand the drive for more individuality and authority of the individual. This contradiction is

just ostensible since true universality can only be build by independent individuals that are freed

of a believe of a particular placed over idea. It has no meaning whatsoever, whether that

particular idea leans onto a religion, a nation, a wish to expand ones territory or an ideology of

any kind. This doesn't go along with uniformity.

Our perspective lies in the acceptance of our individual, personal, ethnic and religious differences

and various opinions, which are not to be understood as hurdles but as creative parts of

More magazines by this user
Similar magazines