The Legacy of 1989, in Two Hemispheres
November marked the anniversary of major events in 1989: “the biggest year in world history since 1945,” as British historian Timothy Garton Ash describes it.
That year “changed everything,” Garton Ash writes. Mikhail Gorbachev’s reforms within Russia and his “breathtaking renunciation of the use of force” led to the fall of the Berlin Wall on Nov. 9—and to the liberation of Eastern Europe from Russian tyranny.
The accolades are deserved; the events, memorable. But alternative perspectives may be revealing.
German chancellor Angela Merkel provided such a perspective—unintentionally—when she called on all of us to “use this invaluable gift of freedom to overcome the walls of our time.”
One way to follow her good advice would be to dismantle the massive wall, dwarfing the Berlin wall in scale and length, now snaking through Palestinian territory in violation of international law.
The “annexation wall,” as it should be called, is justified in terms of “security”—the default rationalization for so many state actions. If security were the concern, the wall would be built along the border and made impregnable.
The purpose of this monstrosity, constructed with U.S. support and European complicity, is to allow Israel to take over valuable Palestinian land and the main water resources of the region, thus denying any viable national existence for the indigenous population of the former Palestine.
Another perspective on 1989 comes from Thomas Carothers, a scholar who served in “democracy enhancement” programs in the administration of former President Ronald Reagan.
After reviewing the record, Carothers concludes that all U.S. leaders have been “schizophrenic”—supporting democracy if it conforms to U.S. strategic and economic objectives, as in Soviet satellites but not in U.S. client states.
This perspective is dramatically confirmed by the recent commemoration of the events of November 1989. The fall of the Berlin wall was rightly celebrated, but there was little notice of what happened one week later: on Nov. 16, in El Salvador, the assassination of six leading Latin American intellectuals, Jesuit priests, along with their cook and her daughter, by the elite, U.S.-armed Atlacatl battalion, fresh from renewed training at the JFK Special Warfare School at Fort Bragg, N.C.
The battalion and its cohorts had already compiled a bloody record through the grisly decade in El Salvador that began in 1980 with the assassination, by much the same hands, of Archbishop Oscar Romero, known as “the voice of the voiceless.”
During the decade of the “war on terror” declared by the Reagan administration, the horror was similar throughout Central America. The reign of torture, murder and destruction in the region left hundreds of thousands dead.
The contrast between the liberation of Soviet satellites and the crushing of hope in U.S. client states is striking and instructive—even more so when we broaden the perspective.
The assassination of the Jesuit intellectuals brought a virtual end to “liberation theology,” the revival of Christianity that had its modern roots in the initiatives of Pope John XXIII and Vatican II, which he opened in 1962.
Vatican II “ushered in a new era in the history of the Catholic Church,” theologian Hans Kung wrote. Latin American bishops adopted “the preferential option for the poor.”
Thus the bishops renewed the radical pacifism of the Gospels that had been put to rest when the Emperor Constantine established Christianity as the religion of the Roman Empire—”a revolution” that in less than a century converted “the persecuted church” to a “persecuting church,” according to Kung.
In the post-Vatican II revival, Latin American priests, nuns and laypersons took the message of the Gospels to the poor and the persecuted, brought them together in communities, and encouraged them to take their fate into their own hands.
Reaction to this heresy was violent repression. In the course of the terror and slaughter, the practitioners of liberation theology were a prime target.
Among them are the six martyrs of the church whose execution 20 years ago is now commemorated with a resounding silence, barely broken.
Last month in Berlin, the three presidents most involved in the fall of the Wall—George H. W. Bush, Mikhail Gorbachev and Helmut Kohl—discussed who deserves credit.
“I know now how heaven helped us,” Kohl said. George H.W. Bush praised the East German people, who “for too long had been deprived of their God-given rights.” Gorbachev suggested that the United States needs its own perestroika.
No doubts exist about responsibility for demolishing the attempt to revive the church of the Gospels in Latin America during the 1980s.
The School of the Americas (since renamed the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation) in Fort Benning, Ga., which trains Latin American officers, proudly announces that the U.S. Army helped to “defeat liberation theology”—assisted, to be sure, by the Vatican, using the gentler hand of expulsion and suppression.
The grim campaign to reverse the heresy set in motion by Vatican II received an incomparable literary expression in Dostoyevsky’s parable of the Grand Inquisitor in “The Brothers Karamazov.”
In this tale, set in Seville at “the most terrible time of the Inquisition,” Jesus Christ suddenly appears on the streets, “softly, unobserved, and yet, strange to say, everyone recognized him” and was “irresistibly drawn to him.”
The Grand Inquisitor “bids the guards take Him and lead Him away” to prison. There he accuses Christ of coming to “hinder us” in the great work of destroying the subversive ideas of freedom and community. We follow not Thee, the Inquisitor admonishes Jesus, but rather Rome and “the sword of Caesar.” We seek to be sole rulers of the earth so that we can teach the “weak and vile” multitude that “they will only become free when they renounce their freedom to us and submit to us.” Then they will be timid and frightened and happy. So tomorrow, the Inquisitor says, “I must burn Thee.”
Finally, however, the Inquisitor relents and releases “Him into the dark alleys of the town.”
The pupils of the U.S.-run School of the Americas practiced no such mercy.
ZNet Articles
ZMag Articles
ZCommentaries
ZAudios
ZVideos
Blog Posts
Books
expanding this assumption further
By Vilkins, Mareks at Jan 03, 2010 03:52 AM
Anyway, hawkish comments about Russia going on the offensive are music to the ears of proponents of the eastward expansion of NATO in Washington.
====
it's also a good news to governments of those countries where are living big populations of Russian settlers (like in Latvia, Estonia etc.) who are posturing how loyal they are to Kremlin (waving Russia's flags and carrying around Czarist/Occupier honor signs,medals etc.) ... I mean, they are making BIG problems for themselves because soon they could have opportunity to show their loyalty in Russia's Far Eastern regions :)
and ,please, just don't repeat all that funny stuff about 'possible nuclear war between neoliberal Washington and neoliberal Kremlin' in case russian settlers will be kicked out from our countries
Reply this comment
a few comments to alla
By Yen, John at Jan 14, 2010 07:28 AM
- you believe in sakai's thoughts on the US? ok, then would you care to comment on <http://www.newsocialist.org/newsite/index.php?id=101>? as a chinese american, i don't think sakai's nailed it
- chomsky specifically praised the end of communist rule in eastern europe. period. not gorbachev per se, and not russia's history post-1989 or how US power was used after 1989. his thesis was US contradictions between word and deed, as demonstrated up through 1989 by its words about democracy in eastern europe vs its support of latin american death squads and dictators
- if you want to call gorbachev a dupe, i agree. but a traitor? what i perceive: gorbachev intended something akin to sweden's blend of social programs and capitalism. when he asked for loans to enable this, he was forced to agree to chicago school free market shock therapy which in practice only enables cronies' corporate profit. he had a gun to his head, basically. he accepted and got broken for it, as the nomenklatura swept in, got theirs and ran while most russians became much worse off. this wasn't really even unrestricted free market capitalism let alone keynesian mixed market capitalism. it was just theft on a horribly grand scale. was he wrong to accept? yes. however, i think the evidence shows he believed the IMF/world bank economists who told him he could achieve sweden's economy that way. he did not knowingly screw over russia. for that matter, thatcher et al only said they liked him once they forced him into chicago school economic theft
Reply this comment
Chechen President Kadyrov's Interview
By Cooper, Curtis at Jan 02, 2010 23:59 PM
A little over a week ago, but last year already, Reuters published an interesting article by Michael Stott, in Russian and English, based on an interview with Chechen President Ramzan Kadyrov. In the interview, Kadyrov praised Putin to the skies, talked of a Western plot to seize the Caucasus, and called for Russia "to attack."
"...Georgia, South Ossetia, Ukraine, all this will go on and on. It's Russia's private affliction. Why should we always suffer if we can eradicate this for good? We are a great power, we have everything -- an army, technology. We need to attack."
Comments like these, along with background on the man, including details on his history and his "exotic private offices," portrayed Kadyrov in a thuggish light. American planners and military men tend not to be as flashy and operate behind closed doors. However, Kadyrov seems to be echoing their thoughts about being a great power, having everything, and needing to attack- despite the fact that offensive wars and threats violate Article 2 of the UN Charter.
For the record, Kadyrov vehemently denied any involvement in the murders of activists, journalists and opponents in Russia and overseas. Anyway, hawkish comments about Russia going on the offensive are music to the ears of proponents of the eastward expansion of NATO in Washington.
Reply this comment
The user who created this comment no longer exists.
Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty and Missile "Defense"
By Cooper, Curtis at Jan 02, 2010 17:46 PM
The Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) between Russia and the USA formally expired on December 5. Officials from both countries have indicated that negotiations for a new START treaty will likely be concluded in early in 2010, although the US Senate would need to ratify it before it could go in effect. Approval from the Russian Duma is required as well, but isn't in question. According to an article last week in the New York Times, Vladimir Putin has tied Russia's development of new offensive weapons to the United States' position on its missile "defense" program:
“'If we don’t develop a missile defense system, a danger arises for us that with an umbrella protecting our partners from offensive weapons, they will feel completely safe,' Mr. Putin told journalists during a working visit to Vladivostok. 'The balance will be disrupted, and then they will do whatever they want, and aggressiveness will immediately arise both in real politics and economics.'
To preserve the balance, he said, Russia must develop new offensive weapons to counter the missile shield — or the United States must provide Russia with data on its missile defense plans in exchange for data on Russian weapons development."
Hopefully, the United States will agree to share information, or even better, scrap its missile defense plans, and Russia will likewise share information on its weapons development. This would be a positive step by the major nuclear powers before the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) review conference, which will take place at the UN in New York this May. Article VI of the NPT obligates its signatories to work toward "general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control."
Reply this comment
Alla on acid, as usual
By Vilkins, Mareks at Dec 31, 2009 10:31 AM
one just needs to look at Cuba and all those claims how 'USA prezes and imperialists destroyed our great [settler] USSR' immediately collapse :))))
everybody knows that Cuba was and is under more severe pressure from US govt but it's still there :)) but brave russian progressives need their own fairy tales to justify their cowardice therefore thanks god that exists this all-mighty supergovernment -otherwise with what are left all these russian posers as their excuse?? with evil fascist Latvians, Estonians and Georgians :)))
Reply this comment
on Chechnya's genocide
By Vilkins, Mareks at Dec 31, 2009 09:36 AM
Russia 'planned Chechen war before bombings'
Former Prime Minister reveals invasion of republic was prepared months in advance of terrorist attacks
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/russia-planned-chechen-war-before-bombings-727324.html
The fact of Russian complicity had been finally confirmed once again when Sergei Stephashin, Russian Interior and Prime Minister for most of last year (he was Interior Minister up to May and then Prime Minister until August, therefore having been at the centre of Russian decision-making), testified according to British correspondent Patrick Cockburn that “Russia made its plans to invade Chechnya six months before the bombing of civilian targets in Russia and the Chechen attack on Dagestan which were the official pretext for launching the war. His account wholly contradicts the official Russian version... which claims that it was only as a result of ‘terrorist’ attacks last August and September [1999] that Russia invaded Chechnya.” Stephasin himself testified that the plan to send the Russian army into Chechnya “had been worked out in March [1999]”, and he had played a central role in organising the military build up before the invasion. He stated that the invasion “had to happen even if there were no explosions in Moscow”. Cockburn points out: “The revelation by Mr Stepashin, that Russia planned to go to war long before it has previously admitted, lends support to allegations in the Russian press that the invasion of Dagestan in August and the bombings in September were arranged by Moscow to justify its invasion of Chechnya.
Reply this comment
Re: The Legacy of 1989, in Two Hemispheres
By Vilkins, Mareks at Dec 31, 2009 09:32 AM
1) USSR crime apologist -poser Alla is not one who will decide what 's in the best interests for non-Russian "citizens" of former USSR ( one can just laugh how she pretends that russian migrants who came during Occupation were mere 'citizens' and not settlers anymore :)))))))))
2) she also will not judge the interests of Chechen people (even if in one's flat is going on some crap it isn't enough for some russian chauvinist pig to occupy this flat and claim "this is my flat now!" and commit even worse crimes)
3) NC just exposed the US govt hypocrisy and mass media's servitude to govt agenda - he didn't praise social breakdown in Russia post 1991
4) who elected Yeltsin in 1996?? US govt elected that funny alcoholic? ok, there were some PR experts from USA but if russians are so dumb as to elect such USA puppet after shock therapy then it speaks volumes about those russian 'progressives' :)))) the same goes for putin and medvedev who both are neoliberal ideologues
Reply this comment
The user who created this comment no longer exists.
The user who created this comment no longer exists.
bloody poser
By Vilkins, Mareks at Dec 30, 2009 06:29 AM
i will clarify one more time - Eastern Europe wasn't liberated by USA govt , we simply REGAINED our independence as USSR dissappeared by its internal dynamics (Yeltsin's fraction outsmarted both Gorbachev and hardliner fractions) ... USA just watched as also did Russian civil society :)
so , maybe, for starters just stop consuming your stash of acid ? how about that??
Reply this comment
as usual
By Vilkins, Mareks at Dec 29, 2009 15:00 PM
it's funny to read bolshevik Alla on acid :)
Reply this comment
The user who created this comment no longer exists.
The user who created this comment no longer exists.
as usual,
By Vilkins, Mareks at Dec 28, 2009 12:57 PM
Bolshevik bloody poser is silent about real nazi scourge ir russia, but that grim reality can't stop commissar from mouthing about 'glorification' in Latvia :) nevermind, that we have official remebrance day on 4th July - putting out Latvia's flags with black ribbon to honour holocaust victims - that's how evil Latvia's government is glorifying nazism :)
Reply this comment
Questions for Alla
By Cooper, Curtis at Dec 28, 2009 19:14 PM
Do you think it's a bad thing that we can have this sort of exchange on the internet? Was the Soviet press system, with rigid control of printed content, especially in the political sphere, good? That is not to defend everything printed in Ogonyok since the beginning of glasnost. Did the Beatles and Bonnie M, both of whom gained popularity pre-glasnost/Gorbachev, corrupt the musical tastes of the USSR, or enrich them? Sometimes the polls give you the answers you want, and sometimes they don't.
How was Anna Politkovskaya "spreading unproved accusations of Chechen terrorists?" What proof, if any, do you have that she was fabricating her sources? Why do you ignore the brutal solution that the Russian army imposed on Chechnya?
It is so interesting that, in the wake of the Georgian conflict, Russia and the US/NATO have nimbly switched positions regarding the rights of national minorities to secede from recognized states. Before that, the US/NATO was so supportive of the secession of Kosovo from Serbia, while Russia clamped down on Chechnya. Both regions are in a bad way right now, but the respective powers in charge are satisfied.
Reply this comment
Re: Questions for Alla
By Vilkins, Mareks at Dec 29, 2009 06:07 AM
no no , Curtis, you don't get it - more fun and kick was with Bolshevik underground secret cells conspiracy than with all that "openness" and civic activism :(
Reply this comment
Re: The Legacy of 1989, in Two Hemispheres
By Vilkins, Mareks at Dec 28, 2009 12:16 PM
if Jerusalem Post is not worried about Nazi glorification in Latvia then obviously the problem is with Kremlin posers :) and nothing to do with NC
Reply this comment
to bolshevik bloody poser
By Vilkins, Mareks at Dec 28, 2009 12:12 PM
that i can freely express my rights of free speech, but you can't get such a simple point - and that's not intriguing at all ;)
Reply this comment
The user who created this comment no longer exists.
Re: The Legacy of 1989, in Two Hemispheres
By Vilkins, Mareks at Dec 27, 2009 12:38 PM
Bolshevik agitprop worked in full gears for 70 years and the result? now 'progressive' russians are supporting neoliberal putin and medvedev by 60-70%
but there will always be some particularly faithful bolshevik commissar who will "expose" NC and other activists
Reply this comment
Re: The Legacy of 1989, in Two Hemispheres
By Vilkins, Mareks at Dec 27, 2009 12:26 PM
a little bit how Jerusalem Post is supporting Nazi glorification:)
http://hnn.us/readcomment.php?id=33809&bheaders=1
The resolution did not identify any country, but Western diplomats said it was a veiled attack on Latvia and was an attempt to distract attention from its own record in Chechnya. Since regaining its independence as the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, the tiny Baltic nation has had tense relations with Moscow.
Last year, the country faced criticism over a memorial to the Latvian Legion, part of the Waffen SS. Latvian leaders have claimed that members of the unit were drafted or joined not out of any sympathy for Nazis, but to fight against the Soviets they feared even more.
During World War II, Latvia was sandwiched between the Nazi and Soviet armies. About 250,000 Latvians ended up fighting on one side of the conflict or the other as the country changed hands three times.
Nearly 80,000 Latvian Jews, 90 percent of the prewar Jewish population, were killed during the Nazi occupation, most before the formation of the Latvian Legion.
In Friday's vote, Russia mustered support from developing countries, which dominate the 53-nation commission. Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Honduras, and South Korea abstained. European nations, the United States, Australia and Japan voted against.
While deploring the crimes of the Waffen SS and the activities of current extremists, Western diplomats criticized Russia for submitting the resolution.
"We strongly condemn all forms of intolerance, including neo-Nazism - however its manifests itself. It must be combatted wherever it occurs," said Irish Ambassador Mary Whelan, speaking for the EU. "This initiative fails to address neo-Nazism in a global and balanced way and so does not add to our consideration of the issue. We question the timing and the motivations of the Russian Federation."
During the commission meeting, Russian Ambassador Leonid Skotnikov said the resolution was "thematic" - the UN body's term for general resolutions that do not criticize the human rights abuses in particular nations.
During voting on countries' rights records Thursday, Russia successfully ducked condemnation of abuses by its forces in Chechnya for the third year running.
The Russian proposal surfaced last week when Latvia and six other former Warsaw Pact members were admitted to NATO. It is one of 10 mainly ex-communist countries set to join the EU on May 1.
Reply this comment
bloody poser Alla
By Vilkins, Mareks at Dec 27, 2009 12:09 PM
who still ,probably, is dreaming about another Bolshevik coup and believing that calling Latvians as fascists will help this nonsense come true
NC in this video says that he gets hundreds e-mails every day from internet based slander industries which tries to prove that NC is working 1) for osama bin laden2) to undermine the Left 3) to sent all Jews to cemeteries 4) to harm Palestinian independence struggle
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1183723725817479703&ei=-zEJSviGCJiI-gGdhpycAQ&q=ward+churchill&hl=en&dur=3#
dream on, poser :)
Reply this comment
The user who created this comment no longer exists.
The user who created this comment no longer exists.
The user who created this comment no longer exists.
Faces of Freedom? There's only one!
By Phillips, Blair M. at Dec 20, 2009 06:15 AM
Great article again.
Freedom from russian tyranny with the dismantling of the Berlin Wall and murder of spiritual people trying to help the poor in El Salvador by U.S.-armed Atlacatl battalion. Freedom has two faces according to USA/Capitalism interpretation.
In my opinion, this article continues to support the belief that Capitalism is a "financially supported death squad" that is interested in profits at any cost and it's not about freedom for people.
Read William Blums book,"Killing Hope - US Miltary and CIA Interventions Since WW2" if you would like to find out more about the USA/Capitalism's freedom. The USA/Capitalism has murdered more people since WW2 than the NAZI's murdered in the Holocaust.
Reply this comment
The user who created this comment no longer exists.
The user who created this comment no longer exists.
The user who created this comment no longer exists.