romare.ro
CORNELIU VADIM TUDOR Senator of Bucharest President of the "Greater Romania"
Party (This message is the editorial printed in the "Politica" newspaper, May
8, 1999)
THE NEED FOR PEACE
For years on end, I exhalted peace without knowing what it meant. I
was like Theodor Aman who painted Tudor Vladimirescu after the descriptions
made by the pandours, several decades after the ruler was killed. Also, I was
like Jules Verne, who never left his place of birth, but imagined all kinds
of wonderful trips. It is one thing to experience something, and another to
write stories about it. The truth is that peace can be understood, in all its
depth, only as opposed to war. That also goes for the air we breathe: you
cannot feel it, but if you don't have it for just a few seconds, watch how
you panic, and, if the 'disorder' lingers, you die. Thus, I would compose
verses about peace, and they were recited at shows dedicated to different
occasions, or on TV, but I was what Eugen Barbu used to call (the poet Ion
Barbu, for instance) "a poet of head knowledge". That is, cerebral,
methodical. I wasn't biting the air, like those desperate people suffocating
on their deathbed, the air that Eugen Barbu himself - the author of the
famous novel "The Pit" - was biting during the days and nights of his agony,
on his deathbed at the Elias Hospital. Peace was for me a dull and
commonplace reality. Almost all its giant load of symbols rested on the
fragile back - made of soft feathers and air-filled little bones - of the
dove of peace. Positive creations are not appreciated by people, unless they
are comedies. Apart from that, the world prefers scandal, and bad news, and
dramas. Here, the manner in which history is taught, everywhere on the face
of the earth, is mostly to blame. Nobody learns in school, or writes term
papers about the times of peace in a nation, but about its wars. The
chronicles bear record of the 7 year War, of the 30 year War, the 100 year
War, the 1st and 2nd World Wars, etc. These are the landmarks of fire of
human existence. Peace is considered to be something natural, although it is
nothing else but the time of calmness between two wars. I don't think anybody
has ever asked himself this question: After all, how many wars is a nation
allowed to wager in a century? I believe no more than two! Why? For two
reasons: the decimation of the population (the male population, in
particular), and the lengthy period of socio-economical re-building. Against
all expectations, I shall not begin with Romania, but with France. It
inaugurated the 19th century in full war, to be precise, starting from the
9th of November 1799 - when Napoleon Bonaparte gave the coup d'Etat (the 18th
of November, according to the calendar of the Revolution), and threw out of
the windows of the Parliament the people elected, chasing them afterwards
with a cavalry squadron - and till the 18th of June 1815, when the Corsican
genius irrevocably lost, at Waterloo, France was constantly engaged in a war
campaign. The human losses were enormous. Out of the Great Army, made up of
600,000 people, that invaded Russia, in 1812, only 60,000 returned to France.
The next war, in which France could afford to participate again, took place
after approximately 40 years, between 1853 and 1856 (the Crimean War). Very
swiftly, the nephew of Napoleon the 1st, who entered history under the title
of Napoleon the 3rd, developed a taste for war, probably desiring to equal in
glory to his illustrious forerunner, who had rocked him on his knees, when he
was a little fellow, and, in only a few years, he fought against Austria
(1859), and sent troops to China (1857-1860), Indo-China (1859-1862), and
Mexico (1862-1867). But France had become a mere shadow. In September 1870,
the autocrat surrendered at Sedan, and, with the Revolution raging, he
eventually abdicated. A man of wit said, at that time, that the great French
empire was destroyed from within by the music of Jacques Offenbach, who,
through his French Can-Can, provoked such debauchery and immorality that the
comb of the Galic Rooster flopped over. One thing is for sure: for almost 40
years again, from 1870 to 1914, France was not engaged in any wars. These
wars occur in cycles, which are not caused by the laws of history, but rather
they are the ones that determine the course of history. Taken out of its
context and considered in all its horror, a war is more powerful and
overwhelming than history itself, because, in the pages of the history
treaties, war co-exists with peace, it has a beginning and an end, but, taken
in itself, it seems downright infinite and synonymous with the Apocalypse. I
shall now refer to Romania; to be specific, I shall deal with its modern
history, that began in the year 1821. Throughout the 19th century, Romanians
were involved in one war only, the War of Independence. The excitement was
high, the zeal of the population was great also, but misfortunes overcame us.
We should remember that, compared to the campaigns that were to come, the War
of Independence, with its 1,500 dead and 7,500 wounded, was apple-pie and a
lullaby. In the 20th century, Romania participated only in two wars, true,
they were World Wars. We won the 1st one (although we lost it), we lost the
2nd one (but actually won it)! But all these things pertain to our destiny as
a people that is subject to the very complicated ways and judgments of God.
We are in no way a cowardly people, this has been proved, over and over,
throughout our existence. It's just that we are the people of the ballad
"Mioritsa". I am talking about a kind of fatalism and resignation in front of
one's destiny. In our relationships with history, we wait first to see what
the gods have to says. And we don't charge ahead blindly. Remember how many
messages the great Duke Nicolas, the brother of the Czar of Russia, sent us,
that culminated with a desperate telegram, persuading us to join the 1877
war. Remember the pressures that were placed upon us, for over two years, by
both belligerant parties, to make us dance to the tune of death, that started
in July of 1914. At a certain point, after proclaiming the neutrality of the
country, the prime-minister, Ionel I.C.Bratianu, gave utterance to a
statement that not many long-winded analysts of today are acquainted with:
"We don't want to loose our breath too soon, like the Serbs." And he held on
tight and stayed in his saddle, thoroughly weighing the international
guaranties, the military and food supplies, and the people's frame of mind.
Maybe it was in this cold, mathematical calculation that Ionel I.C.Bratianu's
training as an engineer played a decisive role; if he had been merely a
politician, or an army officer, he would have been lured by the temptations
of the Antanta, or of the Central Powers, or he would have suffered a nervous
breakdown on account of the very serious accusations that were brought
against him by Delavrancea and Nicu Filipescu, outstanding personalities of
that time, who kept calling him 'a traitor' and 'a gang leader'. But the
Sphynx didn't budge. He measured his steps very circumspectly, decreeing the
mobilization at the right time. And, here is a detail that says much about
the destiny of a country that has always endured the pangs of chronical
hunger: he waited for the harvest to be gathered, in July 1916, to make sure
we would not have to eat bread made out of flour, ground from the bark of
trees, again. In that War of the Unification of the Motherland 800,000
Romanians died. An enormous loss! 'The demographic forest' only sprouted new
shoots a little before World War 2, in the slaughter houses of which 500,000
Romanians died, some say even more. Not to mention the tribute of blood and
tears paid by millions of Romanians in Bassarabia and Bucovina, who were
killed, imprisoned, or deported by Stalin. The fiery chariot of history rolls
on over this meek and God fearing people, leaving empty seats around the
family table, while, at the front gates, fur trees, adorned with the ash
tinsel of death, loom like mortuary flags. Maybe because they were born out
of a war, originally, Romanians are not a war-like people. I cherish the
secret opinion that, if Shakespeare had known our folklore, he would have
entitled one of his plays like this: "The Bowed Head the Sword Wilt Not Cut".
Albeit that even the bowed head was cut, many a time, the principle is proven
by the lapse of centuries, and still stands true today. By all these
historical connections, I am trying to figure out the roots of our behaviour
today. Like a flash of lightning, all the polls of opinion have moved the
needle of the social barometer from 'unemployment' to 'war'. In other words,
Romanians, for the last month, have feared war more than anything else.
Unemployment? A tea party compared to war! Street crimes? They are like
kisses, when the dance is over, at the end of a wedding! I am sorry to
confess it, but from the war in Yugoslavia, I think, we, the neighbors, learn
more than the parties involved. They are too blinded by fury now, they are
living in a different dimension of time. On the one hand, the martyr
resistance of the Serbians; on the other, the mad ambition of the Western
leaders to prove that no one should ever entertain the thought of opposing
them. I will not write again, now, about the atrocities of this war, which
have gone beyond any supportable limit. NATO is lying and killing without any
shame, like a gang of Satanists, with their muzzles dripping with blood and
with their eyes burning red. There will come a time, when all the massacres
committed by this diabolical Alliance will be studied in schools under the
chapter entitled "The Degeneration of the Human Species". I was, and I have
remained, a just man, so I will not cease to speak out the truth. But
politicians should ponder, through and through, over all the effects that
their actions might have upon their people! And now I shall touch upon the
clear and temperate stand that the Romania Mare Party adopted, since
conditions have taken such an unimaginable turn in the Balkans. The truth of
the matter is that Yugoslavia is right. The province of Kosovo is the cradle
of Serbian Orthodoxy and civilization, that goes without question! The real
ethnic cleansing was performed there by the the fundamental Islamics, not by
the Serbs. But now, by the escalating of war, which has become TOTAL, the
pretext of NATO's intervention was lost on the way, and the Muslims
themselves don't know what to make of it any longer. I have before my eyes
the opinion of the Egyptian writer Mohammed Abdel Wahab: "The whole operation
has no other aim in view, save to strengthen the arms industry. If the U.S.A.
had really cared to defend Islam, then they would have solved the problem of
Palestine." Then, Aly Risk, a journalist, also from Cairo, does not believe,
in the least, in the humanitarian purpose of NATO's operations, but, rather,
suspects that the U.S.A. and the other Western countries have great hidden
interests: "The attacks will continue till the very end, so that the U.S.A.
may reach its two goals: to wipe Yugoslavia off the face of the earth, for
repeatedly standing up against Washington, and, simultaneously, to erase
Islam off the map of the Balkans. It is only then that the U.S.A would have
no more adversaries." I made mention of Egypt. In March 1994, I was on an
official visit to Cairo, as part of a Senate delegation. We were welcomed by
the President of Egypt, Hosni Moubarak. I studied him very carefully. Our
most honored host was called 'the President' because that is the Western name
for the highest office in a republic. In reality, he was (and still is) the
follower of the Pharaohs. Doublessly - an absolute dictator, but what else
could he be in an Eastern country, from the North of Africa, which is
constantly troubled by profound contradictions and paradoxes. In his youth,
he had been a general in the air force, from which position he had zealously
fought against the agressor, Israel. Then, after the unexpected assassination
of Anwar El Sadat, he became the head of the State. His responsabilities were
now different. True, the international concourse of events was different,
too, after the peace at Camp David, in 1979. The new Pharaoh turned into a
man of peace, and his country gradually started getting back on its feet.
Hosni Moubarak was to give the great blow, in 1991, during the Gulf War. As a
reward for placing itself on the 'good' side of the barricade - namely, it
did not attack Israel, and did not join Saddam Hussein - Egypt was forgiven 7
billion dollars of debts (America spared it 4 billion, and Iraq, 3 billion).
I don't know how much Iraq would have benefitted, if it had received moral
support from Egypt, but I do know how much Egypt would have lost! I am not
pleading for stradling the fence, and much less for political prostitution.
But a leader must do that which is best for his people. Politics is, after
all, not only the art of negotiations, but also the art of compromise.
Besides, most certainly, politics is not mathematics, and, in its field of
activity, 1 plus 1 does not always equal 2. When, by a simple tilt of the
scales, you can help your people with 7 billion dollars, instead of burdening
it down with 77 billion, in war losses, then you have passed the test of
veracity. Two years ago, I was in Libya. Colonel Khaddaffi is a man of honor.
As a matter of fact, I guess he is the only colonel in the world who does not
want to become a general, although he could. Regardless of what some people
may say, those who call him the head of terrorism in the whole world (!), the
Libyan leader is a perfectly balanced man, and knows history remarkably well.
For this very reason, that he is a man of character, he refused to hand over
the two suspects of the Lockherbee bombing, of 1988, a tragedy in which no
less than 270 innocent people perished. He, the colonel, had information that
the two men had in no way been involved in this, and he did not intend to
hand them over to sure death, especially since the commotion caused by the
catastrophe was still great. Then, they imposed the air embargo against
Libya. And it has lasted, uninterruptedly, for 11 years. I could feel its
inconvenience myself, for just a few days: I had to fly to Tunis first, and,
then, from there, we took a sort of a night taxi, all the way to Libya, for
400 kilometers through the desert. It is uncommonly tiring and, most of all,
humiliating. But the embargo hinders not only travellers and air cargo, Libya
as a whole is deeply affected by this condition that I would not fear to call
a genuine 'plague'. Actually, in the case of Khaddaffi, they looked for the
Lockherbee pretext, because he was to much 'in the way', he would not yield,
he kept rejecting the authority of the Mafia that is running the world. All
right, but why punish the people? The people are suffering, that is a fact.
They feel they are isolated, ostracized, and on 'the black list'. The core of
the matter is this: the ephemeral leaders from the West (who have to be
changed every 4 years, or, if they are lucky, every 8 years) cannot stand to
see that the leaders in the East are sometimes cleverer then they are, they
are more appreciated by their people and live longer, and some of them stay
in office for more than 20 years. That is why they exterminated Ceaucescu.
That is why they demonized Saddam Hussein, Moammer El Khaddaffi and, of late,
Slobodan Milosevic. Evidently, Milosevic, like the others, is right. The
difference between the President of Yugoslavia and the President of America
is like day and night - the former is a patriot, who stands up to defend his
country; the latter is a mentally unbalanced maniac, an animal of prey, who
mistakes countries for women, and national flags for Monica Lewinski's dress.
I have no respect whatsoever for this planetary hoodlum, named Bill Clinton,
and I can foresee that he will probably not die a natural death. Yet, I will
go on speaking my mind: Was it worth it for Yugoslavia to go through this
sacrifice?True, for your own country, for its territorial integrity you
should spare nothing, you can and must give even your life for it. On one
condition: You need to have the guarantee that your sacrifice will solve the
problem. But the river of history has overflown its banks, and is now
devastating everything in its way. In your desire to defend your country, you
run the risk of contributing, although involuntarily, to its irretrievable
destruction. It was so clear, from the very first attacks against Yugoslavia,
that NATO is a criminal organization that can go to any lengths to do
anything, including even the radiating of its own soldiers (you should read
about the victims of "the Desert Storm syndrome"). Do you know how Milosevic
acted? Like a traveller walking down the railroad tracks, believing no train
could run over him, at that hour, because the fast train no longer ran that
way. That was his firm belief, but he hadn't heard that the traffic
controllers had changed the train schedule, and, to crown it all, the train
engineer was out of his mind. So, according to the old schedule, Milosevic is
right, but what about the new schedule, that has imposed a different reality,
and the train ran over the uncautious traveller? The visitors, who find
themselves in the yard of a lunatic asylum, should behave with much
circumspection. Let's say a furious patient attacks them; if they are
sensible people, they will not react with the same kind of violence, but will
carefully take him by the hand, then call the doctors and the men in the
white coats, while, all the time, gently talking to him, till they put him in
the straight jacket. NATO's acts of collective dementia don't even have to be
proved, their consequences can be seen, day and night, everywhere. What
should Milosevic have done? Not long ago, I said that there was a point in
the so-called Rambouillet negotiations, in which President Milosevic, though
not present there, should have stopped. I am talking about organizing a
Referendum, in 3 years time, regarding the status of the Province of Kosovo.
If I had been in Milosevic's place, and if I had had to choose between the
destruction of my country and an agreement that was to be put into action
only after 3 years, I wouldn't have hesitated for one second: I would have
chosen the Referendum! Because, in 3 years, many things can happen: in the
first place, all those who wave the sickle of war over their heads, Bill
Clinton, Madeleine Albright, William Cohen, will step off the scene. In the
second place, Boris Eltsin himself will vanish out of the picture - and, in
my opinion, he is the main cause of the tragedy in Yugoslavia. In the third
place, Belgrade would have looked for new allies, would have made an
efficient lobby in the international organizations, and maybe its cruelest
enemies (NATO and Albania) would have disappeared by then. Try to imagine how
many moves Milosevic could have made, in 3 years, without letting down his
principles! But he did not deal with it like a statesman, he dealt with it
like a banker. I am sorry for him, but the price that is being paid is
fearfully big. I don't know what dignity is good for, if you no longer have a
place to show it in, that is, if your country is dying. And I don't know what
the ecological balance of the Planet would look like, if all the trees were
inflexible and would break with the first wind storm! In politics you need to
ride with the tide, sometimes, waiting for a more favourable moment, for a
place of rest, an island, or a safe shore. Hypothetically speaking, if I were
a Serb, I would find no comfort in the thought that NATO covered themselves
with shame and brought upon themselves the curses of the whole world, but I
would be more concerned that my country is perishing. When we read that NATO
distroyed the understructure of Yugoslavia, we should call a spade a spade,
and understand that NATO distroyed the country itself, in a cataclysm that is
unprecedented in history. Does any leader have the right not to analyse and
anticipate all these events? This is the great mistake of Slobodan Milosevic:
He was not cleverer than his hunters! He will remain in history as a martyr.
But martyrs give their life, so that their nation may live, they don't die
together with the nation. That is why I prefer the alternative of Romanian
wisdom. And I am learning to esteem peace! Oh, Lord! Give me the wisdom not
to follow those passionately angry minds, that keep stirring me up to
resistence and rebellion, but when I look for them, in a time of trouble, and
wait for them to stand with me in the heat of the battle, they never show up,
they hide behind curtains, and they leave me uncovered. On a much smaller
scale, I have been experiencing this, for many years. Many push me in front,
and set me on fire, and ask me to perform miracles of bravery, after which
they all scatter like frightened birds, and leave me to fight by myself,
empty-handed, with the enemies of the Romanian nation. I ask you once again:
How many days of bombing would the Romanians have been able to withstand?
It's unconceivable for them not to go out and drink a beer at the "Tree Stump
Restaurant" in the Cismigiu park, or play checkers on a bench at the entrance
of their apartment buildings, or press the buttons of their remote control,
looking for movies and football games! I'm telling you, we wouldn't have
endured it for one day! Just remember how troubled we were, two weeks ago, by
the toy earthquake, and how we dashed out into the street! Also remember that
most of the victims, in December 1989, were made not by terrorists, but by
panic, because we were not prepared for anything like that. Throughout the
20th century, the Romanian people have had an empty stomach, but a heart full
of patriotic pride. Without giving up one inch of our national dignity, I
suggest that we know what is our national interest. In other words, don't let
us be loosers of history, but winners! The war in Yugoslavia has matured us
all, extremely fast. The Serbs are a people of guerilla fighters. The
Romanians are a people of singers. On a Planet which is not being led by the
public opinion, but by some assassins, it is advisable to walk on tiptoes, as
if the ground were strewn with landmines. You can reach the same end by many
ways.They are all good, except one: the way of suicide! And, after all, why
should Romania - and not Hungary - commit suicide?
CORNELIU VADIM TUDOR Senator of Bucharest President of the "Greater Romania"
Party (This message is the editorial printed in the "Politica" newspaper, May
8, 1999) |
