Three Years Later: Missing Havel's Moral Stature
|
Service for Václav Havel on third anniversary of his passing |
Three years ago today Václav Havel
passed away and today he remains greatly missed. In large part, sadly, this is due to the lack of anyone else on the international scene with his moral stature and consistent solidarity with the victims of repression world wide. For example,
ten days prior to his passing Havel signed on as one of the members of a new
International Committee to Support Liu Xiaobo, the imprisoned Chinese dissident and 2010 Nobel Peace Prize laureate.
|
Murdered over international airspace on February 24, 1996 |
Yesterday, watching
the spectacle of the Obama Administration orchestrating the unveiling of its
change in Cuba policy while trying to obfuscate that it had been blackmailed by the Castro regime into releasing a man
convicted of conspiracy to commit murder in the
February 24, 1996 Brothers to the Rescue shoot down in order to obtain the freedom of Alan Gross, an innocent man brought to mind an observation made back in 2009 by the late Czech president.
Havel believed that
moral actions,
no matter how small or futile they may appear at the time can have
profound consequences for both freedom and a just society. It is because
the world is not a puzzle to be solved but incredibly much more complex
that decisions of right and wrong made by each person have such great weight.
Back in 2009, President Barack Obama had backed out of meeting with the Dalai Lama due to
an upcoming trip to China, Havel offered the following reflection on October 12, 2009 at the Forum 2000
conference:
I believe that when the new
Laureate of the Nobel Peace Prize postpones receiving the Dalai Lama
until after he has accomplished his visit to China, he makes a small
compromise, a compromise which actually has some logic to it. However,
there arises a question as to whether those large, serious compromises
do not have their origin and roots in precisely these tiny and very
often more or less logical compromises.
The New York Times in their October 13, 2009 issue in an article titled
Vaclav Havel, Still a Man of Morals and Mischief:
reported
that in an interview that was supposed to be about the revolutions
that overturned communism 20 years earlier that President Havel raised
the question asking if it was true that President Obama had refused to meet the Dalai Lama? Havel replied:
“It
is only a minor compromise,” Mr. Havel said of the non-reception of
the Tibetan leader. 'But exactly with these minor compromises start
the big and dangerous ones, the real problems. “This is actually the
first time I really do mind something Obama did,' Mr. Havel said. He
minded it “much more” than Mr. Obama’s recent decision not to station
elements of a missile-defense system in the Czech Republic, a move
that several Central European politicians criticized but that Mr.
Havel noted was ultimately “an internal American decision.”
Unfortunately, the failure of American diplomats, to reach Alan Gross for 25 days following his kidnapping by the Castro regime in December 2009 sent a signal to the dictatorship that
they could do what they wanted with this man. Over the next five years they used him as a bargaining chip demanding the release of Cuban spies who had engaged in espionage, planned to carry out terrorist acts and were
implicated in the murder of American citizens.Yesterday the hardliners in the regime achieved their objective.
Unfortunately, the consequences for Cuba and the Americas with these moral compromises by the Obama Administration will be "big and dangerous ones" generating new problems and challenges. Make no mistake the message to enemies of the United States yesterday was crysstal clear: Take an American hostage and hang on to
him for years until your demands are met and you'll get what you want. It sets a terrible and dangerous precedent.
Thankfully, Vaclav Havel has words of advice that he gave in a message to all Cubans inside and outside of the island when
he spoke to them at Florida International University back on September 23, 2002 that remain timely and relevant today:
Our world, as a whole, is not in the best of shape and the direction it
is headed in may well be quite ambivalent. But this does not mean that
we are permitted to give up on free and cultivated thinking and to
replace it with a set of utopian clichés. That would not make the world a
better place, it would only make it worse. On the contrary, it means
that we must do more for our own freedom, and that of others.
No comments:
Post a Comment