About parades and insecure rulers

President Trump seems intent on staging some glorious and costly parade, to showcase our military might and — presumably — to celebrate his own power as America’s Commander in Chief. Why does this sound familiar to me?

Nicolae Ceaușescu was still ruling Romania with an iron fist in the summer of 1976, when my parents brought us back for a week-long visit with friends in the lush countryside. In one town near the border with Serbia (then called Yugoslavia), we happened upon a strange spectacle. A few days before Liberation Day, citizens were lining the main street and cheering as soldiers and workers and schoolchildren marched down the middle. It seemed the whole town had turned out for what amounted to a dress rehearsal for the big event — marchers and spectators included. Such was the hero worship of this hollow autocracy, that the farce of national strength and solidarity had to be practiced. 

The spectators even waited as the marchers ran back down a side street in order to repeat the exercise from the top. On TV, I had seen the fancy parades in Beijing, Moscow and even Bucharest, but it had never occurred to me just how absurd was the farce and how insecure the ruler — or to what degree everyone knew it. 

I have been to Paris for the July 14 parade, which is impressive and genuinely popular. It is embedded in the national consciousness, and never about the politicians who happen to oversee France's military professionals.

Romania got rid of Ceausescu's parades in 1989,
but North Korea's Kim is still going "strong"...

I doubt we civilians will be required to practice cheering in advance of Trump's big day, though the President has already branded as traitors any Members of Congress who didn’t stand and applaud for his State of the Union address. Personally, I need no practice. I’ve seen this movie before, about the cult of personality, and I don’t need to watch it again. #SpoilerAlert 

Hooray for Europe!

Romania, 1976 - I was shorter, but Communism was big.

Many of my friends on this side of the Atlantic (and on the other side of the Mediterranean) have reacted with derision and ridicule to the news that the European Union is receiving this year's Nobel Peace Prize. LOL, haha, gimmeabreak, etc.

Here are a few of my own reactions:

THIS ISN'T FUNNY

The eurozone is currently suffering through potentially catastrophic economic turmoil. While there were definite structural flaws in the new economic integration, and the major EU players have exacerbated matters by reducing rather than expanding short-term liquidity, the major crisis was triggered by our own financial brinkmanship and near-collapse here in the United States: The CDO and mortgage bubble, Lehman Bros, trillion-dollar budgetary black hole in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and much more. There's nothing funny about Europe's current woes in any case, especially given the increasing connectedness and see-saw dynamic between our two mega-economies, and the history of instability over there eventually costing Americans our own blood and treasure.

EUROPEANS ARE THE GOOD GUYS

In a world that's increasingly out of balance -- and with violence and uncertainty flaring across the Middle East, the EU has been our key partner in promoting stability and progress. Its member states also comprise the bulk of our NATO allies. We should be wishing them well, and doing whatever we can to encourage and support them, not tear them down and poke fun.

MAYBE THEY DO DESERVE THE NOBEL PRIZE

When Alfred Nobel conceived of his peace prize, he wasn't thinking about ending conflicts in East Asia or Central Africa -- he was focused on Europe. The EU s the embodiment of many of those hopes and aspirations -- as the Nobel Committee put it:

The work of the EU represents "fraternity between nations", and amounts to a form of the "peace congresses" to which Alfred Nobel refers as criteria for the Peace Prize in his 1895 will.

EUROPEAN UNITY MATTERS

All those childhood summers spent bouncing around Europe during the 1970s involved no end of cumbersome border crossings between East and West, within the Communist Bloc, and even between some of the Western European democracies. Borders and virtual barriers were very evident, and not only because of the Soviet domination over half the continent. Europe's divisions went back centuries and the animosities were still very fresh. Indigenous Muslims and Gypsies were barely tolerated, if at all. And of course, the despair, privations and terror of Communist rule were as overwhelming as they were implausible. And it was all very real. Just visiting Berlin today is an out-of-body experience, as the once stark dividing line remains only as a course of paving stones, a short segment of the old wall, and memorial markers where East Germans were killed attempting to cross into freedom. The very idea of East Germany or exit visas seems so remote, and yet 25 years ago it was a reality.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH

Perhaps, as Americans living in the here and now, we measure the world too much by what we -- not others -- have achieved recently, rather than in any other generation. The challenges we face today can blind us to the struggles of every other nation, forgetting that the post-9/11 mirror poles used to check for bombs under our cars were once used in Berlin to stop East Germans from escaping between the axles.

As early as 1821, Thomas Jefferson wrote to John Adams: “Even should the cloud of barbarism and despotism again obscure the science and liberties of Europe, this country remains to preserve and restore light and liberty to them.” Such arrogance and exceptionalism have been among our greatest flaws and most powerful of inducements to keep pushing forward and saving the world. But this week, a little humility is in order, and yes, some appreciation for the dedication, aspirations and achievements of others -- especially those we call our friends.

Our debt to Vaclav Havel

The fear was palpable on our first family visit to Prague, 40 years ago. My parents had been in Vienna, packing for a visit, when Soviet tanks took over the streets of Prague in 1968. The Prague Spring was still fresh in people's minds, though for a five-year-old American no history lesson was necessary. My memories of that 1971 trip are only of darkness and desperation, like the Batman and Spiderman cartoons I later watched growing up, or the films noirs I eventually came to appreciate as a college student.

One of those who saw through the darkness was Vaclav Havel. Many years later, he would write: “The time of hard, everyday work has come, a time in which conflicting interests have surfaced, a time for sobering up, a time when all of us – and especially those in politics – must make it very clear what we stand for.” I believe that, for Havel, each moment was such a time.

Having suffered for his principled dissent and literary liberties, he used his moment to lead Czechoslovakia to democracy in what became known as the Velvet Revolution for its lack of bloodshed on either side, whether before or after. The fact that Czechoslovakia has a long tradition of cultural and political expression certainly helped usher in the post-Communist phase, but the situation could still have turned deadly – both before and after the revolution – and there was no guaranteed outcome. 

In retrospect, with so many people intent on putting the dark years behind them, the democratic transformation can seem obvious and inevitable. But back then, few people had the courage or creativity to see beyond the prison running across Eastern and Central Europe. 

Berlin might give Washington some hope

Fifty years ago, the Berlin Wall went up, blocking East and West Germans from crossing the dividing line left from the end of World War II (which Germany lost). By the time my parents drove us across Europe ten summers later, East German guards were sticking mirror-ended spars under our car to make sure we weren't smuggling anyone out to the West. (Of course, as I grew up, I would learn exhaustively about the Holocaust, but that's for a separate post.)

The next time I'd see anything like that was on Capitol Hill following 9/11, in Washington, DC, of all places (we had won WWII). The deserted expanse of public spaces, where cars once roamed freely, may be of necessity, but it's still jarring. Our architecture, after all, follows the dual American ethos of automobile access and public participation.

I used to aspire to work in government, because it seemed like a worthwhile experience (despite the constant complaints by federal workers who are free to join the private sector at any time). Since 9/11, the added incentive is just to be able to enter buildings without waiting for clearance and being escorted around like a tourist (even when I am a tourist).

Arab Putin? Or real Mideast democracy?

Before stepping aside, a President abruptly annoints a veteran intelligence officer as his transitional successor. Where have I heard this before? Yes, I remember now:  Around 6 a.m. on New Year's Eve, the last day of 1999, I was jolted out of bed by news that Boris Yeltsin had thrown in the towel on what might have become 11 post-Soviet time zones of democratic evolution.

After centuries of feudalism and decades of Communism, Russia had a shot at pluralistic democracy. Now that corporatist, ideology-free technocracy has taken hold, there's little chance that human rights and free markets will be instituted for the next few generations. If the Middle East is to move forward and begin reclaiming its heritage as a crossroads and incubator of civilization, it will need more than failed states, oil platforms, and duty-free hubs.

By trying to stop Egypt's revolution halfway, through an "orderly" transition guided by Hosni Mubarak's own loyalists, we now risk losing democracy where it matters most. There are no second chances, no do-overs, no new post-War shake-ups to anticipate.

Egyptians have seized an opportunity to set a new course. It will not be easy, nor its success assured. But half-measures run the risk of squandering a once-in-a-century chance, not only for Egypt but for the entire Middle East. The Cold War and de-colonization ended one and two generations ago, respectively. The house that Nasser built back in the 1950s and '60s can either fall entirely or merely change owners. 

Almost a Manifesto

Just because something is inevitable doesn’t mean it will come to pass, and just because something is unthinkable is no guarantee it won’t happen. 

Israeli-Palestinian peace seems to be a no-brainer, especially 17 years after Oslo. And yet, most Israelis are convinced that Oslo “failed”. What failed was the U.S. Congress, among others, to support the process politically and financially when the two adversaries were ready to move forward. Rabin knew that Israelis and Palestinians couldn't live together, so he sought to separate as quickly as possible under some diplomatic cover of night. The window of opportunity was wasted once Rabin was assassinated, demonstrating that at certain points in history it really can’t be bigger than one or a handful of individuals.

Reflecting on the 47th anniversary of President Kennedy’s assassination (which happened a bit before I was born), Cold War brinkmanship could so easily have led to full-scale nuclear war, if not for a few cool heads. Even for those of us old enough to remember just the 1970s and 1980s, the blanket of nuclear terror and the despair of Soviet-bloc police states are inconceivable in hindsight. One must travel to North Korea to grasp what I experienced as a young boy during one long summer in Ceaucescu’s Romania. 

The idea that things can get out of hand and that leaders and followers can lose touch with reality seems preposterous, and yet this happens with frightening regularity right here in the United States -- fear, paranoia, suspicion, hatred, willing suspension of disbelief. In ever-widening circles, the subversion of basic liberties and freedom masquerades as a triumph of American values. The Cold War may have ended, but history continues and our intellectual and spiritual struggle for genuine democracy and enlightenment is a daily challenge, even when we choose (yes, it is a choice) to ignore it.

Even as the cult of self-enrichment and self-absorption metastasizes throughout our political culture, many Americans stubbornly and proudly maintain the ethic of self-sacrifice and common good which JFK tapped, celebrated, and sanctified. For those of us, the purpose of government is to make America and the world a better place, because we have a purpose that must go beyond ourselves. At no other time in nearly a century has this assumption been so tested and demeaned. And yet, at no other time has it been as meaningful or critical.

President Kennedy famously said: “We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too.”

We have been to the moon, but we should still avoid the easy answers and the convenient black-and-white analysis, or the obvious path of polarization. We do these things, “not because they are easy, but because they are hard...” Otherwise, we humans are wasting some valuable space back here on Earth.