Web edition Vol. 38- No. 4 August 1990 p. 8 - 13

Stability and Integration in Mitteleuropa Gianni de Michelis, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Italy The year 1989 marked not only the end of a decade, but the end of an era. In a flood of protest and popular uprising, the countries of Eastern Europe unleashed a season of transformation, as exalting as it was dramatic. One after the other, regimes that, until a short while ago, had seemed rock-solid, suddenly began to reveal all their innate weaknesses, laying bare the pre-cariousness of an ideology that had been their lifeblood for decades, preventing any possibility of evolution. Incredulous, we witnessed first the erosion and then the collapse of an entire world. And although the first signs came from Poland and Hungary, the definitive confirmation that something was truly changing was, and continues to be, the push toward German unification. The deepest and most painful wound right through the heart of Europe, which served as a constant reminder to us of the division of our continent and of the very real confrontation between East and West, is finally healing. Today we are creating a new order, no longer based on the seemingly unavoidable concept, war improbable, peace impossible. In this process, we have witnessed the first steps taken by our fellow Europeans in the East with a sense of involvement and excitement equal in intensity only to our emotions when they were cut off from the rest of Europe. But a watchful eye could not fail to realize that, once the euphoria had subsided, there would surely follow an era of uncertainties -which is exactly what is happening now. Before, we faced a situation in which changes were few and far between and, to a large extent, predictable; now we find ourselves immersed in a highly uncertain guessing game. President Bush warned of this, stating that the real danger we face is no longer a surprise attacks, but rather a period of chaos. In the place of our familiar, and therefore reassuring adversaries, are we now to find ourselves face to face with some rather disquieting friends? The old world was familiar territory to us, while today's is full of uncertainties, resulting from the disappearance of traditional points of reference. We are experiencing something akin to Pascal's bewilderment and awe upon his realization that the universe had no Ptolemaic centre and was merely a small speck in the infinity of space. One by one, the countries that have shaken off Communism have been going to the polls, in what was the first test of their de-mocratization process. So far, the results confirm the rejection of the political model which has ruled them for over 40 years. Now that the idyll of recent months has passed, the new leaders often find themselves compelled to deal with dissent and opposition, requiring a spirit of compromise that is difficult for those who have just emerged from a totalitarian system and a revolution, even if a bloodless one. The difficult process of retreat In this process, all of the countries of Mitteleuropa must take risks and assume responsibilities. To begin with, let us consider Gorbachev and his country. Gorbachev had the courage to acknowledge the profound nature of the crisis in the Soviet system. He also realized that it could not be solved by violent means. He had no desire to be the leader of a Soviet Union fighting a losing battle and, therefore, decided that the USSR would withdraw voluntarily from Europe. Carl Von Clausewitz demonstrated that of all military manoeuvres, the most difficult is retreat, especially retreat from indefensible positions. And if the German historian were here today to witness Gorbachev's retreat from the ruins of Communism, the Soviet leader would very likely assume, in his eyes, a stature commensurate with the difficulty of the task, undoubtedly one of the most difficult in history. From this aspect, Gorbachev appears more as a liberator than a builder. But the situation requires our intervention as well, in order to prevent disorder from taking root in the areas he leaves behind him. For this reason, we are all making efforts to support the countries of Central and Eastern Europe in their march toward democracy. We are trying to bolster their structures and institutions, for example through the help provided by the organism created last January in Venice by the Council of Europe: the Committee for Democracy Through Law, an instrument for drawing on the studies and experiences of countries with strong democratic traditions. The same applies to assistance for economic reform, primarily directed at Central Europe. Communist ideology and the system it produced had cut off these countries (some of them, such as Czechoslovakia, already highly industrialized and modern) from the progress and development of the post-war period, leaving them in a state of relative backwardness. It also caused a psychological backwardness of sorts, a much more complex phenomenon than simple economic or industrial backwardness. While it is true that tremendous resources of passion, intelligence and faith were consumed to realize the collectivist system, in no other part of the world has this system revealed itself to be so great an error and such a deception, than in Central Europe. Here we have seen that the system cannot be transformed. Nonetheless, as Communism makes its exit, we do not want it to leave behind, right in the heart of Europe, the chaos out of which it was born in the first half of this century. In the economic sector, new financial institutions will have to be created, as well as a market economy. This is not some abstract concept, that can come into being through a simple decree; it requires a complex and highly developed juridical structure. Bridge for all Europe Professional and entrepreneurial classes, with a capacity for initiative, will have to be developed, and this will require our assistance. It is an extremely difficult undertaking, since in the capitalist world such a phenomenon is the product of a centuries-old evolution. The countries of Eastern Europe will soon come knocking on the door of the European Community. Prime Minister Calfa of Czechoslovakia confirmed this in Brussels, on the occasion of the signing of the cooperation agreement between his country and the European Community. A coordinated approach is, therefore, necessary to prepare for these nations' return to a Europe whose vital centre will comprise the Twelve of the European Community. It will be up to this Europe to make use of this patrimony and take maximum advantage of each country's individual contribution to our common house. For example, East German Prime Minister Lothar de Maiziere, speaking recently before the Council of Europe, pointed out how his part of Germany can act as a bridge for all of Europe. Thus, there are two tendencies at work here: toward continental integration which, while respecting national identity, will bring about an awareness among all peoples of their common roots; or toward fragmentation, which would mean catastrophe for all. This, too, is nowhere more evident than in that part of Europe that had always been in a kind of limbo between the Russian and Germanic worlds. Today, we can offer that Europe an involvement in the process of Community integration, with the prospect, at a later stage, of full membership in a strong, cohesive organization formed by the Twelve. The Association Agreement that the Community has just prepared for negotiations with the Eastern countries, to begin during the six-month Italian presidency, provides the juridicial basis for this rapprochement and indicates the general lines along which Central and Eastern Europe should gradually seek convergence with the Twelve. The current situation has become increasingly uncertain, as a result of the Soviet Union's internal problems, as formidable as its geographic size, and the accelerated pace of the German unification process, which continually brings new surprises, due to the numerous implications, both internal and external. Initial stage of reconstruction The constantly changing picture requires us to continually update our objectives, as well as the instruments needed to achieve them. In any case, the Soviet Union is a world apart from its former satellites and its aim still appears to be a revision of the present system. It has been said that the cold war is now over. And after every war, the beginning of a period of peace is always marked by an initial phase of reconstruction, in this case, the rebuilding of a new structure suitable for Europe's new-found, and perhaps even newly-fashioned position as an epicentre of civilization. In building the new Europe on the ruins of the old, we would be wise to preserve whatever elements can help to provide cohesion on our continent. As stated by Prime Minister Haughey of Ireland, who currently holds the Presidency of the European Community, in building European union, we must try to eliminate all that can divide us, while preserving and safeguarding all that distinguishes us. Now that East-West relations are no longer defined in terms of confrontation, Manichaeism, and deep-rooted bipolarity, there has emerged a new political will for collaboration among countries that are neighbours not only from a geographical standpoint, and that share many elements of affinity. The countries of Eastern Europe are rediscovering - at all levels - a pluralism suffocated for decades, and are liberating themselves from a forced hegemonic and ideological homogeneity. This process should, however, be a source of enrichment and not lead to dangerous centrifugal forces. For an illustration of how destructive such forces can be, one need only think of the nationality problems currently plaguing so many parts of Europe. Today's crisis in the doctrine of equality, the raison d'etre of Communist regimes, is giving birth to a culture in which the right to affirm differences is paramount and in which nationality is clearly a key element. This transformation must be carefully controlled, in order to prevent it from doing even greater harm than that caused by the failure of the previous order. According to Claudio Magris, an Italian scholar, a fundamental characteristic of Mitteleuropa is an agonizing inability to forget. Mitteleuropa, he says, always has an account to settle with the past, going back as far as the Thirty Years' War. This was also an essential factor behind the idea of creating new forms of association in Central Europe, beginning even on a very small scale. In November 1989, it was decided to launch the Quadrangular Initiative, which has now become the Pentagonal Initiative. I think it is important to point out the speed with which this initiative was put in place, immediately after the fall of the Berlin Wall and following closely the collapse of the last bastions of Communism. At the Budapest meeting, a new form of regional cooperation was born, with the participation of Italy, Hungary, Yugoslavia and Austria. Czechoslovakia has now joined as well and we all agree that its role will be pivotal. Pooling resources Four countries - Italy, a member of the European Community and NATO; Austria, neutral and a member of EFTA; Yugoslavia, non-aligned; and Hungary, a member of the Warsaw Pact and COMECON -have thus decided to pool their resources and collaborate in areas such as the environment, culture, tourism, small and medium-size enterprises, science and technology, telecommunications and information. The objectives and modus operandi are set forth in a Joint Declaration and Policy Address of last November. They are to be pursued through specific projects and in the framework of various working groups, which can also call on the advice and assistance of experts. The initiative will be of a continuous nature, even though no formal institutions are envisaged, and its bywords will be flexibility and pragmatism. It will be on the agenda of political meetings of Foreign Ministers, Deputy Prime Ministers and Prime Ministers, who will have the responsibility of sanctioning the chosen courses of action. The purpose of our initiative is to facilitate a dialogue among several interlocutors and to respond to the most pressing needs, both short and medium term. One could say it is to be a buttress to provide extra support for the main construction. It is an initial step, a first element of what is to be the new European architecture. Such forms of empirical collaboration are not intended to replace existing mechanisms and institutions, but rather to complement them, in order to facilitate the transition to broader systems that may emerge during the 1990s, based on three supporting elements: the European Community, NATO and the CSCE. As a participant in all three of these institutions, Italy feels a special responsibility, all the more so since our country will assume the presidency of the Pentagonal Initiative on 1 August, after having taken over the presidency of the European Community on 1 July, and during the year of the 15th anniversary of the Final Act of Helsinki. The five countries participating in the Pentagonal Initiative will hold a Summit in Venice, attended by their Prime Ministers and Foreign Ministers, to mark this important beginning. The interest already expressed by Bulgaria and Romania in the Initiative testifies to the soundness of this approach, which appears to have gained widespread approval. The basic concept is to aim at integration in order to prevent instability, dangerous power vacuums and schisms. I am convinced that it could be applied to other areas as well, and I have suggested that a larger-scale conference be organized, along the lines of the CSCE, for the countries of the Mediterranean. In my view, the Bratislava meeting of last April can be seen in this same light. On that occasion, Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Poland met to discuss their future, and invited the other countries of the Quadrangular Initiative to participate as observers. Czechoslovakian President Vaclav Havel stressed that, even though the purpose of the meeting was to discuss these countries' return to Europe, this was not to be taken in a literal sense. That is, it does not imply a return to the past, to systems that are now obsolete; rather, the countries involved must look to the future and seek to create a wholly new order. Amalgamation rather, than fragmentation It is our hope that our Quadrangular Initiative will serve as a model for other, similar forms of association; for example, that undertaken by the Baltic states and Poland, to be joined possibly by Czechoslovakia and to which I referred last December during talks with my colleague, Hans Dietrich Genscher. In the meantime, an initial meeting has been convened for this autumn. Although its agenda is to be limited, for the time being, to environmental issues, this is an encouraging beginning. The process of structural disintegration occuring in Eastern Europe is a necessary precondition for broader forms of association. But this will come about only if there is, in the end, amalgamation rather than fragmentation. Indeed, this fear of dismemberment in the East, fear of chaos from the Elbe to the Urals, serves as an incentive for increased integration, both at European Community and regional level. Only an Eastern Europe involved in various forms of regional cooperation, with strong links to the Twelve, while maintaining its close relations with the Soviet Union, can play a stabilizing role, also with respect to this superpower that today seems on the verge of chaos. The idea of integration must, therefore, be extended to include the Europe of the Slavs, of the Danube region, formerly Habsburg, and of the Balkans. A Europe of the Twelve is not enough, but nor do we want to create new axes, new hegemonies or new national alliances. What we seek is a gradual integration. Europe is a concept, a concept in evolution, and a system of values. The United States and Canada are also part of the concept of Europe, as is Cyrillic Russia. According to Braudel, the former are Europe's daughters, while the latter is its sister. The situation may seem difficult and confused, as it is at the dawn of every new era. But once the East-West caesura has been eliminated, it will be possible to return gradually to cohabitation among all peoples of the Western world, from San Francisco to Vladivostok, in accordance with the CSCE ideal. We would like to see this ideal pursued further, beginning with this year's CSCE Summit of the Thirty-five. Europe is casting off its fears, determined to shape events, and not just react to them, in order to bring to a positive conclusion the revolution that began in 1989. But we must act quickly and, for this reason, the regional approach is especially important. These are years in which, to use the words of Goethe, eternity, once lost, never returns. If we do not succeed in setting in motion this process, beginning from the centre of our continent, the static but less predictable order of the past will be transformed into a permanent state of instability, leading us into the unknown.