Anunţ publicitar al Statului Român in ziarele mari ale lumii:

Cine a putut, ştiut şi vrut a plecat.

Avem nevoie de ajutor!
Plătim la nivelul pieţei.
Preferăm vorbitori de Româna!

______________________________


poante § intelart § cafeneaua
© 2005
cel mai vechi blog peromaneste

2.3.13

Vaclav Klaus - modelul despre care nu se vorbeste in Romania, despre care altii vorbesc neputincios

The Failings of a Czech President

By James Kirchick

Vaclav Klaus will leave office next week after a decade as president of the Czech Republic. Although he played an important role in his country's history, his legacy is likely to be marred by his controversial positions on the European Union, climate change and often blatant populism.

An interview earlier this month with outgoing Czech President Vaclav Klaus was routine: spiteful, hysterical, and disparaging of his predecessor, the late poet, playwright and dissident, Vaclav Havel.

In a discussion with the Polish weekly Rzeczy, Klaus ridiculed the widely admired first president of the Czech Republic as promoting "Havelism" while in office. Havel's governing philosophy, Klaus explained, was similar to Jacobinism, the murderous ideology of the 18th century French revolutionaries which ended at the guillotine. Klaus' outburst earned him a rebuke from the Czech chapter of PEN International, which asked him to stop "dirtying" his predecessor's memory, as well as from former dissident and Defense Minister Sascha Vondra, who correctly pointed out that had Havel really been a Jacobin, Klaus -- Havel's long-time political nemesis -- would have been decapitated.

"Havelism" is but the latest creed coined by the controversial Czech president, who has generously appended the suffix "ism" to a variety of phenomena he detests: "humanrightsism," "NGO-ism" and "homosexualism," in addition to railing against more recognized movements like environmentalism and "globalism."

As he departs office on March 7, Klaus leaves behind a contentious legacy as the most influential Czech political figure of the post-communist period next only to Havel, who died in December of 2011. Known internationally for his denial of anthropogenic climate change and fiercely critical stance against the European Union, Klaus is credited, even by his detractors, as playing a constructive role in the peaceful dissolution of Czechoslovakia and the privatization of the Czech economy in the early 1990's when he served as prime minister. In light of the "other post-communist federations that fell apart in a more violent way," Jiri Pehe, a former Havel advisor, says, his leadership during the "Velvet Divorce" that led to the independent Czech and Slovak Republics is "no small thing." Robert Kron, an analyst with the Center for European Policy Analysis in Washington, credits Klaus' early 90's voucherization policy that privatized public industries as "yield(ing) a society that began to learn capitalism."

A Man Given to Contrarianism

But Klaus' decade in the presidency, marked by his frequent testing of the job's constitutional limits and outbursts on matters ranging from gays to global warming, more accurately capture his influence and character. Forced to step down as prime minister over a party financing scandal in 1997, Klaus remained in parliament and succeeded Havel as president in 2003. Not content with merely carrying out the duties of the largely ceremonial post, he used his newfound visibility to revamp himself as a public intellectual on the world stage. He published a book on the subject of global warming, "Blue Planet in Green Shackles," and challenged former US Vice President Al Gore to a debate. In 2009, despite approval from the Czech parliament and a constitutional provision mandating his signature, he delayed his approval of the EU Lisbon Treaty until a provision was added prohibiting the descendants of Germans expelled from Czechoslovakia after World War II from reclaiming their property (Klaus has compared the EU to the Soviet Union, and recently instructed Czech military officers that they must defend the country "against unification tendencies in Europe").

So given to contrarianism is Klaus that even his eulogy of Havel (an awkward speech given the men's mutual enmity) caused some listeners' eyes to roll. "(Havel) also played an important role through the concrete steps he took so consciously and decisively to support those of us who did not see in 1989 simply another 1968 or another attempt to create socialism with a human face," Klaus said before the audience of assembled international dignitaries. Paul Wilson, the Canadian translator of Havel's works, later remarked that, "It was as though Klaus, aware of the momentousness of the occasion, were reserving a top spot for himself in an eventual rewriting of history. In that sense, he was true to form."

While Klaus has gained notoriety for the things he's said, it is often the things he doesn't say, or that his closest of aides say, which generate the most controversy. Deputy Chancellor Petr Hajek, Klaus' right-hand man, for example, has claimed that the 9/11 attacks were the work of the American government. Following Osama bin Laden's assassination two years ago, Hajek declared that the al-Qaida leader was a "media fiction." In a book published last year on the 23rd anniversary of the Velvet Revolution, "Death in Velvet," Hajek wrote that Havel "served as a tool of Satan" spreading "hatred and lies" (Klaus endorsed the book). When Hajek denounced homosexuals as "deviant fellow citizens" before Prague's first gay pride parade in 2011, Klaus defended the term "deviant" as "value-neutral."

Perhaps no episode was more infamous than that of Klaus' stealing a pen during a signing ceremony with his Chilean counterpart in 2011. Video of the event went viral around the world. But while the pen-snatching incident earned laughs, it also seemed to embody a man whose blunt speaking and often bewildering behavior has made him one of the most divisive figures in European politics.

A 'Dr. No' Philosophy

"He has a 'Dr. No' philosophy, seeing external forces with skepticism, asking 'How do we protect our interests against the encroaching foreigner?'" Kron of the Center for European Policy Analysis says of Klaus' worldview. Such attitudes, which former Havel advisor Pehe believes have drifted from mere euroskepticism to outright "europhobia" over the years, skilfully play upon popular feelings in this small land wedged between large and historically aggressive neighbors, doubly occupied in the 20th century, and repeatedly betrayed by its putative allies.
"The Czechs, as a nation, are very provincial and very bourgeois and Klaus fits this profile perfectly," Pehe says. Whereas Havel spoke to the world with his plays, essays and appeals to a common humanity, Klaus is a "sort of leader who was much more in tune with what the Czechs think than Havel." Klaus has disparaged the Czech dissident movement in a way that assures Czechs -- the vast majority of whom went about their lives during the communist era and did nothing to oppose the regime -- that they have nothing to feel guilty about. He has similarly downplayed Western efforts at bringing about the collapse of the Soviet Union. "The West's policies toward Eastern Europe, the Helsinki Process -- none of that really helped us," he told SPIEGEL in an interview in 2006. No doubt envious of the acclaim his predecessor earned, Klaus has ironically fashioned himself as a dissident in the Havel mold with his stands against European integration and likening of climate change to a communist conspiracy.

IMG_3595.jpg


Penchant for Populism

Klaus demonstrated his penchant for populism in the country's presidential election this January, when he weighed in on the side of left-wing former Prime Minister Milos Zeman over the center-right Foreign Minister Karel Schwarzenberg. After Schwarzenberg criticized the country's post-war expulsion of ethnic Germans, Klaus coyly remarked that his successor should be someone who has spent their entire life in their homeland (Schwarzenberg's family fled Czechoslovakia following the 1948 communist coup; he lived in exile in Austria). Klaus' family joined in the attacks; his wife stated that the first lady ought to speak Czech (Schwarzenberg's wife does not) and Klaus's son alleged that Schwarzenberg's father was a Nazi collaborator (it has since emerged that Klaus' father-in-law was an official in the Slovak fascist regime).

Though Klaus' effective endorsement of Zeman (who proved victorious) might have seemed odd given that the men represent the opposite poles of the political spectrum, it was emblematic of Klaus' deeply personal political style: not only does Schwarzenberg's internationalist and cosmopolitan political outlook jar with Klaus' chauvinism, but Schwarzenberg was a close friend and ally of Havel. (As if to stress the cynicism behind his intervention, Klaus reassured the press after Zeman's victory that the incoming president remained his "old and eternal enemy" and that he "disagrees with almost every statement he has ever made.")

In his 25 years in politics, it is hard to find a single geopolitical issue on which Klaus' position has differed from that of Russia, the country that brutally invaded Czechoslovakia in 1968 and occupied it for 20 years. Kron attributes this affinity to Klaus' "very pragmatic and economic and not ideological or emotional-based approach" to politics, which stands in stark contrast to the views of Havel, who was deeply suspicious of Russian influence, particularly once Vladimir Putin rose to power at the turn of the century. "He sees the only advantage of European integration in economics," says Pavol Szalai, a Slovak political analyst. "Anything that's political in the EU is like the Soviet Union."

But strangely for a free-market enthusiast constantly likening anything he disagrees with to resurgent communism, Klaus has been very warm with the revanchist government in Moscow. Klaus opposed the NATO bombing campaign in Yugoslavia to prevent genocide in the Balkans and has long been against independence for the former Serbian province of Kosovo, in contradiction to official Czech government policy. When war erupted between Russia and Georgia in 2008, and as a series of leaders of former Soviet bloc countries vocally sided with Tbilisi, Klaus was outspoken in his support for Moscow, once again putting him at odds with the Czech government position. And at a Russia-EU summit the following year, Klaus said that the regional body should pay greater attention to the concerns of Russia at the expense of "small Estonia or Lithuania." In 2007, Klaus was awarded the Pushkin Medal on behalf of Russian President Vladimir Putin for his "helping to spread the Russian language and culture."

Trusted among Czechs

Throughout his 10 years at the helm, and despite his frequently controversial statements, Klaus remained generally popular and trusted among Czechs. That was until his surprise announcement, however, of a far-reaching amnesty on Jan. 1st. Klaus' decree freed all those prisoners serving sentences of less than a year, people sentenced for non-violent crimes with less than two years remaining in their sentence, and individuals over the age of 70 whose remaining jail terms are less than three years -- some 7,000 prisoners in all. Most troubling about the amnesty was a provision that cancelled ongoing criminal proceedings of 8 years or longer in which the defendant faced less than 10 years in jail. This measure ended a number of serious embezzlement and fraud cases originating out of the "mafia-style" capitalist days, as Havel termed them, which Klaus presided over as prime minister in the 1990's.

Ultimately, this move may produce what will likely be the most lasting aspect of Klaus' legacy. Almost immediately after the amnesty was announced, mayors and school principals across the country began to remove Klaus' portrait from their walls. A recent survey by the Czech daily newspaper Mlada fronta Dnes found that, nationwide, most schools and town halls have decided to forgo hanging the president's official portrait -- a tradition extending back to the founding of independent Czechoslovakia in 1918 -- altogether. For a man who so relished being the center of attention, it is hard to think of a more punishing verdict.

James Kirchick is a fellow with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and the Robert Bosch Stiftung. He was formerly writer at large with Radio Free Europe/Radio Libery based in Prague.



IMG_3502.jpg

5 comentarii:

VACLAV KLAUS in 2006 spunea...

SPIEGEL:
Mr. President, you are one of the sharpest critics of the EU. You have called the European Union a controlling, bureaucratic entity -- in short, an undemocratic behemoth. But the Czech Republic itself has been an EU member for just under two years now. Has EU membership hurt your country?

Klaus: I never said that. I have always said that the Czech Republic is an important part of central Europe. It's clear that we must participate in European integration. I am convinced that the Czech Republic -- or, in the past, Czechoslovakia -- would have been one of the founding members of the EU if it hadn't been for the communist takeover in 1948. My criticism is directed at the form and methods of European integration.
SPIEGEL: In the debate over the EU constitution, you said that you were "concerned about Europe." The French and the Dutch have since put an end to the project. Do you find that satisfying?

Klaus: Unfortunately not. I only felt satisfaction in the first few minutes after the decision was announced. Now I realize that we are in a dangerous situation once again. I can see that EU expansion is, unfortunately, continuing without a constitution, as a gradual process of standardization -- and that's far more dangerous. It is very difficult to slow down this process, which is being pushed forward without significant public participation.

SPIEGEL: Aren't you being overly pessimistic? Austria, the current rotating president of the EU, is expected to present a new agenda for dealing with the issue of a constitution soon.

Klaus: The purpose of the constitution was to take a step in the direction of a unification process. It failed. The supporters of a united Europe were in shock and practically paralyzed in the first few days following the French and Dutch referendums. But then they quickly realized that they could continue to pursue their original goals and intentions, even without a constitution. With each day that passes, Brussels puts out new laws, new initiatives and new guidelines, all of which are forcing us in the direction of unification.

SPIEGEL: Which recent signal from Brussels did you find especially disturbing?

Klaus: I'm not talking about a single decision being so dangerous. Hundreds of decisions reach us every day from EU headquarters. I am especially troubled, for example, over the talk of possible tax harmonization in Europe and efforts to boost cross-border services. I couldn't believe my ears recently, when I heard that our own EU commissioner, Vladimír Spidla, proposed a program that I find mind-boggling: an EU fund for the victims of globalization. This is communism in its purest form -- just as in (former Soviet Prime Minister Leonid) Brezhnev's day. Back then people also didn't find about the decisions the people at the top had made for them until they read the newspaper. I remember that feeling of helplessness all too well.

SPIEGEL: You are criticizing the EU for a lack of democracy and a growing gap between the political elite and the people?

Klaus: Yes, but my main concern is the political dimension of European integration. This is one of the most important issues of all, as far as I'm concerned. It has to do with our past, with our sensitivity, perhaps even our hypersensitivity in this regard.

SPIEGEL: You call yourself an EU realist. How should we interpret this?

Klaus: It's the opposite of someone who is naïve about the EU. I am neither a skeptic nor an EU opponent.

VACLAV KLAUS in 2006 spunea...

SPIEGEL: What characterizes someone who is naïve about the EU?

Klaus: It isn't just someone who passively accepts everything coming out of Brussels without uttering a word of criticism. Those who advance this gradual unification process -- in the European Parliament, in the Brussels bureaucracy and in the European Commission -- are also naïve about the EU. Hardly anyone who isn't involved in politics professionally knows the names of the EU commissioners or even that of the president of the EU Parliament. But these people are gradually becoming more influential, whereas the significance of national parliaments continues to decline.

at about Slovakia, where authoritarian Prime Minister Vladimír Meciar was voted out of office in 1998?

Klaus: But the Slovaks did that on their own. As far as I'm concerned, it would be unacceptable to push forward such a process from the outside. We created our democracy ourselves. And besides, EU membership isn't a question of attraction. There simply is no alternative. For the countries in question, EU membership represented important political recognition. In fact, the rule of thumb in Europe is that the good ones are EU members, while the bad ones are not.

SPIEGEL: But didn't the EU encourage processes that wouldn't have gotten underway as quickly otherwise? Think about the development of a new legal system, for example. Current membership candidates Bulgaria and Romania are now going out of their way to satisfy EU standards by reforming their judicial systems.

Klaus: The Bulgarians and Romanians are already interested in a normal, free and democratic society. They don't need anyone to tell them that that's what they want. We developed our democracy for ourselves -- not to make someone in Brussels happy.

SPIEGEL: You are opposed to minimum social standards in Europe and a common tax policy. Do you find a common foreign policy equally objectionable?

Klaus: I think a common foreign policy is completely unnecessary. The various European countries have widely differing priorities, goals and prejudices. It would be wrong to force them all to follow the same course. Just look at the outcome of the popular referendums in France and the Netherlands. Voters in the two countries rejected the constitution for very different reasons. And that's ok. We can't allow someone to show up and force us all to buy the same shirt size, even though one person has a size 39 collar and another a size 41.

VACLAV KLAUS in 2006 spunea...

SPIEGEL: You certainly have many objections to the EU. How far should integration go, in your opinion?

Klaus: The development of European integration can be divided into two phases. The first era ended with the Maastricht Treaty. It was a liberalization phase, with the main goal of European integration at the time being the removal of various barriers and borders in Europe. I was completely in favor of that. But the second phase is a homogenization or standardization phase, one that involves regulation from the top and growing control over our lives. In my view, this no longer has anything to do with freedom and democracy.

SPIEGEL: Many predicted the end of the EU following the debacle over the constitution, but that clearly hasn't happened.

Klaus: Those were prophecies of doom by some European bureaucrats and lobbyists. Everyone knows that the EU wasn't about to come to an end. The European constitution was one of many steps, and we shouldn't attempt to bring it back to life again.

SPIEGEL: Your Russian counterpart, (President) Vladimir Putin, recently visited Prague. You were conspicuously reserved when it came to criticism of his policies in Chechnya. Was this a quid pro quo for his critical assessment of the 1968 Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia?

Klaus: I'm not certain that there is an easy solution for Chechnya. When we look at Bosnia-Herzegovina or Kosovo, we can see that outside intervention was not terribly effective, or at least didn't produce stabile solutions. I am afraid that no one in Europe is capable of putting together a realistic proposal for resolving the situation in Chechnya. All I hear is moralistic criticism of the Russian side. These are nothing but cheap shots, which is why I refuse to sign open letters on this matter...

SPIEGEL: ... as your predecessor, Václav Havel, has just done. Do you agree with the German government's position that while developments in Russia may not be especially democratic, they at least provide stability?

Klaus: Of course, one cannot turn a blind eye to what's going on there. We must be very vigilant. But how can you speed up the transformation of society in a country as large as Russia? Those sounding the moral outcry are the ones who are trying to dictate their standards from the outside. Of course, that isn't the right way to go either. One cannot impose democracy from the other side of national borders, which is something we ourselves experienced during the communist era. The West's policies toward Eastern Europe, the Helsinki process -- none of that really helped us.

VACLAV KLAUS in 2006 spunea...

SPIEGEL: Many in the West disagree. In our view, relations between Germany and the Czech Republic are still rather tense. Indeed, the anti-German card was played during the last election four years ago in Prague. Are you worried that the same thing will happen when the Czech Republic elects a new parliament in June?
Klaus: What? There was anti-German sentiment in the Czech Republic? I strenuously object to that characterization. It was nothing but a fabrication by German politicians and journalists.

SPIEGEL: But what about then-Prime Minister Milos Zeman who, in the 2002 election campaign, suddenly began characterizing the Sudeten Germans (German-speaking Czechs) as Hitler's fifth column?

Klaus: What's anti-German about that? It was merely an attempt to describe the situation in Czechoslovakia before World War II, between 1935 and 1938. There is nothing anti-German about that. How can you say such a thing?

SPIEGEL: Nevertheless, it became clear, during that election, that the Germans may be viewed as partners, but also as potentially threatening partners. Is this still true today?

Klaus: Human relations tend to be more difficult when you're dealing with someone who weighs 30 kilograms more than you do. That's when you worry about whether a well-meaning gesture could produce complications. We have no problems with countries like Madagascar or Bolivia, for example. But Germany is our neighbor and we have a shared past. Besides, Germany is powerful and ambitious and more than four times as large as we are. It makes complete sense that we would act cautiously. It's simply Realpolitik.

SPIEGEL: Last summer, the Czech government issued a symbolic apology to those expelled Sudeten Germans who fought against Hitler -- a gesture that attracted a lot of attention in Germany. But even that went too far, in your opinion.

Klaus: I criticized the idea of selecting a few left-leaning anti-fascists and communists and apologizing to them. After all, many Germans were not Fascists. It was a completely bad idea, a political idea concocted by the Social Democratic government. I'm opposed to such dishonest gestures.

SPIEGEL: But without dealing with the past ...

Klaus: The past is the past. The European Parliament is currently demanding that Turkey issue a gesture of apology to the Armenians for the genocide that occurred after 1915. Whom would this help? President Putin has just apologized for the Soviets' suppression of the 1968 Prague Spring. It was a nice gesture. But I don't believe that I should be talking to Putin today about what Brezhnev did in 1968. Putin isn't his successor, and I am not the successor of the communist government that came to power in Czechoslovakia in 1948.

SPIEGEL: Mr. President, thank you for this interview.

The interview was conducted by editors Christian Neef and Jan Puhl, as well as SPIEGEL staff member Renata Hanusova.

peromaneste spunea...

Parlamentul ceh a votat asupra punerii preşedintelui Vaclav Klaus sub acuzaţia de înaltă trădare, Senatul votând trimiterea preşedintelui în faţa Curţii Constituţionale, pentru a decide dacă acesta a încălcat Constituţia prin acordarea unei amnistii de anul nou.

Treizeci şi opt de senatori din totalul de 81 au votat pentru suspendarea preşedintelui, iar alţi 30 au votat împotrivă, relatează BBC News Online. Senatul este singurul dotat cu această putere.

Decizia controversată a preşedintelui, al cărui al doilea mandat se încheie joi, a vizat anularea unor procese ce s-au extins mai mult de opt ani, provocând furie în rândul opiniei publice, ci nu eliberarea din închisori a aproximativ 7.000 de deţinuţi ce ispăşeau sentinţe de până la un an de închisoare sau anularea sentinţelor cu suspendare. Aproximativ 12 cazuri importante de corupţie au fost anulate, implicând milioane de dolari în devalizări, mită sau fraudă.

Între procesele anulate se numără şi cele ale cunoscutului om de afaceri ceh Tomas Pitr, acuzat de evaziune fiscală, sau al fostului director al federaţiei de fotbal, František Chvalovský, investigat pentru delapidare. În plus, senatorii îl acuză pe Klaus de nerespectare a Constituţiei prin refuzul de a ratifica tratatele Uniunii Europene sau refuzul de a numi judectori, în pofida faptului că tribunalele i-au cerut-o. Preşedintele eurosceptic a amânat ratificarea Tratatului de la Lisabona, pledând pentru excluderea voluntară a ţării din UE.

În contextul în care Klaus îşi încheie mandatul joi, votul este mai degrabă simbolic, comentează BBC, care adaugă că nu este clar ce va însemna un verdict "vinovat" atunci când preşedintele nu se va mai afla în funcţie. Cea mai importantă sancţiune pe care Klaus o riscă este pierderea pensiei de preşedinte.

Google
 

Postări populare