Pat Allen: The View from Right Field

Protesting NATO. Why?

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is meeting in Chicago on Sunday, May 21 and Monday, May 22.  It’s a big deal, and a lot of protesters are expected.  I’m not exactly sure why all these protesters are coming to Chicago.  Chicago police are going to look at this as a chance for baton target practice – just kidding.

Seriously, though, I do wonder what it is about NATO that the protesters don’t like.  Most recently, NATO has been fighting in Afghanistan.  I realize President Karzai is pretty marginal, but compared to the Taliban, he’s not so bad.  Unless you like things such as girls not being allowed to go to school, etc.

NATO has been involved in the Balkans, too, stopping fighting there.  The operations in Libya were perhaps the most controversial – and maybe questionable – thing NATO has done but they are over now.

In any case, Afghanistan and these other operations are not what NATO is really about.  If you are protesting against NATO, that means you are protesting against things such as:

• NATO helping maintain peace in Europe for over forty years after World War II, while giving the nations of Western Europe the chance to do what they wanted to do, instead of what the Soviet Union wanted them to do.
• NATO members working with the United States and West Germany to facilitate the peaceful reunification of Germany after the Wall fell in 1989.
• NATO supporting the people of Eastern Europe in their efforts to bring freedom and democracy to their countries when they finally had a real chance to achieve it.  And not just countries like Poland and Hungary, but Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia, too.  Mind-boggling.
• The nations of Eastern Europe becoming members of NATO.  As soon as they could, members of the old Warsaw Pact, and even some republics of the USSR, joined NATO.  Why?  So the security promise that had protected western Europe for so long would now protect them, too.

When you protest against NATO, this is what you are protesting against.  I can see why Vladimir Putin might not like NATO, but protesters in Chicago?

I suppose some of the protestors may think that they are protesting against inequality and that they are supporting the 99% against the 1%.  Except that is not what NATO is about.  Protesting against those things at a NATO meeting misses the point.

But that is the main story of the protests:  The protestors are missing the point.  They don’t understand NATO: they don’t understand what it is, and they don’t remember all the good if has done over the years.  It sort of makes you wonder if they really know what they are doing at all.

A Meeting of Nobel Peace Prize Winners – And Those Who Were Not There

There was a World Summit of Nobel Peace Prize laureates in Chicago last week.  Attendees included Lech Walesa, the Dalai Lama, Mikhail Gorbachev, Oscar Arias Sanchez (former president of Costa Rica), F.W. de Klerk (former president of South Africa and co-winner with Nelson Mandela), and Jimmy Carter.

It was a very impressive group, but perhaps more impressive were those who were not there because they were never awarded a Nobel Peace Prize.  I understand the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Mikhail Gorbachev.  He played a critical role in the transformation of Europe in the late 1980s and early 1990s.  But he did not do it alone, and he didn’t succeed in what he was trying to do.  Instead of reforming the USSR, he killed it.  But the way he acted in the process of doing what he was trying to do was worth a share of a Nobel Peace Prize.

But that is the point.  It was only worth a share.  Because he should have shared it with two other people.  The Axel Springer publishing group understands this point and they get it right in the collection of busts outside their headquarters in Berlin.  They call them the “Fathers of [German] Unity,” but they are really the fathers of the peaceful transformation of Europe:

 
[Picture by Jennifer Allen, December 20, 2010]

Mikhail Gorbachev, George H.W. Bush and Helmut Kohl.  It was Helmut Kohl who drove the engine of German unification and worked to get the Soviet Union’s consent for this incredible accomplishment.  It was George H.W. Bush who provided the support to Chancellor Kohl and who set U.S. policy to help achieve German reunification and bring democracy to Eastern Europe, including even the Baltic states, peacefully.  And it was Mikhail Gorbachev, supported by Kohl and Bush, who was able to stay in power long enough so that his policy of non-interference in eastern Europe gave those countries the time to choose freedom and democracy.

The achievements of Kohl and Bush were outstanding.  They did something that could not have been reasonably foreseen even a year before 1989.  And Kohl and Bush did it in peace.  It was truly amazing.  They were accomplishments that truly deserved at least a share of a Nobel Peace Prize.

But I doubt either Helmut Kohl or George H.W. Bush really care.  At one point, George H.W. Bush was asked what he was proudest of.  He said it was that his kids came home.  I am sure that they still do, and I am sure that George H.W. Bush considers than more important than a Nobel prize.

As for Helmut Kohl, I think that being known as the father of German unification is much more important than winning a Nobel prize – and he’s right.

Does History Repeat Itself – Or Do Some Problems Just Never Go Away?

A year ago the four of us went to Germany (Berlin, Munich and Nuremberg) to see the Christmas markets, eat the bratwurst, drink the beer (three out of the four of us at least).  While we were I picked up a couple of German newspapers, which I brought home with me. 

One of the papers was the Süddeutsche Zeitung, which is published in Munich, from December 18-19, 2010.  On the front page, in addition to an article on the “Schneechaos in Deutschland” (“snow chaos in Germany”), there was a headline that read: “Merkel: Wir tun alles, um den Euro zu sichern”.  My German is pretty bad, but I interpret translate this headline as basically saying this: “Merkel:  We will do all we have to do to save the Euro”.

Still not there.

----------
Update (12/14/11 9:50 am): Corrected a typo.
Update (12/15/11 11:35 pm): In the last paragraph changed "interpet" to "translate".

Are We Good Enough for President Obama?

On June 17, 1953, workers in Communist East Germany revolted in protest of new, increased work standards that the government tried to impose.  The protests were put down by Soviet tanks.

In response, Bertold Brecht, German poet, playwright and theater director, who had actually moved to East Germany from the West in 1949, wrote this poem:

“After the uprising of the 17th of June
The Secretary of the Writers Union
Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee
Stating that the people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could win it back only
By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
In that case for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?”

Bertold Brecht’s poem came to mind when I read, over the weekend, that President Obama said the United States has “been a little lazy” in terms of “selling America and trying to attract new business into America.”  This was after the President said that America has “gotten a little soft” and that we “have lost our ambition, our imagination”.

Maybe Bertold Brecht was onto something.  If the American people aren’t good enough for Barack Obama, maybe he should choose himself another people to be President of.

--------
Update (11/15/11 11:00 am):  Corrected a typo in the last paragraph.

The Cost of Deficits May Be More Than the Interest On the Debt

While the news media and some of our politicians are focused on Occupy Wherever, a bigger story is occurring under the radar in Europe and the United States.  While Europe may have solved the Eurozone/Greek debt crisis for now – and hopefully for longer, look at one of the parts of the solution: a call by French President Nicolas Sarkozy for China to support the European Financial Stability Facility.   Europe needs money (to support its economy, including importing goods from China), and China has trillions in reserves, so it seems like a match made in heaven – except.  Except that the cost of those loans to Europe may be more than just the interest charged.

The United States is in a similar situation.  While President Obama talks about how we need another stimulus plan (though it’s not called that), the fact is that we already have a huge federal deficit, and that deficit has to be financed by somebody.  In the past, part of the deficit was financed by loans from the Social Security Trust Fund.  But with the Trust Fund now paying out more than it takes in, Treasury can no longer borrow from Social Security.  Fortunately (I guess), the economic turmoil around the world has made the United States seem relatively secure, even with our S&P credit rating downgrade.  But we still need to borrow a lot of money and much of that borrowing has to come from overseas.  Once again, the concern is what might come with those loans, especially if they are from China.

But instead of talking generalities, let’s look back a little over 20 years.  With the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, the 20th anniversary of the reunification of Germany and the 50th anniversary of the building of the Wall, I have been reading books on the end of East Germany and the reunification of Germany.  There are some lessons to be learned here about over-borrowing, if we want to see them.

First, consider East Germany.  By the 1980s East Germany was supporting its lifestyle, and its “really existing socialism,” by borrowing money from the West, including West Germany.  In fact, in 1976 East Germany stopped publishing separate totals for its exports and imports and reported only aggregate numbers in order to hide its true situation.  By the mid-to-late 1980s, East Germany’s debt was huge.  According to one report, the West German government was buying East German debt “in order to put greater pressure on the SED [i.e., the East German communist party] in the future.”  By 1988, “[t]he GDR had been living beyond its means for years, and the only way out, [planning chief Gerhard] Schürer implied [in a report to Erich Honecker], was a drastic cut in living standards for most East Germans.”* 

We never found out what the political effects of this debt would have been on East Germany because once the Wall was opened on November 9, 1989, the GDR was doomed.  Either East Germany was going to go away or the East German people were.  The Germans were going to re-unite.  It was just a matter of whether East Germany and West Germany were going to become one country or a very large percentage of the East German population was going to move to West Germany.

While we don’t know what would have happened in East Germany, we do know the effect that the Soviet Union’s need for money had on the Soviets’ policies toward German re-unification.  In the late 1980s Mikhail Gorbachev was pursing glasnost and perestroika.  But he needed money and loans to pursue those policies.  And where could he get that money?  West Germany.  Here is an excerpt from Dissolution: The Crisis of Communism and the End of East Germany by Charles S. Maier:

“The Soviet ambassador in Bonn, [Yuly] Kvitsinsky, returning home after the two plus four [talks] to become deputy foreign minister, was unhappy about the concessions that had been made but also aware that his government’s confusions left little to rescue.  Increasingly crucial was the financial calculation.  Since earlier calculations of a profitable Soviet, FRG, and GDR ‘triangle’ had been overtaken by events, West German economic assistance seemed increasingly necessary. 

Soviet military leaders were scornful of the compromises [Mikhail Gorbachev had made] on Germany, but their pressure was countered by the acute financial realities.  Just as it had constrained the GDR and Poland, indebtedness to the West now cut deeply into Soviet options. …

Shevardnadze had been delegated to plead for credits from Kohl on the eve of the two-plus-four meeting of Mary 5: perestroika could not be carried through if the ruble collapsed: might not the Germans therefore, so he had to plead, guarantee loans of DM 20 billion?  Kvitsinsky had deep misgivings about undermining the foreign minister’s leverage by making him play the role of mendicant – but the financial plight seemed determinative. …

Less than two weeks later, on May 16, Kohl proposed to Bush that the United Stated join him in economic credits [to the Soviet Union] ….  But the president refused in view of the Lithuanian situation and congressional unhappiness with the Soviet pressure on the small emerging nation. …

It was up to the Germans to become the Russians’ bankers.  It would not be easy, Bush pointed out, for the Russian supplicants to shut the door on German national aspirations if they hoped to open the purses of the Federal Republic.”**

We know how this turned out: Germany was reunited, it stayed in NATO, and it all happened peacefully.  It was an incredibly good result.  But in 1990 it was the good people who had the financial leverage.  And they were using it for good purposes.

But what about today?  Will what China demand from Europe in return for the help President Sarkozy is seeking?

And what about the United States?  We need loans, too.  In March of 2009, I said that borrowing from China might not affect us too much domestically but that Taiwan should worry (see here and here).  Our reliance on Chinese loans might also mean that we cannot support the Tibetans or the Uyghurs if China cracks down on them.  Our ability to influence what China does with respect to North Korea and its nuclear arsenal could be reduced.  And any chance of our standing up for human rights in China will be gone.

Please understand I am not saying we should isolate ourselves economically from China.  Trade and investment are great.  What I am worried about is dependence on loans from China.  Because the cost of these loans may be more than the interest we have to pay.  It may also be the self-respect we have to give up to get them.

----------
* Jeffrey Kopstein, The Politics of Economic Decline in East Germany, 1945-1989 (1997), p. 84, 101-103, 224.

** Charles S. Maier, Dissolution: The Crisis of Communism and the End of East Germany (1997), p. 271-72.  Note that in the book itself, this excerpt was part of one long paragraph.  I have divided it into separate paragraphs here to increase its readability on a computer.

     Interestingly, Spiegel, a German news magazine, recently reported that, in 1963, then-Chancellor Ludwig Erhard was seriously considering trying to “buy” East Germany from the Soviet Union in exchange for loans of 100,000,000,000 deutsche marks that would never be repaid.  In 1963, Nikita Khrushchev was still in power, and the Soviet Union was suffering one of its worst crises, as well as facing a new rival in Mao Tse-tung’s China.  But President Kennedy was assassinated before Chancellor Erhard would mention the idea to him, and Lyndon Johnson wasn’t interested.  By 1965, Chancellor Erhard decided the plan was no longer possible.  Khrushchev was out, and the Soviets’ need for loans was being met by other lenders.

     Also with respect to the effects of foreign indebtedness, see this excerpt from In Europe’s Name: Germany and the Divided Continent (1993) by Timothy Garton Ash:

“In fact, Brezhnev was constantly warning Honecker, and other East European leaders, of the dangers of becoming too indebted to the West.  The great lesson of what had happened in Poland, he told the Czechoslovak Politburo in spring 1981, was that they should all make sure that their foreign debt ‘did not reach a dangerous level’.” (p.157)

Why Go to Berlin? Here’s Why – Two Last Reasons

I am sure many of you may wonder “Why?” about all my articles about Berlin.  I had thought my post about going to Berlin would be my last.  But, in looking over some notes, I realized, in my rush to get that post finished, I had left out two points I really wanted to make about going to Berlin.  So, here they are.  And I promise this will be the end – for a while.

Point one.  While I would never say to go somewhere because it is cheap,* Berlin is inexpensive.  It is much cheaper than London or Paris – or even big cities in western Germany (according to Germans we talked to in Berlin in 2009).  In fact, Berlin is the only capital in Europe that is poorer than its country (i.e., the average income in Berlin is lower than the average income in Germany as a whole).  A former mayor of Berlin famously said that Berlin was “poor, but sexy.”  While the fact that Berlin is cheap is not a reason to go, it is a reason to stay longer.

Point two.  Even if you have been to Berlin recently, you should go again.  Because Berlin is constantly changing.  I realize that every city changes, but Berlin changes more.  It’s been only a little over 20 years since the Wall came down.  The re-uniting and rebuilding process is not done yet, and it won’t be for a while.  As one article said, Berlin is “unfinished”.  Watching Berlin grow and change and yet still be unfinished makes it an exciting place.  And it makes Berlin a place that is constantly new.  Every time you come.

---------
* You should, instead, go where you want and travel cheaply.

Why Go to Berlin? Here’s Why.

This is the final installment in my posts on the fiftieth anniversary of the Berlin Wall:

A couple of months ago I was talking to somebody about having been to Berlin (again).  He had never been there, and he asked me why I liked Berlin so much.  I did a poor job of explaining it, so I wanted to try again, here. 

First, at least for me, is history.  Berlin is full of history.  Maybe its history isn’t centuries old like some cities, but for 20th century history, Berlin can’t be beat.  You’ve got the ‘20s, World War II, the whole Cold War, and everything that has happened since the end of the Cold War. 

There are cabaret shows like in the ‘20s and really neat housing developments (which are also part of one of Berlin’s other great attractions: architecture).  While World War II bombing and the Russians destroyed large sections of pre-World War II Berlin, parts remain – and much has been restored.  My favorite is Kaiser Wilhelm Memorial Church.  The neo-Gothic church was built in the 1890s, but was bombed during World War II.  Only the steeple, which was itself damaged, survived.  After the war, the steeple was preserved, and a new modern church was built next to it.  It is sort of like a German Coventry, which is appropriate since Germans helped rebuild St. Michael’s Cathedral in Coventry, and people from Coventry helped in Berlin.

The Topography of Terror, which opened just last year, covers the Nazi era in complete detail.  The Jewish Museum tells the story of Jews in Berlin.  The Wannsee Conference Center is where the Nazis planned the Final Solution.

But the Cold War is the most important.  The original museum about the Wall, Haus am Checkpoint Charlie, is now called the Wall Museum.  It is getting a little worn, but it can still be interesting.  Having opened in 1962, it is part of the history of the Wall itself.  The Allied Museum talks about the Airlift.  The Airlift Memorial is at Tempelhof Airport, which itself is a prime example of Nazi architecture.

The Berlin Wall Memorial is on Bernauer Strasse, where a section of the Wall complex has been preserved.  At Bernauer Strasse you can also see the Chapel of Reconciliation, which was built on the site of the Church of Reconciliation.  (In my August 13 post, I showed a picture of the Church of Reconciliation from three years before it was torn down.  After the Wall came down, the Chapel of Reconciliation was built on the site of the church.)

Outdoors, there are reminders of the Cold War everywhere.  There are still a few pieces of the Wall left, as well as several old East German guard towers.  On Zimmerstrasse, near Checkpoint Charlie, you can see a memorial at the place where Peter Fechter bled to death in 1962, after being shot while trying to escape over the Wall.  There are also more unusual places, like Glienicker Bridge, where the Soviets and the U.S. exchanged spies, like Gary Francis Powers and Rudolph Abel, during the Cold War.  

You can go to Bornholmer Strasse, where the Wall first opened in 1989, and to the East Side Gallery, where artists came in 1990 to paint in celebration of the Wall coming down.  The Brandenburg Gate, without the Wall around it, and with the American Embassy next to it once again, is magnificent.  At the headquarters of the Axel Springer publishing company there is a memorial to the “Fathers of Unity,” with busts of Helmut Kohl, George H. W. Bush and Mikhail Gorbachev. 

The Reichstag is definitely worth a tour to see the restoration by Sir Norman Fowler and the history of the building: the graffiti by Russian soldiers, the new meeting place for the Bundestag, and the panoramic view of Berlin from the dome.  Sign up ahead for a 90-minute English tour.  (One thing that is interesting about the various restorations in Berlin is how many of them have been done by non-Germans.  I give the Germans credit for being willing to have so much of this work done by foreigners.)

In terms of culture, plays can be a little tricky unless you know German, but the music is fantastic.  I love the Berlin Philharmonic, not just for the music, but for the hall they play in.  The acoustics are great, the sightlines are fantastic, and all of the seats are really close to the orchestra – because it is “in the round”.  The hall was built in the 1960s in what was then a desolate area of Potsdamer Platz, near the Wall.  When we went there in 1982, it seemed like it was in the middle of nowhere.  With reunification and the rebuilding of Potsdamer Platz, it is now in the middle of everything.

I am not an expert on art museums, but to my understanding, Berlin’s art museums aren’t as good as other places, such as Munich.  However, I particularly liked the Neue Nationalgalerie, which is in Mies van der Rohe’s only building in Berlin.

But Berlin does have other really great museums.  The appropriately named Museum Island has several world-class museums.  The recently re-opened Neues Museum has the bust of Nefertiti.  The Pergamon Museum has, not surprisingly, the Pergamon Altar, as well as the Ishtar Gate, the market gate from Miletus, and much more.  For those interested in more current things, the Film Museum at the Sony Center is bilingual and covers movies from their beginning to today.  (It even has a model of the boat from Werner Herzog’s “Fitzcarraldo”.  {That’s an inside joke.})

There is plenty of shopping.  The Kurfürstendamm, or Ku-damm, was the heart of West Berlin, and it is still very nice, but now there are lots of new stores in Mitte (in old East Berlin).  My favorite store is KaDeWe (Kaufhaus des Westens), in west Berlin near the Ku-damm, especially for its food halls on the sixth floor and all of Steiff stuffed animals on, I believe, the third floor.  On Friedrichstrasse in Mitte (old East Berlin) is a brand new Galeries Lafayette, which I am told is very French.  The flea markets are interesting, and in December there are Christmas markets everywhere.

I am probably not the best person to ask about food since my idea of heaven is bratwurst or currywurst for lunch and wienerschnitzel for dinner, but there are very good restaurants of all types – and all price ranges.  One night we ate in a fantastic Turkish place for dinner for less than 40 euros for four people.  Another night we ate in a Michelin-starred restaurant.

Berlin is full of outdoor activities.  There is the Wannsee, for boating and swimming.  It’s great in the summer.  Also, there are “beaches” in the center of Berlin along the Spree River where sand has been brought in to mid-city spots for summertime R and R.  The Tiergarten in central Berlin is wonderful for walking and resting and picnicking. 

There are several sports teams but soccer, a/k/a football, is the biggest, obviously.  You have two main choices.  Hertha BSC, which is back in the first level of the Bundesliga (the German soccer league), plays in the Olympic Stadium from the 1936 Olympics.  It was renovated for the 2006 World Cup, but it is still full of history.  (Take a look at the listings there of gold medal winners from the 1936 Games, and see Jesse Owens’ name four times.)  On the other side of town, literally, is 1. FC Union, which plays in Bundesliga 2.  Their home is a little stadium that seats 19,000.   Actually, it only “seats” 3,000.  The other 16,000 are “steh platz” or “standing places”.  This is the other side of soccer, and it is a lot of fun.

And finally, what may be the best of Berlin: architecture, especially modern architecture.   As I mentioned, the restored Reichstag is great, as is the restoration work on the museums on Museum Island.  There are also the modern buildings built for the federal government when the capital moved to Berlin from Bonn in the 1990s, as well as the new Hauptbahnhof (main train station).  The 1905 Berlin Cathedral has been restored and is beautiful.  And there are other churches, too, including the 13th-century gothic Marienkirche (Mary’s Church) near the TV Tower.

Of course, there is the TV Tower at Alexanderplatz.  The TV Tower was once a symbol of East Berlin.  Now it is a symbol for all of Berlin.  On a clear day you can get a great view of Berlin from its observation deck.  Alexanderplatz itself was the heart of East Berlin.  The World Clock, another East German symbol, is there.

Our last time in Berlin we went to a 1920s housing development, Hufeisensiedlung, that is an UNESCO World Heritage site.  Post-World War II architecture includes the contrasts between Karl Marx Allee (formerly Stalinallee), East Berlin’s showpiece of Stalinist architecture, and the Hansa Quarter, in a corner of the Tiergarten (in west Berlin), which includes a number of housing designs by leading post-World War II architects.  A boat cruise on the Spree River and the Landwehrkanal gives you a great view of Berlin modern architecture.  And, there is the Bauhaus-Archiv, a museum of the famous Bauhaus School.

One final comment for those of you from (or familiar with) Illinois.  Go to Helmut Jahn’s Sony Center in Potsdamer Platz.  It looks like the Thompson Center in Chicago, except that it is open air, with panels, inside of a full roof, at the top.  In the winter, the snow drifts in for a beautiful effect.

I could go on, but I hope that is enough to convince people that Berlin is great.  And that you should go – now.

--------
Update (8/26/11 12:01 pm):  For it more on why to go to Berlin, see “Why Go to Berlin?  Here’s Why – Two Last Reasons” here.

Berlin Wall - August 15, 1961

The iconic picture of the building of the Wall.  Conrad Schuman, an East German border guard, escapes to West Berlin by jumping over the barbed wire at Bernauer Strasse on August 15, 1961.

 

--------
Update (8/15/11 8:25 am): Corrected a typo.

The Berlin Wall and Other Walls

The Washington Post’s coverage of the 50th anniversary of the Berlin Wall included a blog post about other walls: 

“[The Berlin Wall] may be one of the most famous walls in modern history, but it is far from being the only one. Around the world, walls are built to keep out people, drugs, guns and war. They keep people in, too. They protect and civilize, guard and defend. And they divide people from one another.”

The blog post showed pictures of these other walls: walls between Israel and Palestine, India and Pakistan, China and Burma, Zimbabwe and South Africa, Morocco and Spain, Mexico and the United States (of course), West Belfast’s Peace Line, and traffic barriers in Baghdad.

But look at the pictures of these walls (all but two of them between countries) and compare them with the pictures of the Berlin Wall I posted yesterday.  The walls between India and Pakistan or Morocco and Spain are about disputes between countries.  The wall between Israel and Palestine is about keeping out suicide bombers.  The barrier between Mexico and the United States is about controlling illegal immigration, not locking people up – or in.  And to include traffic barriers in Baghdad that are designed to keep out terrorists is absurd.

In fact, to compare these “walls” with the Berlin Wall is to show a lack of understanding of what the Berlin Wall was about and what it represented in the Cold War between freedom and communism.  Also, it is unfair to the people of West Berlin who had to live with the Wall for 28 years.  But most of all, it is an insult to the people of East Berlin and East Germany who were imprisoned by the Berlin Wall for almost three decades – and to those people who died trying to cross it, merely because they wanted to be free.

Pictures of the Berlin Wall

Here are some pictures I took of the Berlin Wall in 1979 and 1982.

Checkpoint Charlie:

 
Potsdamer Platz, the heart of pre-World War II Berlin and the busiest traffic intersection in Europe:

 
Church of Reconciliation.  The church was between the two parts of the Wall.  The church was finally torn down by the East Germans in 1985:

 
The cross made by the sun shining on the East German television tower was called "the Pope's revenge":

 
A final picture: