FACES AND PLACES: Christmas present, Christmas future (12/25/88)

FACES AND PLACES

by Myron B. Kuropas

Christmas present, Christmas future

Peace and good will seem dominant throughout the world this Christmas season, the first time in years.

Last week South Africa, Cuba and Angola reached consensus regarding the independence of Namibia.

In the Middle East, Iran and Iraq have ended their bloody war and Yasir Arafat has finally recognized Israel's right to exist.

Mikhail Gorbachev has announced unilateral conventional arms reductions in Eastern Europe, and every Soviet-bloc nation except Bulgaria has stopped jamming Radio Free Europe.

Democracy seems to be making headway in Central and South America with visible progress in Chile, Argentina, Guatemala, Honduras, Peru and Uruguay. The same is true in Asia, where democratization appears on the move in China. South Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines.

According to Freedom House, some 38.8 percent of the world's population now lives in a "free" country, an all-time high.

We have a lot for which to be thankful this Christmas, thanks in large part to Ronald Reagan, who resurrected America's traditional commitment to the right of all people to national determination, and made it the centerpiece of his foreign policy.

But what about next Christmas and those yet to come? Will the Bush administration live up to the Reagan legacy and pursue the same foreign policy? There are straws in the wind that suggest otherwise.

I am troubled by the fact that George Rush has yet to meet with his strongest supporters, America's white ethnics. He has met with Michael Dukakis, Jesse Jackson and, despite overwhelming Jewish support for his opponent, with various Jewish leaders. Given the shabby treatment accorded American leaders of East European ancestry in the wake of Mr. Bush's "ethnic massacre" last fall, one would think the president-elect would go out of his way to make nice-nice with our communities.

Another reason for concern is Mr. James Baker III as our secretary of state. I met Mr. Baker in 1976 when he was President Gerald Ford's campaign chairman. As in 1988, so in 1976, Mr. Baker was oblivious to white ethnic concerns and no one, not even such highly respected GOP stalwarts as Congressman Edward Derwinski and Anna Chennault could budge him.

My fear for the U.S. Department of State is compounded by the rumor that William Hyland is in line for a significant slot. Mr. Hyland was with the National Security Council when I was a special assistant to President Ford. It was Bill Hyland who argued for a water-downed Captive Nations proclamation in 1976 and against White House statements supporting national self-determination in Eastern Europe. It was also Bill Hyland who counseled against presidential meetings with former Hungarian freedom fighters and others who might prove to be too anti-Soviet and thus "an embarrassment" to the United States. Like Larry Eagleburger and Helmut Sonnenfeldt, Bill Hyland is a protege of Henry Kissinger who, as President Ford's secretary of state, probably contributed as much to the president's defeat as anyone.

One needs to remember that it was Helmut Sonnenfeldt, then a member of Henry Kissinger's state department who authored the so-called "Sonnenfeldt Doctrine" urging President Ford's recognition of Moscow's domination of Eastern Europe as a permanent phenomenon. It was this "doctrine" that President Ford was trying to disavow during his second debate with Jimmy Carter when he declared: "And the United States does not concede that those countries are under the domination of the Soviet Union." The words were taken out of context by the press to suggest an ignorance of the Soviet Union. It is one of the ironies of American political history that President Ford, one of the original and long-time Congressional supporters of the Captive Nations Resolution, lost much of the ethnic vote because he was perceived as soft on communism while Jimmy Carter, who as president was later to declare that Americans "have an inordinate fear of communism," won it.

Given present transition personalities and circumstances, I can easily visualize a drift towards past mistakes. If there was ever a person who suggests and projects easy acceptance of the "inordinate fear" approach to Soviet power it is Mikhail Gorbachev. And if there was ever a crew that can smoke and mirror us into accepting the "pragmatism" of the view, it is James Baker and Co. The U.S. State Department has often reflected Soviet foreign policy objectives in the past and given its apparent direction under President Bush, that reflection could become slavish. Cold war all gone. Evil empire go poof. Just cherubic Uncle Gorby here to lullabye us to sleep while the State Department hums in the background.

What kind of Christmas will we enjoy a year from now? Will America have abandoned Jonas Savimbi in Angola? Will we still be tolerating Israel's crass rejection of peace in the Middle East? Will "the" Ukraine still be viewed as part of a greater whole, like "the" Yukon, by Moscow and Washington? Will the democratization process extend to Nicaragua and North Korea?

President Reagan was successful in bringing the world closer to peace in 1988 because he is a simple man with a simple vision: a democratic world dedicated to national self-determination. For Ronald Reagan, nationalism is not a dirty word because, like many Americans, he understands the simple truth that our great nation is the birthplace of nationalism, the crucible of human rights, and the citadel of democratic freedom. In his own simple way, President Reagan seldom wavered from his vision or his beliefs.

Thank you, Mr. President, for your marvelous simplicity. I pray that like you, your successor will reject pragmatism, adopt your simple values and principles, and build on your legacy. Only in that way will all Americans be assured of peace and good will on Christmas, now and in the future.

| Home Page |