Interview given by Egon Krenz, former president of the German Democratic Republic (East Germany), to Zeitung vum Lëtzebuerger Vollek, daily paper of the Communist Party of Luxembourg.
(Translated from German.)
Was the opening of the border spontaneous?
No, the events leading up to the opening of the borders are ignored today. On the 1st of November 1989 I met Gorbachev in Moscow. We had talks lasting four hours, during which I asked him what place the GDR would have in the “European House” he was propagating, and whether the Soviet Union would continue to honour its fraternal commitment in relation to the GDR. He told me that German unity was not on the agenda. The USSR and the GDR were allies for ever. He even warned me about what he termed “Helmut Kohl’s politics, who had wagered everything on the horse of nationalism.” I still trusted Gorbachev. I didn’t know at that time that his emissaries had long since made contact with Bonn to establish what price Bonn was prepared to pay for German unity.
And how did it develop?
Following my meeting with Gorbachev I received intelligence reports from Moscow, Warsaw, and Berlin. Therein was contained information suggesting that certain political forces were planning to storm the border at the Brandenburg Gate on the 4th of November 1989. A concerted breach of the border at the Brandenburg Gate—regardless of who organised it—could have resulted in a war at that point. It was for this reason that I, as chairman of the Defence Council of the GDR, issued an order on the 3rd of November: “The use of weapons in connection with a possible demonstration is forbidden, without exception.” This order was in place also on the 9th of November.
Does this explain why everything passed off peacefully on the 9th of November?
Without doubt. On the morning of the 10th things got pretty heated. The Soviet ambassador pointed out to me that the GDR did not have the authority to open the border, as Berlin still remained under the control of the Four Powers (i.e. the USSR, the United States, Great Britain, and France). It was only in the late afternoon that the news came that Gorbachev was in favour of the border being opened. At the same time he communicated a verbal message to the West German chancellor, Helmut Kohl, warning him against “destabilising the GDR.” A day later the Soviet foreign minister, Shevardnadze, made telephone contact with his West German counterpart, Genscher, to express his concern about the content of a speech given by Kohl on the 10th of November at the Schöneberg town hall in West Berlin.
What made the situation so dangerous?
A wrong or a hasty decision on the 9th of November or in its aftermath could have led to civil war. There was even the danger that the superpowers might have been drawn into military conflict. In the final analysis, they insisted on the “Four-Power status of Berlin.” Gorbachev had warned Kohl on the 10th of “a chaotic situation with unforeseeable consequences.”
It has been claimed that the GDR had intended to use violence but was prevented by Gorbachev. The Frankfurter Allgemeine stated: “Despite the demands of the GDR security forces, the Soviet military were ordered by Moscow to remain in their barracks.”
That is complete nonsense. That champagne rather than blood flowed on the 9th of November is thanks to the GDR security and border troops. Had the GDR leadership really wanted to use violence it could have done so without the assistance of the Soviet military. Our own forces of law and order would have been strong enough, and there is no evidence for such a request by the GDR. However, it is documented that the GDR leadership requested the Soviet troops stationed in the GDR not to move outside their barracks for the autumn manoeuvres, as this might have sent out a wrong signal.
The Soviet military complied with the GDR’s wishes. There is no evidence of a similar order by Gorbachev. At no point in October or November 1989 did the GDR leadership intend to use violence against its own people. The noble conduct of the border guards on the 9th of November and the ensuing days demonstrates how absurd the West German media’s portrayal is of these troops as “heartless killers.”
What does this anniversary mean to you today?
We are experiencing a massive propaganda campaign, suggesting that the 9th of November 1989 is the most significant date in twentieth-century German history. I continue to believe that the most important day for Germans is the 8th of May 1945, the day Germany was liberated from Hitler fascism. Without this victory by the anti-Hitler coalition, Germany would never have emerged from barbarity.
The 9th of November is hardly a suitable date for the day of the century. It is the anniversary of many episodes, not only of the November Revolution of 1918. It is above all the day on which one of the most terrible acts in German history was committed. It was the day that signalled the beginning of one of the most heinous crimes of humankind, the genocide of the Jewish people [the pogrom on the so-called Kristallnacht]. Such a date must never be overshadowed by any other event.
What exactly do you mean?
The spin that propagates the lie of “two German dictatorships,” which places the GDR on a level with Nazi Germany, aims at revising history from an anti-communist standpoint. The truth is, if war had not emanated from German soil there would have been no refugees from Eastern and Western Prussia, Pomerania, and Silesia. There would have been no occupation by foreign troops, no division into zones, consequently no two German states; no border right through Germany and Berlin, and indeed there would not have been a wall. To really understand post-war German history one must pose the question, How and by whom was Germany divided? Germany was long divided by the time the GDR was founded. It is essential to understand the nature of the Cold War.
What was the Cold War, in your opinion?
It was far more than a propaganda war. It was in its nature a Third World War. While it was cold, it always hovered on the edge of a possible nuclear war. Instead of celebrating the fact that peace was maintained, the powers that be today continue to use the Cold War as a way of condemning the GDR.
When did it become clear to you that the GDR would not continue to exist the way it was?
Quite late. At the end of November 1989 Gorbachev had informed me that he would be declaring the end of the Cold War at his meeting with Bush in Malta. This made me wonder what would become of the GDR: it was, after all, an outcome of the Second World War and the Cold War that followed.
In a situation where one side unilaterally declares a conflict to be at an end, this amounts to a political capitulation. Today NATO stands on the border with Russia, while the Warsaw Treaty no longer exists. Neither the world nor Germany has become safer or more equal. Following the end of the Soviet Union, hostility began in the Balkans. And Germany is waging war once again. In 1989 I would not have thought this possible in my wildest dreams.
The GDR did not prevent violence in 1989 so that the soldiers of a united Germany could spill their blood in the Hindu Kush [the mountains between Pakistan and Afghanistan]. That would have been inconceivable at that time. This is a historical fact: the GDR is the only German state never to have waged a war. In view of these facts it is scandalous how the Federal Republic of Germany handles GDR history.
Is there anything you are proud of?
Of course there is. There was much greater importance attached to social and economic rights in the GDR than in Germany today. There was equal pay for equal work. Men, women and young people were equal. The GDR had child-care facilities that allowed both parents to work. It had a modern education system, which guaranteed equal opportunities for all the children of the nation. Free or heavily subsidised access to the treasures of culture and the arts, an effective health system . . .
The German president, Köhler, is of the opinion that the GDR bought its social security through huge foreign debts that eventually caused bankruptcy. This is not true. According to an official statement by the German State Bank regarding the GDR debt, “at the end of 1989 the net debt was 19.9 billion marks.” This converts to €10 billion—a lot of money. However, the economist Horst Köhler is well aware that this does not cause the bankruptcy of a state unless the political conditions for this are in place. Compare the GDR’s debt with Germany’s present state debt of more than €1.6 trillion. With more than €86 billion, Germany has achieved the highest level of new borrowings since the Second World War. That is for only one year—eight times the amount of the GDR’s total debt.
And what about the wall?
The wall didn’t fall out of the sky. No less a person than the US president John F. Kennedy said in 1961: “It is not a very nice solution, but it is a hell of a lot better than war.” The wall marked not only the German-German border. It was in its way unique in the world. It was the border between systems, capitalism and socialism, between blocs, NATO and the Warsaw Treaty, between economies, the EEC and the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance. I always regretted deaths and casualties on the border. Every one of them was one too many. But it would be dishonest of me not to add that at the time of the Cold War a unilateral change of this border by the GDR would have been impossible.
How do you see socialism today?
Between 1989 and 1991 a certain model of socialism disappeared, but not the socialist idea. It lives on. The present crisis, which is not merely a financial crisis but a crisis of the system, confirms Marx’s analysis.
The world cannot stay as it is. I am certain that our grandchildren will do better than us. I agree with Rosa Luxemburg: socialism or barbarism.
No comments:
Post a Comment