Europe-89

Thirty years since the collapse of the socialist bloc. "Velvet revolutions" of Central Europe through the eyes of the young generation

Was 1989 in Europe historically inevitable? What political events prepared him?

What do young people who were born in the early 90s know about the events of the 89th? How did their families perceive anti -communist changes and how did they participate in the civil activity of their countries?

A decade before and after the 89th: how the matter of "solidarity" in Poland continued, how the dissidents came to power in the Czech Republic, which turned into the separateness of Yugoslavia from Moscow and Eurocompanism. Economics, politics, public moods.

Movement to the European Union: Good luck and failures. The responsibility of individual countries and European values. Testing and challenges of Central European countries.

The image of the 89th in the presentation of the generation of 20-year-old Europeans. What are their dreams and the image of the future related to?

Political scientist Karol Luchka (Warsaw), Slavist and independent journalist Jovanna Georgievsky (Belgrade), civil activist Yakub Muchka (Prague, graduate of the Faculty of Philosophy of Karlov University) are being discussed. Commented by historian Yaroslav Shimov , journalist and political scientist Efim Fishtein , student of the Prague Economic University and Milan University of Bokkoni Lily Persina .

Elena Fanailova is running

Elena Fanailova: Can we say that 1989 was inevitable in the political life of Europe? Why does it seem to us so now? Is this true?

Efim Fishtein

Efim Fishtein: I think it was. Despite Gorbachev’s famous saying that the system had another ten -year margin of safety. The new governments were already at that time in Hungary and Poland, the government of the "round table", with the participation of representatives of the opposition forces, and East Germany was boiling, and this led to the fall of the Berlin wall in fact. Could Czechoslovakia then remain the island of blessed, where these changes would not take place? The Secretary Generals of the Communist Party were replaced by one after the others for a month or two, until Vasil Mogorit convened a meeting of the Communists from the Federal Assembly and ordered the chairman of this federal assembly in direct text, and Vaclav Gavel by the president. The country was seething all year. He began with demonstrations in memory of Jan Pajah , about his self -immolation, and ended that yesterday's political prisoner Vaclav Gavel went out of the gates of the prison and almost immediately became the main candidate for president of the country. Many believe that it was the cunning plan of the KGB and STB, the intelligence local, that they turned all this great. It seems to me a complete absurdity.

Elena Fanailova: When Russia recall in 1991, that is, the stretched 89th, there are usually two opinions-"how great it was" and "how terrible it was." How is this discussed in your families, what was this year of revolutions so fast that they took virtually six months, and bloodless (compared to one Romanian)?

Yakub Much: I live and study in Prague as a student, but I am from a small city in South Moravia, which differs from Prague. I am from a rather active Catholic family, our great-grandfather was killed by the Communists in the first month of 1948, and my grandfather, for example, thought to sign a charter-77 against the communist regime. So we were all brought up in a strong democratic tradition of the first republic , Masarikov, liberal Catholicism. And everyone expected the year 1989, when, finally, the Communists would already finish everything, and there will be a chance of a new life. My parents were then students, actively participated in the revolution, even distributed letters, posters about it. They immediately took advantage of the first years after the revolution to go abroad, my mother worked in Canada, on an internship. They perceived this so that this boring, poor communism of the last period of stability, normalization, as they said, will finally end, and we will begin to live a new life.

Jovanna Georgievski

Jovanna Georgievsky: As I was told, in 1989 no one said that we would begin a new life, the collapse of the country, armed conflicts will begin. Everyone lived more or less peacefully. My parents then were as much as I am now, 25 years old. I am from the south of Serbia, my city is called Pirot. Mom began working this year, entered the magistracy, and dad had just finished undergraduate, and he was obliged to serve in the army. If dad would go to serve later, then maybe I would not be. Those who have served since 1991 ended up in armed conflicts, they were sent to different parts of the former Yugoslavia. In 1989, the European basketball championship was held in Zagreb, Yugoslavia became the European champion. But the strikes in Kosovo have already begun, and everything that happened in the early 90s was already felt. But it seems to me that at that moment something changed in life only those who were in Kosovo. My mother in 1990 planned to study in Germany, arrange a visa and start working there. But the Yugoslav border closed quickly, and she could not go anywhere.

Elena Fanailova: What is strange, because Yugoslavia was actually the only open socialist country, people from which could study in Europe. And suddenly the changes in the other direction began.

No one even imagined that this regime could continue

Karol Luchka: My parents were not yet familiar at that time. My mother told me that among her friends everyone had already voted against the Communists. I myself and my parents are from Warsaw. No one even imagined that this regime could continue. My dad was active in a democratic opposition, and he watched this as a general picture, that in the early 80s there were unrest, then martial law was introduced in Poland.

Elena Fanailova : As one of the philosophers described this period: in Poland it took ten years.

Karol Luchka: What I'm talking about. And after this martial law, people lost the hope that everything would change. Dad told me that it was a little unexpected for him that everything suddenly changed.

Elena Fanailova: Poland is the first of the countries of the Eastern Bloc , where the government has changed. In the summer, Moscow removed military support, and already in the fall these modes sprinkled like a house of cards.

Karol Luchka: People had a feeling that then was dangerous.

Elena Fanailova: What new values were acquired by people, what pluses, opportunities opened before them? And what are the minuses of 1989, this revolution, brought to their life?

Efim Fishtein: Transformation covered all aspects of Czechoslovak reality without exception. It was quite organized and planned: restitution, in connection with it the first capital appeared, then privatization. At the very beginning, there was still lustration, a certain quarantine, a check for lice. Thanks to lustrations, and many in Europe did not want and did not recommend that the Czechs and Slovaks, people with a toxic past, former STB, intelligence, high functionaries, during the first years could not get into new structures. As a result, the country received the most effective capitalist economy in the European Union, with a much higher GDP growth and with the lowest unemployment in Europe.

Elena Fanailova: Europe is now facing new challenges, and this is primarily the challenges of populism, separatism. Why did it become possible now?

Efim Fishtein: There is nothing to offer a new generation. Everyone knows that the next generation will not live as good as their fathers. Even the most ingenious person cannot come up with such a project of the future, the prerequisites must mature for this. These difficulties are natural, and there is no need to blame them for an evil uncle, who came with populist slogans and ruined everything.

Elena Fanailova: Do you have a personified image of the 1989, early 90s, metaphor, emotional idea of this?

Jovanna Georgievski: There is a memory from childhood about some kind of political event that is not related to our family life, this is 1999, the war, which was in Yugoslavia. And someone was freed at that moment, and for someone a tragedy began.

Elena Fanailova: Yes, you can draw a context of wider-from the beginning of the 89th to the end of the 90s. Because 1989 seems to be historical inevitability, and there is no subjunctive mood.

Yakub flush

Yakub Much: The first years after our velvet revolution, they became a period of enormous optimism for the whole people, personalized by Vaclav Gavel. All dissidents who had previously been in prisons, underground, became politicians who are listened to in the American Congress, and the whole world begins to talk about Czechoslovakia as a country who wants to reform itself. We also had problems related to privatization, they are very actively studied today. Our government with the then Prime Minister Vaclav Klaus said that it is necessary to do privatization without any restrictions, and the market would do everything itself. Now they begin to admit that it was a little wrong, since these years we also had a new oligarchy. But all the same, for the whole people and our generation, active trips began. For example, in high school I participated in four student exchange around the world, all our schools were very active. There was a period of waiting, which will be next, how it will live differently. This has changed in connection with the economic, refugee crisis. At that time, refugees from the Yugoslav countries began to come to us, and we treated them very openly, since Yugoslavia in the 80s became an example for us how more humane socialism could be built.

Elena Fanailova: What preceded 1989 in Poland, in Hungary, what was it a decade of the 80s?

Yaroslav Shimov: In Hungary, the most acute crisis happened very early, in 1956 . And then the whole era of Yanosh Kadar is an increase in each other, the bullying of the 1956 wounds. To make somewhat wretched compared to the West, the likeness of a consumer society, due to this, reassure objective political and social contradictions. Hungary is the "most cheerful hut of social camps", a country where books were sold quite free, for which in Czechoslovakia it was even possible to sit down or just have trouble. This system later caused many nostalgia for many, but its internal logic was aimed at the fact that when it was already possible, it would melt very quickly. Because the injury of 1956 determined that society lived, it was reconciled, but did not forget. And all over 30 years after 1956 - this is life in a forced, lightweight communist format. Even a significant part of the ruling layer in 1988-89 is happy to get rid of this excessively hard frame. Kadar goes into the shadows, and already at the beginning of 1989, multi-party science, and de facto, the Communists themselves make the decision: the situation is irreplaceable, let's return to some norms, especially the "big brother" no longer presses.

Elena Fanailova: If we talk about emotions and metaphors, what is 1989 for you?

Karol Luchka: When I grew up, I did not encounter ideas that would contradict this image. Nobody even put this into question. Only in adulthood did I realize that there are people in other countries who deny the fact that these were good changes. Therefore, I have an idea that it was natural and natural, logical changes.

Elena Fanailova: Now people in Russia, who were happy to participate in the events of this time, say: probably it was a mistake. I think the reason here is social frustration. Still, the reforms of the early 90s were carried out very hard.

In our countries, the idea of communism has completely failed

Karol Luchka: In our countries, the idea of communism has completely failed. The 80s were years of stagnation, nothing changed, everyone lived badly. Young people could go to West Berlin, earn stamps, change to dollars, return and live well. And there were such conversations: why should we live in this country? That is, Poland did not lose anything from these changes. People lost their jobs, but at the same time there were no communists who would say: let's go back. In this difference from Russia, and the post -Soviet space, where there were people who said that the USSR fell apart, and this is a disaster.

Elena Fanailova: Yes, we know this person.

Yaroslav Shimov

Yaroslav Shimov: In Poland, the 80s are years of huge tension, at first of fair poverty and poverty, because the economy stopped working in 1981-82. The ruling party is already frankly, with the involvement of the army, strict power holds power until the second half of the 80s, when the "solidarity", like the main power of the opposition, remains popular, and there is someone to talk with. A very short transitional stage begins to a full -fledged democracy, which ends with the election of Lech Valensa in 1990 by the first non -communist president of Poland. But the essence is the same: the societies that imposed this regime in the late 40s-early 50s are gradually straightening, because they removed the lid that crushed them.

Elena Fanailova: Many commentators say that the countries of Central Europe were easier to say goodbye to the Soviet past, because communism is a thing that came to them on bayonets, I mean the results of World War II, the liberation of Eastern Europe and the post -war Yalta agreements. Your countries were at the hand of Moscow. It was an Antimoskov, anti -Kremle, anti -Russian idea that we were dumping the power of the Communists, or was there an understanding that this was our internal problem too?

Yakub Muchka: In 1946, more or less democratic elections took place in our country, where the Communist Party won. In our history of communism, two periods need to be distinguished - until 1968, before the occupation, and after it. After the occupation, this was already perceived as something Russian-Moscow, Soviet, not ours. Euphoria in the 90s, that let's build a new society, it was the same as in the 50s in our country. Most people supported the then communist reforms. But then the Prague Spring occurred, in the 60s there was an attempt to find another socialism, not the 50s, Stalinist, but one where human rights will be respected, but socialism will be economically. Then another decision came from the outside, and maybe this is also the problem today that many no longer want to recognize our responsibility for our communism. Even my parents say: “We didn’t know what democracy, personal responsibility was not ready for this. The whole system collapsed, and we thought that we would live in a new paradise, and everything would do again - the European Union, the Americans. And it turned out that we should join this personally and build a new country, and no one else would do it after 2003.” We did not expect that it would be necessary to help refugees, together with the European Union to deal with world problems. Even Vaclav Klaus had one argument for the European Union: "Let's enter there because we can improve our economic conditions."

Karol Luchka

Karol Luchka: In Poland, events from the 40-50s fit into the national pathos of the country, which always suffers, has the discourse of the victim. We still say that during the Second World War, the Poles brought almost the same sacrifices that the Jewish people brought. The militias fought with the new government throughout the country back in the 50s, and there were repressions against them, they are recognized in our historiography by fighters for the independence of Poland. This affects the perception of communism in Poland as something that came from the East.

Elena Fanailova: My favorite example of independence is Joseph Broz Tito , who politically separated from the Soviet Union as soon as he could.

Jovanna Georgievski: Mom told me that in the late 80s they went to the Soviet Union on excursions, and before Tito’s death there were few such stories. Although people traveled, everything was quite closed at the political level.

Elena Fanailova: And where did people look in 1989 - inside themselves, to Berlin or Moscow?

Jovanna Georgievsky: I heard a lot about the fact that in Yugoslavia people lived a carefree life, looked only at what happened in their country, and this was enough for them. Of course, this life was not completely carefree. There was pride that I am a resident of Yugoslavia, a large country, and I may not watch what was happening around.

Elena Fanailova: It seems to us that 1989 was historically inevitable, or the entire course of the development of Eastern Europe after the Second World War leads us to the inevitability of the collapse of the socialist system, the fall of the Berlin wall and then everywhere?

Yaroslav Shimov: An approach, which could not happen otherwise, is seductive. In fact, the Gorbachev reforms with all their pros and cons were a huge catalyst with the fact that Mikhail Sergeyevich got involved in the battle, having no plan, and this fight went completely differently than he imagined. But all this could be much more slowly and sad. The system was not viable, but its life resource did not predetermined its instant collapse. A lot of factors came together - radical reforms, which led to a fairly quick erosion of the foundation of the communist system in the Soviet Union. When throwing these processes into eastern Europe, the foundations of these regimes disappeared even faster, because the foundation was much more flimsy. This was perceived as an introduced from the outside, and someone else's is easy and pleasant to destroy.

Elena Fanailova: What is considered failure? Скоро будут выборы в Европарламент, и всех страшно беспокоит, какое число правых партий туда пройдет, каким будет новый Европарламент, как он будет голосовать, и так далее. Почему возникает новый правый уклон в последнее десятилетие?

Жизнь в свободе, может быть, даже сложнее, чем жизнь в несвободе

Кароль Лучка: У нас правые мнения были очень распространены всегда, просто в последние годы к ним добавилась черта популизма, и другое поколение пришло.

Елена Фанайлова: В Польше правые силы были всегда, но политическая культура, способ политического общения не позволял правым даже принимать такие законы, которые они хотели бы. А молодые политики нацелены в основном на то, чтобы удержать власть.

Якуб Мучка: Для меня то, что крайне правые силы начали приходить в политику, стало шоком. Беженский кризис в 2015 году, возможно, стал для нас первой проверкой, насколько серьезно мы воспринимаем все слова про демократию, про права человека, ответственность за глобальные проблемы и вызовы, в том числе экологические, которые нужно решать сегодня. Не знаю, насколько в этом сыграла роль высокая политика, а насколько это ответ народа, но это было более-менее связано. Мне кажется, высокая политика, особенно с нашим президентом, подтверждала идею о том, что в Евросоюзе, может быть, уже не так хорошо, потому что от нас все время чего-то хотят, завалить нашу страну беженцами, мусульманами. И сейчас это стало зеркалом того, про что мы забыли в 90-е годы. Вацлав Гавел и даже Масарик когда-то говорили, что демократия есть, но демократов мало. Жизнь в свободе, может быть, даже сложнее, чем жизнь в несвободе.

Елена Фанайлова: Чувствуете ли вы, что сейчас идея европейских ценностей, Евросоюза подвергается сомнению, люди больше хотят вернуться в свои национальные границы? Есть ли у вас границы, в которые вы могли бы вернуться, вы, русская, которая выросла в Чехии и учится по всей Европе?

Лиля Персина

Лиля Персина, студентка Пражского экономического университета и Миланского университета Боккони: Когда мне было 19 лет, я полетела в Москву на стажировку на полгода – это был мой первый опыт. У меня был культурный шок. Я училась в международной школе и всегда представлялась, что я русская, а когда я приехала в Москву, меня все спрашивали: "Девушка, вы из какой страны?" Я там ощущала себя иностранкой и потеряла чувство родины, потому что не знала, как ответить людям. Я столкнулась с мужскими взглядами в метро, с бабушками в магазинах, и мне было очень некомфортно. Перед отъездом папа говорил мне: "Все плывут по течению из России, а ты почему-то хочешь вернуться. Зачем?" Я очень хотела попробовать и очень рада, что сделала это. В Европе мне все равно, где я нахожусь, будь это Голландия, Германия или Чехия, я чувствую себя везде более-менее как дома, но в Москве, в России я немножко чужая.

Елена Фанайлова: Наверняка были беженцы 2014 года из Украины в Чехию. What does it look like?

Якуб Мучка: Когда Евросоюз заявлял, что больше не хочет принимать беженцев с Ближнего Востока, говорили: мы же приняли миллион беженцев из Украины. Но сравнивать это неуместно, потому что много людей приехало не из регионов, в которых идет война, а просто из-за общего ухудшения экономического положения, на работу. В Чехию с начала войны до сегодняшнего дня приехали где-то три тысячи человек.

Кароль Лучка: В Польше это где-то миллион человек.

Елена Фанайлова: Почему после 90-х так по-разному выглядят эти структуры, эти общества?

Ярослав Шимов: Очень многие, особенно западные, наблюдатели сейчас перечисляют Венгрию и Польшу через запятую, говоря о торжестве страшных, ужасных популистов, попытках отхода от демократии. В действительности ситуация очень разная. В Польше вполне живая демократия, несмотря на то, что ПиС, "Право и справедливость", которая вернулась к власти несколько лет назад (сейчас у нее и президент, и парламентское большинство), довольно жесткая консервативно-националистическая партия, но она действует в рамках демократической системы. И при попытках провести перестановки, судебные реформы и так далее она, с одной стороны, получает по рукам из Брюсселя и сдает назад. А с другой стороны, она сталкивается с очень жестким сопротивлением живой оппозиции, имеющей весьма значительное влияние в СМИ. Там борются два лагеря, и сейчас у одного перевес, но через несколько лет все может быть по-другому. Между 2007 и 2015 годами перевес был у другого лагеря. То есть демократия работает. Качиньский может кому-то не нравиться, он явно очень травмирован гибелью брата в 2010 году, но он твердый политик. А Венгрия, к сожалению, это совсем другое дело. Орбан выстроил систему, при которой он подмял под себя, под свой клан ключевые объекты и отрасли экономики. Это напоминает путинизм-лайт. Там мобилизация населения по мигрантскому вопросу, антисоросовская кампания, все это выглядит выходящим за рамки нормальных демократических процессов. Это увековечение системы отношений собственности очень опасно, потому что может быть перейдена граница, после которой восстановить нормально функционирующие демократические институты будет гораздо сложнее.

Елена Фанайлова: Как выглядит сербский популизм, хорватский, черногорский?

Йованна Георгиевски: Сейчас на Балканах в разных странах проходят протесты. На прошлой неделе большие протесты прошли в Белграде. Есть понятие – "вторая Сербия", это люди, которые в 90-е хотели сохранить европейские ценности, отказывались от национализма, не поддерживали войну, призывали, чтобы все это прекратилось как можно скорее или не начиналось. Хранители этих европейских ценностей, которые пережили 90-е, сейчас сильно протестуют.

Елена Фанайлова: Стоит ли странам разбегаться по своим национальным квартирам?

Ефим Фиштейн: Национальные государства пока не собираются отмирать, на них просто не стоит делать слишком большой упор, потому что есть еще и вариант их объединения в Евросоюз. Не нужно только ставить бессмысленные цели вроде создания европейской армии. Чтобы построить такую армию потребуется, наверное, четыре процента военных расходов, а логики нет, НАТО же остается. Европейский союз пока не дал себе такой передышки, за это идет борьба. Я не сторонник возвращения в национальные закутки, но сторонник глубокой реформы. Кстати, если говорить о Чехии, здесь только радикальные, экстремистские совершенно задвинутые партии требуют выхода из Евросоюза. Все разумные силы, включая консервативную партию, самую правую, но не экстремистскую, за то, чтобы продолжать совместную жизнь с Европой, но начать реформу, о которой долго и упорно говорят, но которая все не происходит.

Елена Фанайлова: 1989 год как образ. Если это смотреть как кино, то это выглядит, как падают карты – режим за режимом. Жизнь России с 1991 года становится иной. Это обсуждается?

Лиля Персин: Я родилась в 1995 году в Москве, и последствия распада позволили моим родителям переехать в Чехию, что в дальнейшем дало мне возможность продолжить обучение в Чехии, в Голландии, в Корее и сейчас в Италии. Мы можем передвигаться совершенно свободно, и это влияет на всех нас очень позитивно. Мы изучали в школе 90-е как страшные времена, и я смотрела бандитские фильмы, мне кажется, что все жили без правил. Но родители, особенно мама, вспоминают те времена с ностальгией.

Ефим Фиштейн: За четверть века молодые люди стали практически гражданами мира. Все люди молодого поколения, школьники говорят по-английски, и у них есть полное ощущение, что они закончат образование и уйдут в мир. Это чешская традиция: получать ремесло за границей и потом вернуться. Есть уверенность в том, что дома родина, дома хорошо, это тянет их возвращаться и здесь осесть.

Кароль Лучка: Нет смысла терять надежду. Мы никому не поможем, если сдадимся и будем говорить, что все хуже. Нужно сохранять оптимизм, и я хочу верить, что это время популизма закончится.

Йованна Георгиевски: Я верю в чудеса и надеюсь, что что-то чудесное и хорошее для нас сложится из всех этих протестов, и вообще будущее сложится удачно.

Якуб Мучка: Я лично очень переживаю за то, что сегодня происходит и в нашей стране, и в Европе, я социальный христианский либерал. Я очень верю в проект Евросоюза, но сейчас очень боюсь даже в перспективе ближайшего времени того, что произойдет. Я не верю в оптимизм и даже пессимизм, у меня нет никаких общих представлений, как все будет происходить. Я пытаюсь ни от кого ничего не ожидать, а мой ответ – попробовать своими руками бороться со всем этим. Я создал свою маленькую организацию по теме беженцев, миграции, которая пытается через онлайновый образовательный проект помочь людям в этом во всем сориентироваться. Это моя личная борьба с тем, что мне очень не нравится, меня раздражает. И я не ожидаю даже от наших политиков сейчас ничего, потому что не вижу перспективу ни в одном. Организация "Человек в беде" для меня лично стала примером, как можно бороться, даже когда наше правительство не готово.

Елена Фанайлова: У меня и у старших товарищей были сомнения, когда мы затеяли эту передачу, может ли молодое поколение помнить что-то о 1989 годе, не придется ли нам иметь дело с мифами и легендами. Но оказалось, что ребята довольно хорошо себе представляют и историю страны, и историю движения сопротивления, и то, в каком месте самостояния находится каждый из них.