Comments 14

Od Mnichova ke Kyjevu

Mar 13, 2015 Petr Kolář , Juraj Mesík

BRATISLAVA/PRAHA – Když se na podzim 1938 britský premiér Neville Chamberlain vrátil z Mnichova oznamujíc, že přináší „mír naší době“, odmítl Winston Churchill volbu, kterou právě Británie a Francie učinili, legendárním výrokem: “Měli jste možnost vybrat si mezi válkou a ztrátou cti. Vybrali jste si ztrátu cti a budete mít válku.“

V konfrontaci s podobnou volbou v případě války na Ukrajině britský premiér David Cameron, francouzský prezident François Holland, německá kancléřka Angela Merkel a prezident USA Barack Obama bohužel též zvolili ztrátu cti. Je je to dnes Ukrajina, kterou devastuje válka, zatímco Evropa stojí stranou, jakkoli zjevně se tím podkopává její vlastní bezpečnost a hodnoty.

V otevřeném dopise klíčovým vůdcům Evropy a USA je žádá sto třicet českých a slovenských prominentních osobností, aby opustili cestu ústupků agresorovi.Jako občané nástupnických států Československa, které dostalo na Mnichovské konferenci smrtelnou ránu, cítíme zvláštní odpovědnost za to, abychom k tomu řekli své.

To continue reading, please log in or enter your email address.

To read this article from our archive, please log in or register now. After entering your email, you'll have access to two free articles every month. For unlimited access to Project Syndicate, subscribe now.

Featured

The Sino-American Cold War’s Collateral Damage

Oct 19, 2018 Minxin Pei
The End of Scandinavian Non-Alignment

Oct 17, 2018 Carl Bildt
Will Italy Sink Europe?

Oct 17, 2018 Jim O'Neill
The Martyrdom of Jamal Khashoggi

Oct 15, 2018 Daoud Kuttab
The Brexit Endgame

Oct 16, 2018 Robert Skidelsky

Petr Kolář

Writing for PS since 2015
1 Commentary

Petr Kolář is a former senior Czech diplomat and adviser to the late President Václav Havel.

Juraj Mesík

Writing for PS since 2015
2 Commentaries

Juraj Mesík is a climate and energy adviser at the Slovak Foreign Policy Association.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 16 in all 16 Comments on this article

slightly optimistic Mar 17, 2015

In 2013, the UK government found its foreign policy had to change. The parliamentary vote on Syria showed that people were becoming cool on intervention abroad.
In the last few days, the White House discovered that its foreign policy has to change too - many allies have switched allegiance and now support the new Asian Infrastructure Bank, against US wishes.
Global political economy? No, at present we only have global economy.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Rui ferreira Mar 17, 2015

Why does people (politicians, specialists...) keep trying to frame into the thirties Hitler-Lebensraum-Munich-Chamberlain-Churchill box, a situation that bears little resemblance with it, if any?
I don't know what it does look like as seen from the Czech point of view, but I think that we all should be grateful that some of our most proheminent leaders are apparently commited to find a peaceful solution. What kind of lunatic can pretend that Europe is not doing its part, meaning that it is not ready to escalate a conflict that can end in nuclear war?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Petey Bee Mar 17, 2015

Considering the generally stellar "A-list" group of authors Project Syndicate normally has, I'm surprised the editors are trashing it up with this plainly partisan warmongering.

Personally I find spurious comparisons to Hitler to be tremendously insulting, a tactic which is not only cheap but in actual fact quite dishonorable. It is doubly dishonorable if you consider that the violent vanguard of the supposedly naturally occurring Ukrainian revolution were themselves of a certain "nationalist right wing" persuasion, to be polite.

That the authors have a desire to say this is understandable -- they're politicians after all. But the editors of this publication have got a fair bit of Chutzpah if they think anyone will let this go by unnoticed, lets just say.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Andrzej B. Mar 16, 2015

I’d like to congratulate Czechs, that both Mr Kolář and Mr Mesík are the FORMER adviser and FORMER MoP respectively.
It would be great to see war mongers from some other countries kept out from decision making and limited to writing comments as well.
Eventually they could try their talents in writing screenplays. Dear Sirs, sequel to “Dr. Strangelove” is just waiting for you!
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Akhter Khan Mar 16, 2015

so you want war. in 1938 churchill did not know about nuclear weapon. europe cannot start war the like america does with afgahn and iraq.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
j. von Hettlingen Mar 15, 2015

Petr Kolář and Juraj Mesík are Czech politicians. They accuse Western leaders - David Cameron, François Hollande, Angela Merkel, and Barack Obama - of having "chosen dishonor" in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. They compare these leaders' failure of stopping Putin's aggression to the one France and Britian faced 75 years ago, by alluding to Winston Churchill's prescient statement: “You were given the choice between war and dishonor," he said. “You chose dishonor and you will have war."
Churchill denounced the 1938 Munich Agreement that Britain's prime minister Richard reached with Adolf Hitler. This humiliating agreement came to symbolise the evils of appeasement, as Britain and France allowed the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia and the transfer of its Sudeten region to Germany. Chamberlain was seen as weak, because he tried to satisfy Hitler's appetite for land grab, while underestimating that Hitler meant serious with his bellicose threats and expansionism. After the annexation of the Sudentenland, border areas mainly inhabited by German speakers, Hitler went further, and the agreement failed to avert a catastrophic war.
The authors also accuse Britain and the US for letting Kiev down, by failing to guarantee Ukraine's territorial integrity, after signing the Budapest Memorandum. This breach has cast "a shadow on the credibility of other international guarantees and agreements, including the mutual-defense assurance that lies at the heart of NATO membership". They ask whether the West would be willing to defend the Baltic states against a "confrontation with Russia"?
Although the authors' fear and criticism are justifiable, they have no proposal as to how to resolve the conflict. While "it is always preferable to attempt to negotiate rather than resort to war", it is also seen by Putin as a "sign of weakness". Apart from negotiations they propose "the toughest and broadest possible sanctions" and "the provision of effective and extensive help to Ukraine". They can't deny that sanctions have not worked! Besides they have to know that to end a conflict is like to cure a cancer. It takes time and incremental progress is more likely to stick than a short-lived peace deal.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Mirek Fatyga Mar 15, 2015

http://www.stop-russia.org/?page_id=56
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Nat Scientist Mar 15, 2015

"It has been a year since Ukraine's citizens sent a corrupt regime packing,"

The details of the "sent..packing' are more reminiscent of early March 1933 Reichstag fire and occupation of a democratically-elected leader's offices who just concluded an agreement with the opposition party than it does of 1938 Neville Chamberlain's choice. But then the conflation of history narrative flows more easily when the clock is started after the right-wing snipers had their desired effect of forced installation. All politics is local, global power's friction not sustainable for long.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
larry onipko Mar 14, 2015

According to Mr. Curtis Carpenter statement, “It would be good to know what the Czech Republic is doing in a material way to support Western Ukraine” – so you are taking sides and still positioning yourself as objective viewer?
Oh, common: no rights left for the second part of Ukraine?
- Curtis Carpenter Mar 15, 2015
  
  The authors here charge the U.K., France, Germany and the U.S. with taking a dishonorable course in Ukraine. I am simply asking for a few facts that demonstrate the Czech Republic's commitments to a different course.
  
  I would like to believe that I'm on the side of the people of Ukraine, most of whom, East or West, have no desire to be pawns in a proxy war between Russia and the West. To that end, I support the Merkel/Hollande initiative, and am on the side of diplomacy and the right of Ukraine to self determination.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Curtis Carpenter Mar 14, 2015

I don't doubt that the parallels between Czechoslovakia and Ukraine are vivid to Europe and the United States -- but would extend the analogy by noting that the Germans were not totally unwelcome in the Sudetenland in the 1930's just as the Russians were not entirely unwelcome in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine 77 years later.

Perhaps I've swallowed too much Russian propaganda (there is certainly no shortage of it), but I'm not convinced by any means that Putin and Russia have Hitlerian aspirations -- which is the essence of the text here.

Meanwhile, it would be good to know what the Czech Republic is doing in a material way to support Western Ukraine -- and whether that support is aligned with the comments by Bernhard Kopp below which I think summarize the strategic situation, with a few exceptions, pretty well.

Perhaps it is correct to paint the Ukraine tragedy as a war against Russia -- but can we completely discount the view that it is, at base, a civil war?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
larry onipko Mar 14, 2015

These dudes remind me of our Jennifer Psaki (U.S. Department of State), who makes comments about everything but knows nothing! Any facts maybe? Or just “brekočim”?
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Patrick Verhoeven Mar 13, 2015

This article is so right !

But it is hopeless. The economic crisis has really hit Europe very hard, also relatively strong countries like Holland. Our electorates demands from their leaders that they only care about them and the world can really go to hell.

Despite all the danger, the majority still want their politicians to do nothing and simply let Ukraine and its 45 million people go down.

My opinion is: If you treat freedom, justice and dignity of others like this, you are not worthy of it yourself.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
santhosh kumar Mar 13, 2015

the authors of this article are war mongers...they need to clearly analyse who are the promoters of regime change in the 1st place? who subverted the democratic regime in kiev?...it is one and only one USA .....USA wants to mock russia and threaten its security interests under the facade of democracy ..this authors dont know the difference between democracy and war...if they dont know democracy . let these authors study political science ...don teach high moral values about war and democracy ...complete rubbish article
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Bernhard Kopp Mar 13, 2015

Freedom, democracy and first and formost the rule of law agreeable to the vast majority of the elite and the population, and the elimination of the oligarchic kleptocracy, cannot be brought to 'Ukraine' by any sort of war against Russia, or war with Russia about the Ukraine. Many Ukrainians know very well that they deserved to loose Crimea to Russia after the Ukrainian-European-US-tensions with Russia since about 2004. Many Ukrainians understand that they have to create a liberal, rule-of-law-based democracy themselves, and that it may well take them some 100 years. Until then, neutralization may be their best choice to coexist with Russia. The analogies to 1938 of the article appear mistaken.
- Curtis Carpenter Mar 14, 2015
  
  I'm not sure that Ukraine "deserved" to lose Crimea -- and certain that it didn't in the manner that it did. But that said, I think your assessment is insightful and correct.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

http://prosyn.org/qtikYgl/cs;

Od Mnichova ke Kyjevu

To continue reading, please log in or enter your email address.

Featured

The Sino-American Cold War’s Collateral Damage

The End of Scandinavian Non-Alignment

Will Italy Sink Europe?

The Martyrdom of Jamal Khashoggi

The Brexit Endgame

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

The Powerlessness of the Most Powerful

What Has Google Ever Done for Us?

China’s Repressed Memory

The Economics of the Climate Crisis

The Sino-American Cold War’s Collateral Damage

The Disruptive Power of Ethnic Nationalism

When Agricultural Workers Go Hungry

Are Britons Really Softening on Immigration?

Cookies and Privacy

Log in/Register