Transcripts For CSPAN3 Fall Of The Berlin Wall 20140810

Under two hours. Welcome, everyone. It is wonderful to see you all Plenary Session to commemorate the fall of the berlin wall. Honor and pleasure to the chair and moderator. Us have beenwho meetings for four more, its aen little short of remarkable that were marking 25 years since the fall of the berlin wall. The remarkable because on one hand, we can recall that event so vividly but on the other hand, it is sometimes it seems like it took place a lifetime ago. Remarkable because ourthose of us who pursued degrees and published our first books during the proceeding in some case before the construction of the wall. [laughter] seemed sose unimaginable. Indulge you, can session with him and no one was more associated with the cold war. There were lots of talk about the integration of europe, the but no one thinking, was talking about the reunification of germany. Also the time that john series of the conferences on soviet relations. Soviet andthat American Scholars got together. Scott armstrong had just come up with the idea of this theme a National Security archive. But in the end of the cold war, not a chance. Discussion of it at all. What is not remarkable is were closer now than we were then consensus on the fundamental questions regarding germany and their aftermath. Concern theons drivers, whether they be individual, state, or international. These questions concerned the consequences whether they be international, state, or individual. These questions concerned the the legacy also, states, of individuals, and international. While we have not reached any is none in oure articulate the terms of the debate and move the ourersation forward than three speakers tonight. Them need introductions but i will do them anyway and i will do them all at once in the so we can will speak forre there is maximum time our general conversation as well remark. Opening her newest book the collapse the accidental opening of the berlin wall be l appear on the 25th anniversary of the fall of the wall. Her last book, which were all familiar with, the struggle to post cold war europe was Financial Times book of the year. The d. A. D. Prize for foringuished scholars european studies. Princeton university will publish an updated anniversary the autumn of 2014. Header. Ets a double mary serves as dean of history at the university of Southern California and is visiting on leave as a professor of government and harvard. T she is a white house fellow and of the advance professor and council of relations. Faculty fellow at u. V. s miller center. Hes the author of several books cold war and on u. S. Relations with europe, including for the soul of man kind, which fromhe george lewis prize association. All 20022003, he was a professor oxford. Of has been the resip yentsz fellowships from the United States institute of peace, the hedward Wilson Center and served as president of schaferer. Recoedited on Times American foreign war. Y after the cold he is writing about the foreign the george w. Bush administration. Will be jeffker engle. Finding director at methodist university. Doctoral fellowship and taught at the university of yale, university of pennsylvania and texas a m. Texas a m, he was the 52 school andt the bush. He director of programming while at texas a m he received a star award for teaching a universityp and system chancellors teaching award. Nce among the numerous books and he has written and won the bird song prize and a recent recipient of norwegian nobel. Peaceful end of the cold war. Mary . Thank you very much, richard. Thank you to the society for speak. G me to also, it is great that cspan is can so many more people join us in our discussion today from their homes. Of course, the people here have an advantage. Gave you twoisely free drinks before you had to so imistening to me hoping that will help be the penetratingd questions. I have a few minutes to tell you about the fall of the wall. Colleagues will talk about legacy and interpretation. As richard mentioned, i have a book coming out on this top nick the fall. The anniversary itself is november 9. Lot of mediaa coverage, i hope of my book but 25th anniversary of the fall of the wall. He made thisthat session where we talk about the significance of this event. Things that sorry, minor technical difficulties. Great events dont always have great causes. I decided to write this book after i wrote my last book, 1989, i got a lot of unexpected questions. 1989 is actually about the Foreign Policy that followed the the berlin wall. Pages summarized in a few in the unexpected way the wall came down. I would go out and give talk about that book and i would get and say im here to talk events thattingal come after the berlin fall. Would stop me and say dont you know that reagan wall in 1987 . And the first time i got that kind of shocked timey the fourth and fifth i was no longer shocked. There is not a lot in languages than german about the shortterm events that bring wall. He fall of the there is excellent scholarship fort the longer term causes the fall of the wall. The shortterm events are not well known in the world. Anspeaking i tried to put together that story. Researchingstart something it ends up being more complicated so it ends up being a Fascinating Research topic. We willhave questions talk more about them. Precursor about the tinyvember 9, 1989 then a bit about how we think about legacy,ents, memory, and themes that my colleagues will emphasize as well. Unexpected event actually had in berlin but in which is to say there were a rapid series of deaths. Half years, there sovietr leaders of the union. Many funerals in a row, they were known as the funerals. Margaret thatcher remarked at funeral, that the aviets know how to do funeral. Im definitely coming back next year. Wrong. Nt they decided to take a risk on a his 50s and that man was gorbachev. Chehnenko dies, he begins remarkable series of summit reagan. With ronald unexpected and it is matched by an unexpected level of interest matched by Ronald Reagan. Is more sceptal of gorbachev, that either he was a for real and he may have good intentions but he auld be disattached with single bullet and the soviet the capability of destroy the United States. H. Bush team, once george bush became president , when im speaking of bush, im referring to george h. Bush was more cautious. In of the Biggest Surprises my research on how much tension between the reagan team and the bush team. Used the reagan to transition as saying bush fired everyone. Referred to mush reaganites. The practice of annual summits bosh chov comes to an end. It is not going to be a cold war year. There is a massive protest in 1989. Just had that anniversary. Observed insary was china in silence. To commemorate homes. Their we, of course, know the cold war peacefully but the people at the time did not know this. Unfolded in is the 89, the images on the mind were thatmages of the square, lone figure standing in front of communistank, of a party using bloodshed to defend power. D on the fall of the berlin wall was not a forward end conclusion. Catastrophe loomed around every was on thebloodshed mind of the people who were there on the ground. Still a forbidden square of chinathe republic but we have the ability to examine what happened in europe. Happen in eastern created as his reforms new opportunities . Would there be a similar kind of violence as there had been in china . That was an open question in the summer of 1989. This is a map of cod war europe. In the summer of 1989, the and they of the end did not recognize this quickly enough. Beginning of the end started ray allowed gar border. Cross the hundred gar yans first respected it. As a result of financial inducements from west germany in september, hungary decided to east germans leave as well and they flooded out in mass numbers. This is a photo from the secret archives. This is abandoned vehicles. They had to go down to the becausend collect these east germans would abandon these west. Hey fled to the people waited as long as 16 vehiclespurchase these a abandoning it was such dramatic statement and they had to collect them and bring them east germany. It tested even the people who were at home. Many people who stayed home had to justify staying at home. Home became ay at insult. So suddenly this massive exodus where east germans would cross austriaer and through. Nd up through west germany took at german regime series of steps that you wouldty culminating. East germannse, the ruling regime demonstrated the of albert hershman. You can find someone way to exit find so some way to protest quiet and be loyal. Loyalty had been a popular choice. Hungarian. Undre they decided to close their own borders. Since exit then was no longer an option, voice became the dominant option and the number of protests and size of protests. Ere increased the media was still under events had to be smuggled out. Interviewed basically former smugglers who used to smuggle them out to the west so it could make it to eastern who could broadcast soback to Eastern European they could see it. Event on thean night of october 9, 1989. Biggest surprise of my research, the orders to distribution of machine guns are bullet, just for avel of preparations bloody and violent event. Here. S is in that event might have happened we might be talking about events but they behaved in unexpected ways. Their numbers were massive. There were over 100,000 weresters and they peaceful and nonviolent. Deployed military actually started joining them. Event and itrkable was not understood like it should be. Smugglers i mentioned smuggled out video images of the failure of the to carry out its plan. Westernse made it to broadcasters that fueled the easternfidence of the more. S even and marchedd here around this way and this would germanyn a civil war in. Ould have started they were able to circle the october 9. The peaceful kept grow. The hard line leader of east wasany was ousted and he prince. By a crowned he knew that things had gone i willrong so he thought do things differently. I will still maintain control a good game in public. Sound like im doing reform but im going to state. The power of the to issue minor changes to existing travel laws, of these a stop to all andds that were protesting announcement to this fraudulent change that the journalist in room thought it was a real change. There is remarkable video is arguably the worst press conference in the world. German spokesman goes from bad to worse in his efforts on. Xplain what is going before he finishes speaking he peddling but reporters rush out to file reports and those reports say the wall is open. German hear the reports that are not accurate, this newfound selfconfidence inspired by gorbachev and inspired by what each other. By they stormed the wall. Night,tical point that the point where the berlin wall first opens. Is a Border Crossing or was berlinr crossing in an aerial photo. Berlin is at the top so on other end of the bridge. If you come in a car you have to the car processing lanes where you have to go to the finalbarrier and post before you go to the west and the pending would be in these houses. This becomes a critical point ofause there are a number check points but the other ones, the residences near to them have been given to say secret police employees. Stormy were not likely to the wall. This is kind of out of the way this was whered were known as the undesirables live. Those political undesirables numbers onn large the night of november 9, 1989 tried to get in the Border Crossing saying you should let us pass the wall is open. Saw peer called their speurssay the wall is closed. All kinds of reports start coming into the center where crowds are showing up and all of them are convinced that the wall is open. Orders to this effect and the headquarters say closed, business as usual. But it is harder and harder for the Border Guards who are facing tens of thousands of people who for theirng to fear own safety. This is the man who opens the the practical since. This is the guy who is the first one to fold to say, you know what, were going to shoot these people or were going to open up and i say we open up. He is an officer. He was not in charge. He was in charge of the night watch. Was on his watch that this came to a head. His personal file photo. It shows his age in 1989. Of being told tellsss as usual, when he snaps ands cal, he opens the wall. He puts himself out of a job and he ended up unemployed and taxi in berlin and now lives on a small pension. Is just a very brief summary of the dramatic events lead to the shortterm of the collapse of the wall. Remark and ieneral will hand it over to my colleagues. Interesting to me is how this is treated in germany. The United States, we have a number of grand memorials to the collapse of the berlin wall. Are very big insulations berlin walls of the at the george bush library, library, inn fulton, missouri. Nowest germany, theres is major memorial to the fall of the wall. There are small memorials but no big one. There is more going onioned the beauty problem. Trying to memorialize a is not an attractive site. It seems there is more going on with that and it was the ongoing shouldersy on how we interpret this event and the legacy. There is so much disagreement has not reached a point adequatecanne memorialize it. This topic iabout still have people stating that Ronald Reagan opened the wall. Spoke, the wall fell. Or you had some kind of order by the regime because great events mustgreat causes and they have decided. It is hard to process the role and accident in history and local actors. Another surprise for me, this was not a story of elite because there was no order to open the wall. I had to look elsewhere for my main characters. This was a story of revolution from below. The fact that people wanted the open as well but that explanation causal that people wanted the wall to be open in 1961 but it did not fall until 1989. When i came to scwieb as the middle. Of the Eastern Europe bureaucrats. Photo of theent street. There is basically nothing there. Picture because i got a tip from a friend that all of the remaining traces, including the lane lines were going to be ripped up so a Discount Grocery store could be put in. Took a picture of the lane lines and lane numbers that were still there before they got ripped up. If you go there now where the is an wall opened, there Discount Grocery store. Societies insists there should be informational panels but they were installed on the cheap. One as soon as it went up fell prey to vandalism. This is people crossing the wall and someone put a sector on it, and that is the end of that. That is at the site of where the wall opened. The site, that marks momentous event. Hand, we have the u. S. Majors to the fall of the wall where the germans are hesitant to celebrate this triumph. Longer terme are consequences that they feed into thestaken perception that United States was the solar sole author of these events. A misguidedd repeation that they can this performance. We need a better understanding of what happened in this event. To understand the role of chance and the local actors. Knewance ofave a newance o the rule. Theok forward to discussion. [applause] so over the years ive learned the importance of most significant point first. Whatt to tell you despite richard employed, i did not my first book before the war. Ruction of the [laughter] more about more and the history leading up to the wall, as we learn more and more of the texture from peoplevent jeff. Ary and theink we understand better. A lot and tore is to step back of youelf and ask all happened and what should be commemorating . What is there to celebrate . Drawn . Ssons to be about five years ago approaching jeff0th anniversary engle invited a group of the texas a mto to discuss the fall of the wall. They talked about the fall of in easternwall europe and my good friend came meaning of thehe fall of the wall. They talked about the meaning of russia. Of the wall in i talked about the meaning of the fall in the United States. That conference, which i think jeff is going to talk a bit more in a few minute, at that conference, i was very by the divergent meanings attached to the fall of the berlin wall. Europe, she explained wall signified institutions. Of the wallhe fall to avoid the need naive leadership. China, the fall of the wall reactivateeed to politicaleform refirmization. I talked about the fall of the wall in the United States. It meant thesized tyranny. F freedom over it confirmed the redempive role states. Nited the utility of power, the containment and freedom. Rsal appeal of reaffiedcoming down americans exceptionallist view themselves. Triumph view was very widespread and it was very dangerous. It encouraged the use of military power and armed force. It nurtured a loserry hopes of a peace. Tic assumptionsnaive of thehe benevada lance markets. To emphasizeant shared among george h. Bush and the clintons and cheney and doug fife. Bush 41 as jeff and others have emphasized were andes an cautious prudent. President bush 41, could not resist to take credit of the of 1989 and 1990. He liked to say during the theaign, we brought about fall of the iron curtain and the imperial communism. Platformthe republican further the fall marks anrlin wall apock lipt call change in the we live. We the republicans cause the of collectiveness, not threat but thery threat. Dismantling of the collapse of ensuing europe and ussr inspired the utility and supety and not only among republicans. Here in the United States, the Clinton Administration went predecessors. The depression firewall between commercial and investment repealed. S Alan Greenspan were determined regulate the not expanding sectors of the financial economy like derivative trading and security of mortgages. Governments toer deregulate financial controls as conditionn and as a the crisis of the late 1990s. After 9 11 memories of the wettedwall coming down the at tide of officials to show strength. Them to thinkred that displays of u. S. Power enthusiasm. With memories of the jubilation in medicine them think that the bepling of saddam would greeted with the same enthusiasm of the wall. Tling november 9, 2001, bush 43 day. Red World Freedom he said like the fall of the defeat ofl and the areaism in Eastern Europe freedom will triumph in terrorism. Nst a little over a year later observing the videos of the toppling saddam statue secretary of defense rumsfeld declared iraqis one cannot help the fall of the berlin wall and the collapse of the iron curtain. Notions inspired than the strategy statement of 2002. You all remember the quoization the introduction, the great 20th centurythe totalism ended in a single success. Le model of freedom, democracy, and Free Enterprise. Now that we know the history of coming down, now that the contingency of the ordinary the agency of people. Thinkingld we be about . What, in fact, should we be commemorating . Are the larger lessons that we should draw . It in the universal appeal of freedom . It free markets . Is the strength, power, and containment . Draw . Essons should we this is what i think we should draw. First, we should acknowledge and affirm the appeal of fundamental human rights. Applaud the energy and recognize the agency of the organizationsl inmpioning human rights civil society. We should emphasize the will hesinkiof the he agreements in the rights the 1948 in declaration. Lets remember what that rightation affirmed, the to life, liberty, to every person. The right to be free from arbitrariry arrest. Be free from arba trierry with the right to privacy. The right to movement and travel. The right to own property. One self to express freely. The right to enjoy social security. Gainful employment, educational and a minimum standard of living. Rightsre the fundamental that had such wide appeal to the berlin, eastast germany, Eastern Europe and union. Ely the soviet should i think we emphasize and celebrate the attractiveness of a social economy. Not a freeenterprise economy. Indeed it was the principles of the social market that were incorporated into the law establishing the union of the federal republic and the g. D. R. Social market meant combining free markets with regulated governmental competition and commitment to social equity and a social welfare net. Y struggledioological between Free Enterprise and communism, the social market won the cold war. Notwithstanding the reaganthatcher assault on government regulation. Rise oftanding the neoliberalism. We should remember that the erode safety net did not in the 1980s. Shown thatwhere ive crucial toding was the ability of the west to 1970s. He shock of the the social market, not the free so to speak, won the cold war. Thed, we should acknowledge Super National institutions and integration. The berlin wall came down of german reconciliation and the coal and steel the common market, and because of the hopes inspired by the perspective european union. The berlin wall came down the resilience of western economies and because of of the culture of consumption. I think it is important to weresize that u. S. Power essential backdrops for the of western European Economic integration. Fourth, we should emphasize and norms ofte new international conduct, the renounce yags of force and determination. Were the norms that embraced. That embrace was the precondition of the wall coming down. Fifth, we should applaud the agency of wise leaders, reagan, gorbachev. Ost of all reagan grasped that negligenting meant negotiating and nurtures and understand of scary. Very he understood that he must not overreach. He must not provoke a clamp down. Helpst do what he could to avoid a repeat of budapest of 1958. Prague, the opportunity to reunite germany and he also realized germany had to be Super National institutions. Ahead with his the monetaryf union. A understood that it was coopingite to perspective german power and reassuring germanys neighbors. Most of all, we should honor gorbachev. Of conduct new norms for his country and understand priority of domestic reform even though he did not know how it about. We should acknowledge the complex interaction between nations structural elements like globalization and like aent events spokesperson misstating a meeting. Need to strive for complexity as a precondition for lessonsating accurate and appropriate meanings. Reassess, we can also acknowledge that the leaders made mistakes. Not all ofowledge wall comingise of the down was not realized because of bush and because of the and ambiguity of gorbachevs vision. Mostly, because of an International Affairs challenges are too complex and competing too formidable. I think on the 25th anniversary of the dismantling wall, there remains much to celebrate. Of end of the division germany, the end of the division of the coldhe end war, the end of a nuclear arms a bad centuryof depression and total airism. Editorial on november 12, of the think the editors New York Times put the events proper perspective. Crowds of wrote young people danced on top of berlin wall thursday night. They danced for joy. For history. The danced because of history thatof embraced a holocaust and a cold seemed at long last to be end. Ng an we, too, can still rejoice about martyrs. Thanks. [applause] you can rejoice that were done. Theme begin by thanking Program Committee for doing their usual excellent job of a fascinating conference. Are. You to the cochairs also to our president for organize this and for this opportunity and thank you my fellowhard and panelists forgiving a lot to done. S once im changed. Ago, the world the impossible happened. Unexpected seized global attention and altered a people, entirenent and the worlds system. I speaking of, of course, of happened on june 4, 199, voters that polish ejected their communist government. The regime was no more. Moscows influence was no more. Grown polish democracy took its place. This is not the moment you referring to from 25 years ago. Therefore, you must be thinking december 2, 1989 when american officials met at cold war. The may 2 when hungarians the iron curtain that was never shut. We gather tonight to remember the fall of the berlin wall, we the remember that it is not whole story. It is important but it is one that swept changes the world in 1989. Any number of the events be elections, openings, or equal claimstake an grippedold war that society came to an end. When you are asked to consider significantmost event of 1989 you will think of what happened within the hearts of the most popular country. Get mye told, this would vote. Long after we have gone to that sky, big archive in the historians will still note and of 1989. Mber june 4 on the very day that polish up, chinas growing Reform Movement was mowed down. Chinas leader declared to his colleagues at that moment deal severely with those who defy orders. Shed some blood just try as much as possible to ot to kill everyone. Course, has not been the same since. Topped the square, owna cut a deal with its people. The free market, if you will freedom. He chinese leaders, of course, live fail in awful fear if they to hold up their end of the fulfill failing to prosperity. As you consider 1989, asia is tea. Our cup of perhaps you prefer your history 1989 more euro centric. Me offer gorbachev. The man who i think is the most and the moment from socialistto save a system that he loved. Sovietd up ushering the union into its grave. Fullyas the year he articulated his bridging of a peace and prosperity. Profounde single most articulation of a new world woodward wilson. Times new york alienrized imagine an spaceship approached and said take me to your leader. Be . Will that gorbachev. Consider that quote for a moment. Was inev whose country decline, the economy was in where Life Expectancy dropped and alcoholism rose. Worlds leader. No wound their george bush as 1989y feared him began. As the president of the united betes, bush was supposed to the worlds most powerful leader who vowed toer communism. The common european home a way assteal cold war victory from the jaws of defeat. I will return to bush let me say but first the striking thing about gorbachev. His most important words were doors. Behind closed 1989 is often recalled as a year happened. Ch i contend it is what did not happen. Decisions not made or rather not toents that chose act that made all of the difference. A centuryarter of most of our citizens have forgotten how dangerous the the soviet empire was. Wasgates who at that time deputy National Security adviser wanted to to whoever listen would warn anybody there in humanr before history had a major empire collapsed without a great power ensuing. Never before in Human History had chaos not filled a power vacuum. With crowds surging around the of then 199, it had all makings of a chaotic year. Indeed, this is a year that is retold by historians as a story of crowds. Regimes fells. It makes us feel good thinking havedemocracy and people real power. Hitchcock summed this up by gorbachev did not give Eastern Europeans their freedom 1989. They took it. This is a nice warm version of events but it is also incomplete. Dont get me wrong, crowds matter. Their success or failure ultimately rested in 1989 in the hands of leaders who strov to chaos at bay, crowds under violent repression at a minimum. Marched. Urope crowds in doing so, they returned power over events back in the hands of very leaders they dispiesed. One morers that had fateful decision to make, to topple. To to douse the flames or let them burn. Course, those leaders did not know if the buckets they held gasoline. Water or yearn european leaders looking back in 1989, it that to me a fear gorbachevs greatest moment was not a stirring speech but instead when he told Eastern Europes communist troglodytes that moscow would no longer support their use of violence against their own people. This would not be 1953. This would not be 1956. Gorbachev had said no. Geo board of violence. Becoming physically ill in april of 1989, months before the wall fell, before, when soviet police violently dispersed a crowd of georgian protesters, 20 in that crowd died. The moment terrified him. Why . He had not ordered the crackdown. He had not ordered the violence. He, the most powerful man in the soviet union, had less power when crowds and Police Clashed than the loneliest soldier scared and armed with a gun, with the least subdued protester wielding a rock. Either could spark a melee that could quickly spin out of control. Either could start the chaos that could ultimately consume the world. That allever forget that occurred in the fall of 1989 in europe happened after Tiananmen Square and that leaders on both sides of the crumbling iron curtain drew a direct line between the two. At the moment that the rest of the world shunned chinese visitors following Tiananmen Square, sarah connor kirk of east germany publicly invited chinese officials to teach the what what they could about he called crowd control. For georgeed bush, it was a recurring nightmare. As bush wrote, if we mishandle , you would invite crackdown and invite negative reaction that could result in bloodshed. Bush therefore responded by doing and saying as little as possible lest he riled up hardliners, practicing hippocratic diplomacy. First, do no harm, even if it meant doing nothing. Why . Because he believed action carried more risk than potential game and because he fundamentally that the stream of history would continue to flow in that so longn, washingtons, as he did nothing to change its course. Democracy was on the rise. Freedom was on the march. We were all lucky. It was not all luck. It was also the work of leaders bent on keeping chaos that they. Communist regimes looked into the abyss in 1989, and they blinked. East germany, absolutely gone within a year. So to the soviet union ultimately do not have the stomach to fire on their own crowds. Gone by years end. Chinas communist regime remains to this day, offering the trouble in lesson that those who accept reforms sought other states toppled. The regime that sent in the tanks survived. What then is the ultimate lesson of 1989 . We all know the fallacy of trying to draw ironclad lessons from history, but i think if itre is one one lesson, is not just a story of europe or Eastern Europe or berlin, but instead it was an intertwined global affair. Theresson is this were, in fact, as the professor mentioned, multiple lessons. When one thinks of 1989 and why it matters, it largely depends on your National Point of view. For the americans, the central lesson was that they had one won. Ronald reagan singlehandedly tore the berlin wall down brick by brick. I like to think he took off his shirt like putin before he did it. Because he believed in freedom and because he also believed in strength. This person of history offers a blueprint for future american success. The world wants to be like us. Deep in their hearts, Everyone Wants to be free americanstyle. It was just a little push with just a Little American military force. We shall be greeted as liberators. Of course, we saw how well that turned out in 2003. Others have different lessons from 1989. Repressionson, that worked as long as leaders are tough enough to crack down and crack down hard and so long as the people who survive can be made to remain fat and satisfied. Europe also has its lesson the crowd that formed on the far side of the iron curtain did not want to the american. Leaders in brussels, paris included, they instead want to be european and desired to join the collectivist spirit embodied in the nascent european union. Their lesson . That integration works so long as europeans stick together, peace and prosperity will r eign. That is a troubling lesson, it seems to me, six years removed from a financial crisis which has seen european relations strained, while reinvigorating nationalist forces throughout the continent. Russians . E their lesson is the clearest of all 1989 was the moment that gorbachev gave in. West, expecting nato to hold germanys border. Chaos,instead received economic collapse, and nato expansion. Vladimir putin has repeatedly called the soviet unions demise the single greatest strategic strategy tragedy in russian history. Israel takeaway in 1989 is the realization that russians should again ever trust the last trust the west again. It pains me to say, though there is much to celebrate for 1989, the lessons we might take from it are not wholly optimistic. It is that true change occurs when leaders are willing to let the stream of history run its leadersbut sadly, Strong Enough to resist the urge to steer history along our sadly rare, especially those who are intoxicated by the power at their command. Is thatlesson collectivism is easily undermined by jealousy, nationalism, and ethnicity, and that violence can indeed keep chaos at bay for a while. Finally, it is how one stands on the issues of 1989, it depends on large measure where one sits. As Deng Xiaoping told his inner circle, we are not afraid to shed a little one. You carry these things out, you see, and the westerners forget. I think ultimately he was only partly right. The world is not forget. It simply remembers what it once. What it wants. Thank you. [applause] ok. Now those who probably intended to defect from the beginning have defected. [laughter] we can have an opportunity im sure many of you have questions or comments. Andou will raise your hand please identify yourself, it will be easier for us, and it better for thebe filming. Please go to the microphone. Hi. Im from the university of north florida. Ive written extensively on american policy in poland. I want to thank you all for your insightful comments. I never want to follow mel leffler f g talks after he talks to read it was wonderful. Im also very happy that dr. Engel reminded us of the two things that happened on june 4. There are two options there is the polish option, successful elections, and then there is the tiananmen option. In washington, they thought about tiananmen. I like to think that the polish experience opened the door for the other crowds to take power. As a comment on what you said, dr. Engel, not all in east european leaders were troglodytes. There were reformers ahead of gorbachev, in a way, in Eastern Europe, and i think that should be remembered. The fear in poland was never that he would call for shots, but that he would be removed as gorbachev might have been. I think that is important to remember, that he had partners. Married ms to ary. You talked about unintentional actions of the middle but also the agency of local actors. My question is, what did you discover about why on october 9 those guards didnt shoot, those stasi members didnt shoot . It is an action. It is embracing a path that rejects what youre told to do, as well as like jagr did the same thing. The motivation of these leaders is really important and something i dont quite understand. I would ask you to respond to that and explain why they took this step not to act, not to shoot when given the order that night on the 11th im sorry, the ninth. Thank you. Jeff, did you want to say anything . I like your work. [laughter] i would like to recommend to all of you his forthcoming book empowering revolution. I have learned so much about what happened in poland, and im looking forward to seeing the book, as well. Thank you for your question. It gives me an opportunity to talk a little bit more about the book. As i mentioned at the end of the talk, when i set out to write a book, i need to figure out the locus of the agency. As i said, it was not among the elite political leaders. There had not been an elite decision to tear down the wall. It was not a topdown story. It as aried to look at bottomup story. As i mentioned, i realized that while it was true, it was not sufficient. It was not enough to say people wanted the wall to come down. People wanted to wanted the wall to come down from 1961 onward, and yet it didnt come down until 1989. I ended up unexpectedly focusing on this middle tier. This gets your question about the difference between unintentional action and agency. I found that the agency of local actors extremely significant but that agency was at times unintended. The politburo spokesman at the press conference do not intend to botched announcement. I ended up looking on the one hand not only at dissident leaders, smugglers, people who spent a lot of time in prison, people interrogated by the stasi, but also loyalists and people that thought with what they were doing they were going to save the regime. Those were midlevel bureaucrats who provided the wording of the politburo decision that turned out to be very unwise. The deputy passport officer. There were many loyalists andlved who were trying effectively to save their regime, and what they did ended up making the situation worse. Her agency was important, but it wasnt his same as their intention. I ended up doing a huge number of interviews for this book. Interviewed harold jagr, the man who in a practical sense opened the wall. I did interviews and leipsic, as well. Many, but they all came together at that moment. As a historian, i have rarely lity. Monocausa was apsic, there combination of events. The overwhelming number of protesters, the fact that they were handing out huge numbers of leaflets they have produced saying no violence. One over the armed guards who had been told to expect a mob. The guards felt betrayed. At the Senior Leadership level, the Senior Leaders in like sick mysterious and like sick leipsic mysteriously stopped hearing from berlin on the moment to shoot. In a centralized system like that, all important decisions are from the center. The Party Leaders were trying to confirm their orders, and mysteriously, they were hearing nothing about it. The leipsic local leaders at that point began to feel themselves being left in the lurch and were not as willing to go forward with it. There are a whole bunch of factors that come together. With Harald Jaeger, Harald Jaeger is an amazing figure. He had been working that that Border Crossing for 25 years, and nothing unusual had ever happened. Imagine, is been sitting there for 25 years, you are a deputy passport control officer, stasi off sir on the night watch officer on the night watch, youve given 25 years of Loyal Service with multiple awards from the stasi, you have only one minor demerit on your record, you are an exemplary servant of the regime, you are loyalists, and even though you know your state is crumbling, you are still willing to put on your armor your 24hourand worked a night shift. He called his superiors and superiors called him a coward, that combined with his personal fear that tens of thousands of chanting open the wall. There were even random factors. Recently, he was suspected of having cancer, and he had undergone tests for cancer. She was due to get the results the next day. It turned out he didnt have cancer, but on that night, he didnt know that. The changes in the world, gorbachev, right down to the personal i may be dying, and they are calling me a coward. And that moment where he was fed up, he said to his men, should we open up or shoot all these people . He decides to open up. What is interesting for me, these things on describing to you, these should not be worthy of historical study, but as they interact with broader factors, thats an amazing phenomenon worthy of study. Jack . I think its a great question, and one of the things that i think is really fascinating about marys story in leipsic in particular, which she tells remarkably in her new , is the difference between what happened there and what happened in tiananmen, one of the things we should recall about Tiananmen Square is that the world generally remembers the event is occurring on the night of june 4 when the tanks and armored personnel carriers rolled in and the machine guns opened up. There had been a series of attempts over the previous week by the chinese regime to take back the square by force without the use of deadly force, and at each stage, they have been repulsed by the Chinese People of beijing. Fewer students than we recall, more regular workers and residents who have physically repelled and pummeled the soldiers who tried to enter tiananmen. The soldiers who were firing on june 4 have basically been beaten up by the people for a week at this point, and so its not the first moment of violence. Deadly force was not the first choice. It was a choice that occurred after continued pressing and continued violence that escalated. One could only think what would have happened in leipsic if those soldiers who were staring down the crowds, if the crowd had gone to within 30 yards of their position, while they had machine guns, if the crowd had been hurling rocs and hurling rocs for a week at that point, what their reaction mightve been it would have been far different, i think. Jeff and john . While. Get creaky after a it is nice to be back in shape after all of these years. You are one of the people who published before . [laughter] correct. It was very enjoyable and thoughtprovoking, your presentations. One, and i points think this is directed at mel, and maybe im stretching my point, but maybe it was a good thing we had the soviet union around for american capitalism to have a friendly face, a s mile, and a positive approach to the workingman and unions. That is gone. Is there a connection . When,ral question please, when will we see the end of the america trying to see the world in its own image, in terms of interpreting complex events that happen . Im thinking of right now, and once again listening to our political leaders, your political leaders, not mine it just seems to me that the rhetoric just goes round and round and round, and it stops with how great we are and however one should, in fact, be embracing our values. Those are two questions. Im not exactly sure what you meant was it a good idea for United States [indiscernible] the soviet union, there was an enemy. Global capitalism, whatever you want to call it a workingman in america was happier and better off. [indiscernible] i think its important simply to realize the initial context of the cold war. Rather than american officials being happy that there was a clear model that the soviet that the United States or western capitalism was superior, the real context of the origins of the cold war was the widespread apprehension that existed after the depression and world war ii about the viability and vitality of communism. One of the main reasons the cold war starts is because of the fears of american officials about the appeal of communism. American officials prefer to have the situation 1990 thaned after what had existed before. Liked having they the soviet union around as a framework. Really dont lessons, irhetorical think, yes, american officials and american journalists and the American Media and quite a few historians and scholars have an exceptional list view of triumphalism. Ive taken issue with that exceptional list view exceptionalist view. Many people in this room have taken exception with it. What i think is important is for us to carry on, to continue to views. Communicate our i think a very good example of this has happened in the last two weeks. Some of you who read the New York Times and the new know that bob kagan has written an incredibly what weial essay about should learn from the experience of the 20th century, from world war i, world war ii, about american leadership. The bottom line, bob kagan argues, is that what is necessary to have a peaceful, stable, and democratic world order is for the United States, tot has done in the past assert its power and assume leadership. Obamadly, president called bob kagan to the white. Ouse to discuss this article that is what i read in the New York Times. I know for a fact that Hillary Clinton had dinner with bob kagan to discuss this article. I would wager that probably the majority of people in this room do not quite agree with that story. Not that it is totally wrong, in my opinion, but that it has pretty significant problems. Suggest that everyone who disagrees with it should read it and try to publish something about it and make an , communicate your views, affect Public Perception and the memory we have about these events. His article appeared in the new republic in the new republic. Hes a public intellectual. Other people can write and try to communicate a counter view. If we are unhappy with the exceptionalist view of triumphalism, that is what we historians should be trying to do without getting caught in our own ideological biases, i would suggest. Jonathan . Im goingn winkler, to make half the panel feel old. I was a freshman when the wall fell. At least you werent there when the wall went up. [laughter] i dont know where my parents are. Splitteray the role of. You suggested there was a contrast. On the one hand, those who tried to stand against the crowds with violence and succeeded, and then those who exceeded to the crowds , their regimes went away whee do we put romania and that went away. Where do we put romania in that . I think the romanians like to be different. I think we actually have to put in a third category. We should recall that ceausescu did not have opportunity to enact atn in men as he wanted. She was forced to flee before it. Given the opportunity, i think he would have fallen squarely in the troglodyte camp. Honecker that were really the ones who were telling the rest of the soviet bloc that gorbachev had gone too far, that we must hold fast our socialist roots and hold fast against the crowd. They were increasingly outnumbered. Think, is the first place where we can see importantly less an interaction between the crowd and the regime than really the first steps of a civil war. ,iolence in romania that occurs in the two weeks particularly around christmas and after, and up being villager after villager, village against village, many driven by longterm ethnic tension and conflict. Isould say that romania actually a best case example of a precursor to yugoslavia and a good example that communist regimes had done a really effective job of clamping down historic tensions, which bubble up in the aftermath. My name is david mayers. I teach at boston university. When we try to sort out the erosion of soviet power in Eastern Europe and then its ndllapsed, how important a collapse, how important is our understanding of faithbased dissent . John paul ii, poland, a versatile for what took place later on, and then in light said leipsic, it was the protestants who played a role. If you could just comment on those questions. Category ofanother mental actors i discovered, local church leaders, parishioners, prayer groups at churches. Certainly in poland, the role of the Catholic Church can hardly be overstated. Greg knows about this much more than i do. The case of the role of the church in leipsic was significant but more complex than i originally thought. The superficial narrative is shelteredhurch dissidents, and there are a number of books with titles that say the churches that knocked wall. E when i would interview former churchbased dissidents, they had mixed feelings. On the one hand, they said, the stasi, the secret police tolerated the churches giving shelter because it made surveillance easier. It was basically onestop shopping for the stasi. If you have the churches as a primary site of dissident activity, and internal stasi reports made it clear that churches were the main sights of this activity, then you could just observe the churches to read stasi turned a number of stasi staff who worked a agents, and that was uncovered in years after. When i interviewed the dissidents, they had mixed feelings. I found out afterwards this minister was a stasi agent. On the other hand, we have shelter. We had a space to meet and organize. The church was very important to us. Some of the ministers really cared. Some of the parishioners really supported us. On the whole, the church was a really vital space, but the actual picture is much more ambivalent than you would imagine. Spacesrch was a crucial sheltered dissidents, but the irony is that the stasi permitted the space to exist as long as the activity in there did not become too energetic. When in 1989, when factors come together, gorbachev, the example of solidarity, the mistakes the regime is making, some of that activity explodes exponentially. The stasi is unprepared for it. The role of the church is critical but ambivalent. The other factor that came into play when i interviewed a number of these dissidents, they would i am a christian. Someone say, im not religious at all, but i walked into a church, and it was the only place in my country where people said what they thought. Even though i didnt become religious, i value to that space and dialogue. I participated wholeheartedly in these groups even though i am not a certain faith. As is so often the case with historical events, when you get down into the nittygritty details, the picture is a lot more complicated. There were people involved in faithbased organizations, but their actions were not focused on their faith. If you had to summarize it in a nutshell, the churches were important and mattered as shelter and managed to be more valuable than the stasi surveillance that accompanied them. I want to pick up on this point, because i think it is quite crucial. It helps further the broader point we are all making, all four of us. The different nature of national , including exceptionalism. Where thegood case prototypical american has a different view of what it means to say the church played an influential role in influencing events than would somebody in Eastern Europe at this time or even western europe at this time. As mary points out, the church is a social institution as much as anything else, and the american evangelicals and missionaries who are supporting Church Movements clandestinely during the 1980s, they are driven by a sense of faith, that the regimes greatest outrage is religiousn against freedom. The people they are interacting with her using the church most often as a vehicle for organizing and social dissent or social protests or even social safety from the regime, though not necessarily being animated by a great desire for religious freedom themselves. Its an important lesson here, especially as we recall with the exception of vatican city, the United States is just about the most religious country in the world. Consequently, it makes us more prone to think that people around the world who are organized by religion are acting at the same level of passionate faith that so Many Americans are. I am Michael Donohue from marquette university. The strongest impression i got out of that night was an enormous amount of inordinate creaking that went on. You could see the west germans and east german celebrating on the wall, passing bottles of champagne and schnapps and beer. He said that even occur in the United States. It was much more limited, but people went out on their lawns. I lived in an Irish Catholic neighborhood in providence, rhode island. Champagne,ave the more like budweiser, but a lot of people did go out. It was kind of a celebratory night. Once that thed me worst effect of a hangover kicks in about 11 hours after you start raking. It seems like the hangover americans had occurred 11 years after, 9 11, and the most serious question i wanted to ask there was a lot of commentary and oped pieces by a lot of distinguished historians shortly after the event that this was the end of the short century, the end of the 75yearold 20th century, and it started in 1914 and ended in 1989. That quickly was eclipsed 11 years later with this idea that actually 9 11 is the start of the new 21st century. I was wondering if you had any end ofary, is this the the 20th century, do you think . Of anthat formidable event that it supersedes what . Appens 11 years later the proliferation of Information Technologies that are crucial to the United States and its allies being able to see a future beyond the cold war, which the soviets could not. This is significant because it think it helps us not so much looked back at what 99 1989 meant as an ending point about what it means going forward. I think it tells us that 9 11 i have to be careful how i say this 9 11 was not that important. The trends that spawned 9 11 still continue and we are afraid even more of. Was, in many ways, and trendsd manifestation of of information flowing and media flowing, which 1989 allowed to ato a dramatic shift dramatically larger part of the world. In essence, writing 89 opens the floodgates, and we are still seeing what comes later. Just to follow little bit on what jeff has said, i was bookised researching my about a disconnect i saw. There were all of these dramatic events from the ground up. You have solidarity in poland. You have a peaceful revolution in germany. All of these dramatic changes for the lives of eastern berliners. They have dramatically more life choices as of the sudden. All of a sudden. When i looked from the topdown, i didnt see changes. The predominant cold war Security Organization and the cold war was nato. It is still nato. The European Community existed before. Theyve renamed themselves the european union. What surprised me was the mismatch from the dramatic change on the ground up and the perpetuation of cold war institutions into the postcold war era. Perhaps the Biggest Surprise for me, we saw an cold war europe this clear dividing line between eastern and western europe. This was the warsaw pact over here, this was nato. The fact that russia got left on the periphery i mean russia, not the soviet union with nato expanding into Eastern Europe, there is still a dividing line just moved eastward. Not as an end1989 to the 21st century. So Many Organizations that dominated the 20th century persisted into the cold war into the postcold war world. When you get to 9 11, you are trying to respond to 9 11 with cold war institutions. If you look at the 9 11 report, the report says one of the reasons the United States was unprepared to deal with 9 11 was because its security institutions were still those formulated to fight the cold war. That is true, but that was also a strategic decision in 1990 to protect ash to perpetuate his institution. See 1989 not so much as an ending because there was so much perpetuation from the 20th century into the 21st. We are living with that awkward juxtaposition between cold war institutions, formulated to defend western europe, and the challenge of the 21st century. What has been amazing with the crisis in ukraine and with putin is they such institutions seem newly relevant. There is this new rethinking of the cold war. I dont see 1989 as the enemy short 20th century. Let me say one more thing. There is one other view of this that i think is george bushs. H. W. That 1989, in essence, is 1946 in a good way. 1989, we are finally going to get rid of this albatross around our neck, this Global Operation that was the cold war, that kept us from fulfilling the u. N. Mandate he had fought for in world war ii of states working together cooperatively and respecting sovereignty. Isre is a sense of the 1989 a chance to finally do what we were always supposed to do and do it right. One criticism of the view that one could make is that it doesnt take into account some of these broader Global Trends because nowhere in bushs vision of a new world order is articulated a manifestation of 1949 nowhere in there is a sense of nonstate actors. He can only conceive of the world in terms of states. Nato continues to persist because when one considers how to defend oneself, of course one thinks about other states. States are still the most powerful force in the world to this day, with the exception of perhaps google, but they are simply more powerful than other other nonstate actors, which bush was not ready to integrate into his worldview. That i want to comment on i taught a course at the Army War College this last spring, and it had a Large International demographic in my class. In the course of the conversation, we were talking 2011, the trends from the 20th century, and to fastforward, a consensus developed among the students excuse me,ago from now, we are not going to be talking about 1989 so much. We are going to be talking about 1979 much more than 1989. Jeff, you mentioned that 1989 was when the world changed. Affair, butbal there was a big chunk of the globe that has not been discussed at all tonight. We basically went from europe to china. From europe to said, it has made me think what began and what ended at different times. I dont in any way challenge the view that 1989 constitutes the the 20th era of century, but it seems to me something had begun before the that isnt just the trends that go on. If there were political events that triggered something that in a and quartercentury from now, if im in the Intelligence Community and im writing Global Trends 26 feet, i may be thinking about 1989 very differently. Of 1979, presume you are referring to events in the middle east. Collects afghanistan, yelm in getting overthrown. There is a common a common denominator. The likely prevalent in Career Trajectories of most of your students of the army while Army War College, they had spent the last decade concerned with radical islam. If you ask them, what is the most important thing going forward, theyre going to presume something they have to deal with on a daily basis absolutely correct. We should make sure that the next 10 years are a conflict against someplace really innocuous like iceland, and then we will be able to see iceland is a really important place 60 years from now. Im from the university of warwick, u. K. Thanks for your comments, everyone. Sometimes when i think about these complex historical events like the end of the cold war, it that wase of a quick said about the danishprussian war of 1864, which was fabulous for its complexity. He said, only three people ever knew what actually happened. One is dead, one is mad, and ive forgotten everything ive ever known. The question is very simple it is about the historiography thing aboutis one that yourtant event could change, what would it be . If there was one thing about the historiography about the end of the cold war, what would it that you could change, what would it be . Im still trying to figure out which one of us is mad, which one of us is dead, and which one of us is forgotten. I will let you go first. Sure i can address that. To periodizewe try things, richard, you are quite right. There are always continuities and discontinuities. Things that started in the 1970s and 1980s are going to be important after 1989, but it seems to me that if you think issues,me of the basic such as the nature of the configuration of power in the , thenational System Configuration of power in the International System was absolutely transformed between 1989 and 1992. Change isy that that than thesignificant fact that nato continued in a new form, the fact that the soviet union and the warsaw pact disappeared, and american strength was predominant. It was extraordinarily important. Is, depending on how you want to define it, 50 years, 70 years, there were competing ways, competing models of political economy. Abouts really important 1989, 1990, 1991 as symbolic years was that those years demonstrated to all humankind that the communist model was no longer a viable alternative way of life. Yes, that is important as giving rise to the importance of islamism. The destruction of communism as a framework for ordering the political economies of societies is really important everywhere. It is not just the events in berlin, but it is also obviously the trajectory and the reconfiguration of the political economy of china during these years. These things intersect. On the whole, you have two huge transformations the transformation in the structure of power in the International System, transformation in the perception of the viabilitys a certain political economies. Those are huge changes that i think helped to define the 20th century. Can i say one thing really quick . Just briefly, if i understood your question, you said, what about the historiography would i like to change what i would like to change is theres a lot of writing about the cold war and the end of the cold war that talks about europe without talking about europeans. There is writing on the berlin wall coming down that doesnt involve berliners. There is writing on the end of German Division that doesnt involve germans. Im trying to bring in these local actors to show the significance of their agency. In the United States, our Foreign Policy goes badly awry when we forget the agency of local actors. I will give you a quotation from a former activist i interviewed this is a woman who was a very active protester in east germany for years before the it came down she said, still amazes me when i read history books about the history i made, i read these history books, and they say, the wall fell, and it gave us our freedom. We fought for our freedom, and then the wall fell. She is right. You would like to bring that understanding, that there was a peaceful revolution and it mattered and that it was causal, into the historiography. There were people on the Ground Fighting for their freedom, and then the wall fell. Before i bring this session wea close, which im sure will continue the discussion, i should mention that i was negligent at the beginning. Ofeant to mention that many you noticed that james wilson was supposed to be on this session. James has just published a terrific book on the end of the cold war. It is a triumph of improvisation. James also works for the state department, the historical office, and he is actually a leader of the team working on the ukrainianrussian crisis. He did not feel comfortable leaving that. We should feel comfortable that solving work, international crises, while we figure out what is missing from the historiography. In any event, we all missed having james here. With that, let me thank our panelists for a wonderful i really want to thank them because i had insisted that they speak for 1012 minutes each. Fortunately, as is my life, theyve ignored me completely, and i think we have all benefited from it tremendously. Thanks very much. [applause] [laughter] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2014] American History tv will feature a variety of topics on the early american republic, jewish history, world war ii, sports history, and let us know what you think about the programs you are watching. Us. Us, or you can email join the cspan conversation. Like us on facebook, follow us on twitter. Week, american artifacts and visit museums and historic places. To the u. S. Armys archives and carlisle, pennsylvania to learn about their soldier experience gallery , which traces army history from the 1898 spanishamerican war to the present. Welcome to the u. S. Army heritage and Education Center. My name is kara warner, and i am going to show you around today. This is part of the facility, more like a museum rather than an artifact archive or storage facility. It is our way to show the American Public the sort of materials we have. You can understand army history, whether you are a soldier or a veteran, or someone who has never had family or been in the army themselves. Between the spanishamerican war and world war i, we did send a contingent of soldiers with various other nations to the china relief expedition, more popularly known as the boxer rebellion. Became the first Real International operation marked by american cooperation with other countries. Have inresting piece we our collection here at the army isitage and Education Center calvin titus. Calvin titus won a medal of honor for daring and gallant conduct. He was one of the first soldiers to actually scale the walls of pay king during the boxer rebellion. This code will take your a recording of his actual oral history. This is something that took place a long time ago, and it has followed me. I cant get away from it. [laughter] the wall looks like the one you scaled. Yes, that is a very good representation of it. Of course, as you see that fellow standing on top, that wouldve been impossible. Those stones are rounded on top and narrow. Nobody could stand up there unless he was in acrobat. What did you think at the time you were scaling it . Were you sure you would make it, or did you have doubts about it . I thought id make it all right. I wasnt very much afraid of that because i was a fairly good climber. Of course, i never thought about what i was getting into. [laughter] i understand that when president Theodore Roosevelt personally presented you with the metal, it was on the Parade Ground at west point. Was that correct . Yes, they turned out the corps in full dress. I saw somebody coming up with the superintendent. When he got close enough, i saw it was old Teddy Roosevelt himself. He handed him the medal he held the box himself probably he took it and started to pin it on my full dress coat. Man,id to me, now, young dont let this give you the bighead. [laughter] wonderful. It was a very special period because it was the 100th anniversary of the academy. You are a kennett a cadet at that time. I was still a plebe. When did you graduate . Primetime features a wide range of clinical views and topics. A debate on americas greatness. Clubsit the Atlanta Press for the future of news and we take history tour looking at the civil war. Let us know what you think about the programs youre watching. Ou can email us join the conversation, like this on facebook, follow us on twitter. Each week, reel america brings you archival films that help tell the story of the 20th century. At the end of 1963, the United States had 16,000 military advisers in South Vietnam sent to help the army of the republic of vietnam and the w