To the Participants and Guests of the Nebraska SVU Conference

August 1-3, 2001, University of Nebraska, Lincoln

Standing here amongst you, in the heartland of America, I realize that you in this audience represent at least two groups of Czech-Americans.  If you would allow me a bit of simplification, many of you whom are local Nebraskans may be descendants of 19th century Czech immigrants; others amongst you, some of whom are members of the SVU, may be first-generation political exiles.  Two very different groups, influenced by two very different sets of historical forces.

Perhaps I should ask: What does America mean to those of you here today?  What did it mean to your ancestors when they emigrated?  For the immigrant settlers, America meant economic opportunity, which so contrasted with the difficult economic situation then present in Europe.   For the postwar exiles, the political motive seems unquestionable. I think this dichotomy is wrong.

The beacon of liberty, which shone across the Atlantic Ocean to the Old World, was an irresistible calling for all individuals for whom freedom meant more than relative security in  their lives and homes.  For these brave voyagers, taking the risk of starting life anew was outweighed by the opportunities in the New World.  This weighing of risks and benefits has been this way until the present; it probably has been the catalytic natural selection factor between those who left and those who stayed home.  It is true, at times, poverty or the imminent threat of political persecution were critical factors influencing this choice as well, but these factors were responsible for driving people out, to emigrate.  - What drove these immigrants to the USA were the uniquely American ideals of freedom and equal opportunities for all.

The creation of an independent Czechoslovakia in 1918 is the single most important moment in our history.  It is also the event where the meaning of America for Czechs and Slovaks was the greatest, the most unquestionable, and historically the most well documented. Of course, we do not want to underestimate the profound importance of President T. G. Masaryk, his courageous strategy with the Legions, his effective political lobbying, and his skillful negotiating.

Did the meaning of America last longer than the creation of the state?  We know that President Masaryk was a strong proponent of adopting many more features of the American democratic system, while the leaders of the local resistance and emerging political parties wanted to cast the Czechoslovak democracy in a more European mold.  Instead of the presidential system, the parliamentary system (with its strong political parties) was introduced, a party list was followed instead of a single seat majority, and the state was more involved in the economy rather than less involved. The result was not bad at all: Czechoslovakia was the last surviving democracy in Central Europe before World War II.

The meaning of America to the Czechs and Slovaks during WWII was, of course, that America's presence and participation was crucial not only to win the war, but also to liberated part of our country as well.  Unfortunately the significance of this meaning was suppressed, partly by the totalitarian Soviet power that arose shortly thereafter and was ignored, partly by our own people living and struggling in post WWII Czechoslovakia.   In the socialistic decades that then followed, the meaning of America to the Czechs and Slovaks was mainly one of providing refuge for the many exiles that were created after the Soviet Invasion and Communist coup d´etat.

In more general terms, it was America that did not repeat the isolationist mistakes of the post-World War I era, it was America that rose to lead the Western World during the Cold War, and it was America that kept the unyielding and unremitting pressure on the Soviet Union on all fronts: economically, militarily, and in the area of human rights.   America simply did not leave Europe after the Second World War.

One of the most important turning points in this struggle was America's role at the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe in 1975. We now know that, due to great pressure from the U.S.A., the conference's final document included the human rights clause; this was the catalytic spark which set in motion the many human rights movements in our region, especially Pres. Havel's Charter 77.

I am not trying to underestimate the profound importance of President Reagan's policy of a strong hand against the Evil Empire, but it must be stressed that pushing the human rights agenda helped to undermine gradually the grip of the Communist totalitarian regime from our country and to ease the plight of the dissidents who would eventually become the natural leaders of the 1989 Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia.

During the building of a new democratic Czechoslovakia after 1989, America represented one of the opposite poles in our search for an ideal democratic, economic, and social system.  We were caught again in the dilemma between the Austro-Hungarian tradition of a welfare, corporate, and bureaucratically driven state and the Anglo-Saxon ideals of free enterprise and competitive markets.  Unfortunately, I must say, for the most part we have remained stuck in our Austro-Hungarian roots, sometimes even peppered a bit with some Soviet socialist-era traditions.

The accession of the Czech Republic into NATO in 1999, after the creation of an independent state, is undoubtedly the most historic moment in the young Czech Republic's history.   The meaning of America for this epochal event cannot be overestimated.  It was America's leadership in the Western World (strengthened not only by its recent successes in the Gulf War and also in Bosnia, where Europe failed to solve the problem in its own backyard) that brought about the propitious and all too fortunate enlargement of NATO.  For our country, on the other hand, it immediately represented the more pressing questions of loyalty, responsibility, and preparedness.

Now, with the application to become a full member of the European Union mailed a long time ago, and that membership approaching, in hopefully two to three years, our dilemma of our pro-Atlantism or pro-Europeanism is very imminent.  Will we side with America, to which we owe so much, on some difficult foreign or economic policy issues, or will we become more loyal to Europe, to which we will soon need even more? Sometimes it becomes a matter of a mere foreign political statement; other times it represents real economic value; and sometimes it represents both. When the Government, and eventually the Parliament, banned the export of air technology to an Iranian nuclear power plant, the company that had contracted the job presented a concrete bill to the Government for the unrealized contract.  After the Czech Republic had presented to the United Nations, the U.S.-sponsored declaration condemning the human rights situation in Cuba, Mr. Castro put two Czechs in jail in no time.  Today, we discuss whose side we are on, in the difficult issue of the Strategic Missile Defense.

In closing the first part of my speech   (don't worry, the second part will be shorter because it is an unfortunate truth that America means more to the Czechs than the Czechs mean to America), I want to mention the newest wave of immigration to America.  There are thousands, and perhaps tens of thousands, of Czechs living in this country, some of them legally and some of them as undocumented visitors.  They work, travel, learn, and gather experience.  I am sure they all came to follow the same calling as you did: the ideals of freedom, opportunity, and individual responsibility.  Even if most of them choose not to return home, it is not a loss in the end.  Just as you have not been a loss, but instead are an asset, to our nation.

Czechs in America - do the Czechs mean a lot or a little in America?

The importance of a nation or an ethnic group in America depends on three factors: 1) How many members are in the ethnic group in question (in some respects it is more important to know how well they are organized and how are they located in terms of political geography)?  2) What have individual members of this group achieved in America or in the world?  3) How is the home state or nation doing economically (how much business do they do with the USA and in the international arena do they play any significant role in some strategically important areas vis-a-vis American interests)?

If we look at the Czechs from the perspective of these three factors, on the first point we see that numbers are our prime weakness, and there is little we can do about this.  Speaking like this in Nebraska may sound inappropriate because of the large concentration of Czechs that reside here. But in America as a whole, it is most certainly the truth.  Other parts of this point are: the structuring of the social body, its ability to organize itself, and its ability to undertake a concrete and visible action.  It is important to note that Czech-Americans lobbied for the accession of the Czech Republic into NATO; there were voices heard that the Czechs pressed harder than the Poles for accession into NATO.  This example may serve as proof that things can be done if there is a strong motivating cause.

With regard to the second point, well-known and highly achieving individuals are probably our biggest assets.  Be it here or in the world, then or now, in different areas, Americans will always be able to name a couple of Czechs whom they admire.  These individuals might include Hašek, Forman, Secretary Albright, Dvooák, or President Havel.

On the third point our country does not excel either.  Neither country ranks at the top of the other's list of most important economic partners.  Of course, the Czech Republic's position on the American list is somewhere down in the fine print.  The reverse is also true:  America is not too high on the Czech Republic's list of economic partners because of its gradual economic intertwining with the Economic Union.  And yet, there are countries of similar size that are members of the EU, and their products are notoriously well known here.  Examples would include Finland and Nokia and Sweden and Volvo.   But it is improving, especially as a result of the booming American investment in the Czech economy.

Politically, the popularity of the Czechs was probably at its highest just after the Velvet Revolution; Václav Havel was a human rights hero and the economic transformation was beginning to speed up.  Then came a cool-down, when some of the not-so-nice stories, of our Wild West economy and poorly handled human rights, racism, and intolerance cases, surfaced.  The Clinton-era  remained generally very favorable towards the Czechs.  There was the emotional bond between Presidents Clinton and Havel, the admiration of the liberal human rights establishment towards the former dissidents (which even enabled the cult underground band "the Plastic People of the Universe" to play in the White House), and, of course, there was Secretary of State Madeleine Albright.

Under the current Bush Administration, the relations between the USA and the Czech Republic inevitably will be more professional.  On the other hand, the mutual respect between former President Bush and President Vaclav Havel continues to thrive.

What does the future hold?  There is not much we can do to increase the number of Czechs in America, although we have been working hard, even on that.  However, we do hold the keys, to fostering the meaning of the Czechs in America, in our own hands.  These keys include: having a greater number of hard working, excelling individuals and becoming a stronger economic partner for the U.S.A.  We can do it!

Czech-American relations will be greatly influenced after the Czech Republic enters the Economic Union.  We do not know if the Czechs will dissolve in the Economic Union, like a sugar cube in a hot cup of coffee, becoming as completely unidentifiable to Americans as they were during the era of Soviet domination. Hopefully they will not, but, as Rudyard Kipling would say, "That is another story".

~~~

Nebraska SVU Conference