Speech before the Los Angeles World Affairs Council on April 3

Speech before the Los Angeles World Affairs Council on April 3, 2002:

His Excellency Milos Zeman
Prime Minister of the Czech Republic

The Czech Response to the U.S. International Policy

Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen. This morning we had a very interesting discussion about economic questions and the Czech Republic at the World Trade Center. I do not want to repeat the information about our economic situation, and I intend to concentrate on political questions only, but I am prepared and I am at your disposal in case you are interested in some economic problems.

Well, in the case of my political speeches I have two basic types of speech. One type is before lunch when I am hungry and very aggressive. The second type is after lunch and, of course, it depends on the taste of the lunch. Well, your lunch has been excellent. My congratulations. I would prefer the American kitchen after such a good lunch, and that is why my speech won’t be aggressive but very, very quiet because I am not hungry. I am a fat cat just now.

Anyway, le me concentrate on one political moment which might be important for the big state like the States and for the small country like the Czech Republic. As you know, the Czech Republic has only 10 million inhabitants. This is something like a big city in the States, and sometimes I feel more like a mayor of the big city than the prime minister of the country. Anyway, the problem on which I want to concentrate your attention is very simple. This problem is called the war on terrorism, and it is not only a problem which started after September 11^th. A year ago, I was invited to visit [the] Basque [Region].This is the richest Spanish province, where the terrorist organization called ETA organized its election campaign before regular elections. One main leftist and one main rightist parties joined in order to organize the counter-campaign against this terrorist campaign, and there were some assassinations, some terrorist attacks before the election. We were present, we participated in the campaign, and, thank God, the political presentation of Basque terrorist organization lost fifty percent of their mandate.

Why do I give you such an example; Well, I think that first of all we must define terrorism. You know, just today it has been published that there is no common definition of terrorism. I disagree. There is a common definition of terrorism, but it is not accepted by all. What does terrorism mean? Terrorism is simply a killing of [civilian] victims for the purposes of political tasks. Nothing more and nothing less and anybody who organizes these killings not by random but by intention, anybody who finances those killings is a terrorist. True, this my hard point of view, and that’s why the Czech Republic, [while], it is a small country, joined the actions against terrorism, not by words but by deeds. Small deeds, but deeds. The devil is written in the details, sometimes. I wonder whether you remember Shakespeare, “What are you reading my friends? Words, words, words, words.” A thousand times you might say, “I am against terrorism. I support the United States in their fight against terrorism,” and it is nothing. What we need are the deeds, even if we have the limited capacity and our help is more or less symbolic only. For instance, we have three big capacity planes. We have offered two for NATO operations against terrorism and the United States accepted one. We have offered two and not three because I need one plane in order to be sometimes in the States.

We have an excellent anti-chemical unit which was very successful in the Gulf War, and we sent approximately 200 soldiers of this specialized unit to Kuwait. In the frame of the operation Enduring Freedom, the Czech parliament will discuss next week the sending of a Field hospital to Afghanistan and so on and so on. Please understand my position. I chose these words not to exaggerate the very small and symbolic help from the Czech side in the common anti-terrorist operation, but in order to define a clearer division line between words and deeds, and this is my point of view. Why? Because we Czechs have some historical experience with terrorism. You know, there was a terrorist state - - not because it was Germany, but because it was Hitler as the political leader of this state. The basic feature of the political behavior of any terrorist organization is blackmail. If you negotiate with any terrorist, blackmail will be the consequence and not a reasonable compromise. Well, in my country I was able to discuss with my main political opponents and even to come to a political agreement that the winner of the election will be the Prime Minister and I was the winner of the last general elections. My main opponent, who was the second, silver, medal, will be the Chair of the Parliament and he is for four years. We are a very stable society. So, this is not a problem of discussion and seeking for compromises. But you must discuss only with the people who respect the same rules, democratic rules. I said last autumn that there cannot be any negotiations with the terrorists. There must be only the fight against terrorism.

Of course, after the shock with the [Twin Towers] it was an acceptable position, but please do not forget that this war will be long, and after the first shock there will be a hesitation. There will be something like temptation for the phenomenon which I call appeasement - - and back to Czech history. What was appeasement? Well, before the Munich treaty, Britain and France negotiated with Hitler, and the Munich treaty was the consequence. Well, Hitler’s start in the middle of the thirties was very, very weak and in 1936, during the occupation of the Rhineland, two French divisions would be sufficient in order to stop Hitler, not in 1938. But the next compromise led to World War II. My conclusion is very simple. The first sentence says, “Never negotiate with the terrorists.” The second sentence says, “Start to stop terrorism in its beginnings, if possible,” and not after the diffusion of the terrorism. Well, and the third sentence is that you cannot reduce terrorism to any single country, to any single political movement. For instance, the terrorism is in Basquia, which I have mentioned, it’s in Ireland, it’s in the Middle East, I mean the suicide bombers, it’s in Chechnya, it’s in Kosovo. Of course, it is in Afghanistan, I mean Al Qaeda, and so on and so on. And once more I repeat: everybody who supports the terrorist is a terrorist.

The title my speech was the “The Common Interests of the Czech Republic and the United States” - - it is a nice title, thank you so much, indeed, for such an invention. I think our common interests is just the fight against terrorism and that’s why I am here. I’m discussing economic matters; I try to attract American investors to my country, but this is not the main topic for the World Affairs Council. It was a good topic for the World Trade Center this morning.

And now some provocation and a conclusion. Sometimes we think that the terrorism comes from poverty. I think it is nonsense. As I told you, Basquia is the richest Spanish province and Osama bin Laden is a millionaire. It is something like jumping to a conclusion to say that poverty provokes terrorism. I think that what provokes terrorism is fundamentalism and fanaticism. Not willingness to accept the views of others, but simply to think about those views and, well, they sometimes laugh at this. They love to be killed as a suicide bomber and this is a completely different attitude to life.

Let me conclude. We,the Czechs, like America even if we criticize some features of American life. You have excellent democracy and better beer. You have excellent culture, but McDonalds as a fast food is not acceptable for the majority of the Czechs, because we like slow food and we prefer the kitchen as an integral part of human culture. More than that, I like Faulkner, I like Hemingway, I like Steinbeck and many American writers, and I dislike Dallas because my wife said that if you change the sequence of Dallas nobody knows yet whether it is false or right because there are only three or four basic sentences – “Honey, I love you,” “You bastard!” “What is the price of oil?” and I forgot the fourth sentence. So, what I speak about is the critical friendship. And please believe that friends, even small friends, who criticize your beer, your Dallas, your hamburgers, but who are the real friends. Because the real friends [are revealed] in difficult times, not in easy times.

Thank you very much for your attention.