Speeches at the Wall
Posted by Greg R Lawson at 11/15/2009 6:37 AM 
Categories: History ColdWar Europe
Tags: History ColdWar Europe
Categories: History ColdWar Europe
Tags: History ColdWar Europe
Below are my comments to Atlantic Community's question regarding the usefulness of the rhetoric emanating from European and world leaders at the 20th anniversary commemoration of the fall of the Berlin Wall.
"The best part of the speeches were the remeberances of what transpired 20 years ago. While there will continue to be ongoing debate as to the exact influce of Reagan, Thatcher, Pope John Paul II, Lech Walsea, Vaclav Havel, and Gorbachev, at the end of the day, a confluence of events and unique personalities led to a surprising outcome- a largely peaceful transition from authoritarianism to relative freedom.
We should all take pride from across the Atlantic as to this achievement and rememeber it as an example that hope can, even if it does not always, make positive changes.
As to the promises and comments aimed towards the future- everything said is completely conventional wisdom. The enitre notion of bringing down metaphorical walls is so common place as to be practically irrelevant.
Indeed, the paens to future cooperation are nothing more than rhetorical flourishes. Necessary though they are, they really don't mean much other than confirm that political leaders will always find the most optimistic things to say, no matter how conventional and, perhaps, vapid.
That said, it is to be expected but we should be less than sanguine about calls for future action. They should be seen for what they are, rhetorical devices that obfuscate the fundamental trends and interests of individual nations.
All in all, the rememberance was full of meaning; the promises, not empty but far from full."
"The best part of the speeches were the remeberances of what transpired 20 years ago. While there will continue to be ongoing debate as to the exact influce of Reagan, Thatcher, Pope John Paul II, Lech Walsea, Vaclav Havel, and Gorbachev, at the end of the day, a confluence of events and unique personalities led to a surprising outcome- a largely peaceful transition from authoritarianism to relative freedom.
We should all take pride from across the Atlantic as to this achievement and rememeber it as an example that hope can, even if it does not always, make positive changes.
As to the promises and comments aimed towards the future- everything said is completely conventional wisdom. The enitre notion of bringing down metaphorical walls is so common place as to be practically irrelevant.
Indeed, the paens to future cooperation are nothing more than rhetorical flourishes. Necessary though they are, they really don't mean much other than confirm that political leaders will always find the most optimistic things to say, no matter how conventional and, perhaps, vapid.
That said, it is to be expected but we should be less than sanguine about calls for future action. They should be seen for what they are, rhetorical devices that obfuscate the fundamental trends and interests of individual nations.
All in all, the rememberance was full of meaning; the promises, not empty but far from full."
Comments