International Relations – Page 8 – Thoughts Towards a Better World

#1050 – Dick Bernard: Nagasaki, August 9, 1945. A Message to the Peace Movement.

August 10, 2015/0 Comments/in Community, International Relations, Peace & Justice, War /by dickbernard

Woodbury MN Aug 30, 2008, Kathy Kelly (kneeling, in black, in front), with group.

Most everything has been said, many times, about the deadly ending of WWII at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
The second atom bomb exploded over Nagasaki, Japan, 70 years ago yesterday (August 9, 1945). It was scarcely news in the public sphere yesterday.
It occurred to me that while I knew plenty about the deadly events in Japan, I’d never really checked where the cities actually were, to give some context. So, here’s where Hiroshima and Nagasaki are in relationship to each other, and to Tokyo. (While looking at the map, note the proximity of the Korean Peninsula and Japan.)
There is another piece of context usually missed.
Recently I was watching a re-broadcast of the last segment of Ken Burns, War, about the end of World War II. The U.S. possessed two A-bombs, it was said, and if Japanese surrender hadn’t come after Nagasaki, the war would have continued.
What if a third bomb had been available then, and a decision had to be made to use it? Or four, or ten, or 50 were available and “needed”? Would we have bombed Japan essentially out of existence? Would that have brought lasting peace?
Japan is not a tiny country; even then it was very heavily populated (about 80 million, one-fourth the current population of the United States). Today it has 127 million people, about 40% of U.S. population.
Alternatively, what would have happened if no A-bombs had been available to drop on Japan at the awful, bitter, end?
There are many opinions, all speculative, to answer these questions – what we think might have happened.
We now possess a huge arsenal of deadly weapons that are too frightening for someone sane to actually use in war, yet we continue to insist on keeping this huge stockpile, and condemning others who even consider the possibility of having even one of their own.
One wonders what we are thinking? Or, whether we are thinking at all.
Yesterday there were events commemorating Nagasaki, and speeches about what it means to us as a civilization. But mostly, August 9 was off the radar.
But not all was quiet.
Yesterday, a group of which I am a founding member, the U.S. Peace Memorial Foundation, awarded its 2015 Peace Prize in Los Alamos NM, where the atomic bomb experiment became a deadly reality in 1945.
This years award winner, I learned overnight, was Kathy Kelly, who we hosted overnight August 29, 2008, when she and seven others were completing the last day of a walk from Chicago to St. Paul to witness for peace (Photo begins this post, above). Several folks from the Twin Cities area joined the group for their last several miles, ending at the College of St. Catherine.
Kathy’s group was very impressive and committed, I recall. Kathy obviously continues her quest for an enduring Peace in the world.
While people today generally yearn for Peace, the public atmosphere seems far more one of hopelessness than hope, in effect: “What can I do? Nothing.”
That 1964 movie, “Dr. Strangelove, or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb”, comes to mind.
Still, there is a massive and ready market for peace in our country and around the world.
But the salesforce for peace – people like Kathy and the Peace Memorial Foundation – have to drastically change their marketing strategy, in my opinion. This will take much introspection, and retooling of tactics. Otherwise a noble message will continue to be marginalized, and those who “Love the Bomb” will remain dominant.
But all is not hopeless:
For the first time in many years, there are active and efforts at the highest levels of government to change the conversation about relationships between the United States, and Cuba, and Iran; indeed all countries. Building such relationships had seemed hopeless, but they are proceeding, and that is very good news.
My friend, Ehtasham Anwar in Pakistan, has his own driving dream of a peaceful world, and he has the drive to achieve his dream. He and I and others visited here in June; his goal for us is a United States Alliance of Peacemakers.
94-year old Lynn Elling, Naval officer in WWII, witnessed for peace at the Concordia Language Villages at Bemidji MN last Friday, rededicating the World Citizen Peace Site his organization established years ago. Sometimes his quest seems quixotic, impossible, but he’ll never quit.
Peace activities continue between St. Paul MN and its now 60 year friendship with sister city Nagasaki, Japan.
In early October, 2015, another friend, 88 year old Dr. Joseph Schwartzberg, witnesses for peace with a very important Creating a Workable World Conference in Minneapolis.
These folks and many, many others simply need to coalesce together, in concert, towards a common goal: a peaceful and sustainable world.
As the song some years ago so clearly said, “We Are The World” (The long version).
POSTNOTE: a powerful eight minute video received from a friend, today.

#1049 – Dick Bernard: August 6, 2015: The Atomic Bomb at 70. Reflecting on Peace.

August 6, 2015/0 Comments/in Community, History, International Relations, Peace & Justice, War /by dickbernard

PRE-NOTE: The U.S. Peace Memorial Foundation will award its 2015 Peace Prize in Los Alamos NM on Sunday August 9. The event will be live-streamed. You can access information here.
Numerous observances have been and are being held on this deadly anniversary of the first use in war of a nuclear bomb: Twin Cities of St. Paul/Minneapolis; St. Paul; other events in many places. Consider joining something, somewhere.
Some quotations from Albert Einstein, Robert Oppenheimer and Charlie Chaplin on the Atomic Bomb.
Related post: here.
(click to enlarge all photos)

Peace Plaza Fountain, Rochester MN Aug 4, 2015

Today is the 70th anniversary of the first use of the Atomic Bomb over Hiroshima, Japan, the first of only two uses of the deadly bomb as a weapon of War (Nagasaki was August 9, 1945).
The United States is the only country to have ever actually used the bomb in warfare.
The United States and Russia have over 90% of the total arsenal of nuclear weapons worldwide. The U.S. alone has over 7,000 nuclear weapons, hardly a good example of disarmament. Only 9 of over 190 world countries have nuclear weapons.
My personal reflections about August 6, 1945 was written ten years ago. That column was published in the August 6, 2005 Minneapolis Tribune: Atomic Bomb 1945001
Of course, there were differences of opinion about The Bomb in 1945, in 2005, and now. I won’t solve those arguments here.
My intention is simply to open space for dialogue and reflection.
The most recent American Legion magazine (I’m a military veteran and long-time Legion member) has a long article defending the assertion that being armed to the teeth with thousands of nuclear warheads is good, essential even, for U.S. national security. I think such a notion is insane, but here’s the article from my copy of the magazine: Amer Legion A-Bomb001
Both articles represent a reality, then and now, of how a world divided inevitably fails: the downside of powerful people cultivating enmity and division among peoples to achieve and maintain dominion, power and control anywhere. In war, ultimately, everyone loses. Each war is progressively more dangerous. In many ways we now live on a planet without borders. We are at the point where we risk destroying everyone and everything.
But division for the purpose of asserting dominion is, unfortunately, a tactic that is still useful, though never long term. Study any in a long line of those who lusted after long-term victory, power and control, including in our own country.
*
Emphasis on peace is a hard, but much better, road to travel. Peace is a process of inches, never simple. But we see evidence of it every day, everywhere.
I saw it on display Tuesday at the “Peace Plaza” in Rochester MN, just down the street from the famed Mayo Clinic, through whose doors enter people in medical crisis, from many cultures.
Tuesday is best conveyed in pictures (click to enlarge them):
1. The older man, likely Arab, sitting quietly next bench over, feeding the birds with bread crumbs kept in his pocket.

Rochester MN Aug 4, 2015

2. The man and woman, likely father and daughter, who spoke quietly, conversing in Spanish.

Rochester MN Aug 4, 2015

At one point the younger woman, obviously a very gifted dancer or gymnast, posed for her Dad in front of the Peace Fountain, and he took her photo with his iPhone.
3. And finally, the crowd that began to swell nearby, for some unknown reason. But it was obvious that they were proud to be together:

Rochester MN Aug 4, 2015

Turned out, they were together to celebrate successful completion of a summer project to set up mini-libraries in Rochester, for the purpose of quietly improving literacy. There was a ribbon cutting, and the Mayor read from a childrens book.
After they left, I looked at the fruit of their labor – the mini-library which will remain on Peace Plaza, cousin to (apparently) many others around Rochester, and in other places.
War was not welcome in Rochester, on Tuesday…a typical scene everwhere.

Rochester MN Mini-Library at Peace Plaza Aug 4, 2015

So, which reality will dominate us forward from today? Peace, or permanent and unending war or threat of war? Neither can be successfully imposed unilaterally. Both require negotiation of differences towards and compromise, such as the recent and difficult negotiations with Iran.
Watch the emphasis of the questions and responses of the first presidential debate tonight. This is the face of America that the rest of the world will see.
*
Our planet cannot survive war.
Any two people in relationship must negotiate differences, constantly. Why should it be any different among nations?
Neither choice is easy. There are downsides, as my relatives conveyed in their letters (above commentary) back in the summer of 1945. Though it is never perfect (it is, after all, negotiation) reaching an imperfect agreement is far better than the alternative.
Peace takes work, lots of work; and it takes an ability to understand, appreciate and negotiate differences, including amongst “birds of a feather” who seem to have the same basic beliefs, but are hampered by the same competitive power struggles that hobble societies at large.
Peace will continue to happen neighbor-to-neighbor; town-to-town; but it also must happen all the way up the line through the leaders we select by our action or inaction at the local, state and national level.
My opinion: a huge stockpile of nuclear weapons in our arsenal is not a deterrent; it is an expression of national insanity.
There is a better way. Let’s work towards it.
*
POST NOTE: This week was also National Night Out in the United States. This is a week to highlight neighborliness in our communities.
Doubtless the event I witnessed at Rochester’s Peace Plaza on Tuesday was related in some way to National Night Out; and was the culmination of an activity that began in March.
People prefer peace. We ordinary citizens are the one who must lead the conversation about peace everywhere, including in our world.
Let’s rid ourselves of the illusion, as the Aircraft Carrier below, that massive weapons of war reflect any solution to anything.

A United States Aircraft Carrier, Summer 2015, too often the kind of symbol that represents our image to the rest of the world.

COMMENTS:
from Joyce D Aug 6: from Juan Cole, Informed Comment (Includes President Obama’s speech, August 5, 2015.)
from Norm H: Thanks, Dick.
Some good food for thought and the basis for some serious thinking and reflection.
I am one who does think that dropping the A-Bomb twice on Japan was absolutely necessary and really the only way to eliminate the need for an invasion of Japan that would have resulted in thousands and thousands of US casualties. In spite of their significant losses of land, men and material as the Allied forces marched up the Pacific towards Tokyo, the Japanese military was till not convinced that waving the white flag was a better alternative than preparing to defending the homeland from the pending Allied invasion.
And, dropping the two bombs did bring Japan to the table and the end of the war even though there were still members of the military who wanted to fight on till the death literally and figuratively.
The problem with all of the above is, of course, that it opened the proverbial Pandora’s Box of the potential for nuclear warfare….and lead to many years of détente and the Cold War…with the operating theory being that at least in terms of Russia and the United States, if each nation could theoretically destroy the other given their respective nuclear arsenals, that “peace” would exist.
As an Air Force intelligence officer during that time, I was particularly aware of the reality of that situation.
Of course, once the Box had been opened, other countries began to develop nuclear weapon capacities which began to challenge…perhaps only in a minor way…the integrity, if you will. of détente.
The Cold War ended and historical researchers will no doubt spend time trying to sort out whether Russia was actually ever as strong as the US claimed as justification or its arsenal and defensive capability build-up in terms of nuclear weapon capacity let alone the ability to deliver those weapons during that period of time.
So, while I have no doubt what-so-ever given the situation in 1945 that the dropping of the two bombs was necessary, the result was the opening of Pandora’s Box which could never again be closed on the matter.
On the other hand, many countries were developing the nuclear weapon technology so it was just a matter of time before some country either used it or used the threat of its use as leverage for some strategic position or policy.

#1048 – Dr. Joseph Schwartzberg: Remembering India's Early Support for 'One World'

August 4, 2015/0 Comments/in History, International Relations, Peace & Justice /by dickbernard

PRE-NOTE: Too rarely, in this age of sound-bites, Twitter feeds, Text messaging, analysis by headline and screen crawlers, and similar shorthand, and other often blatantly false “forwards”, comes a breath of fresh air, an actual ‘back-and-forth’: an e-mail between two friends with acknowledged expertise about their topic of conversation.
What follows is such an e-mail exchange, shared with permission of the authors, Dr. Joseph Schwartzberg, Distinguished International Professor Emeritus at the University of Minnesota, and Dr. Manu Bhagavan, about Dr. Bhagavan’s book “The Peacemakers”.
This e-mail was received July 23, 2015.
Dick Bernard
*
[Dr. Joseph Schwartzberg]:
Several friends have suggested that the following exchange between me and Manu Bhagavan, who has written an excellent book on early Indian support for world citizenship and world government might be of interest to a wider audience. Manu has encouraged its being put out in the form of a blog, which is now happening. I have edited out a few sentences that would be of interest to nobody but Manu and me and inserted, in square brackets, a few short notes for those whose knowledge of India might be a bit fuzzy. The exchange has, I believe, interest from both a historical and a human interest perspective and contains some lessons for those who see themselves as World Citizens. Manu, a historian of modern India at Hunter College of the City University of New York, is a guy you would like to know. Among his five published books is one entitled Speaking Truth to Power. His interview with Garry Davis, World Citizen No. 1, was broadcast on World Citizen Radio. He maintains a close connection with the World Federalist Movement and will likely be making a presentation to World Federalists in connection with their annual Council meeting this November in New York.
Joe Schwartzberg
Director, The Workable World Trust
============
Dear Manu,
Several days ago, I finished reading The Peacemakers. I thoroughly enjoyed it, It is written in a very readable, jargon-free style, tells an interesting story, and is exceedingly well documented. I learned much from reading it. . . . . .
While there is no reason why you should know this, you may be interested to learn that, on my first trip to India in 1955-56 I made a point of meeting the then head of the Indian World Federalist Movement, C.L. (Chiranjilal) Paliwal. We became and remained good friends until his death (I believe it was in the late 1970s). On that and subsequent trips I was often his house guest and had many discussions with him about world federalism, and, more generally, about world and Indian politics; and he shared with me many of his reminiscences of the freedom movement in which he played an active role as a student leader and close associate of Gandhi. (He was jailed twice for his activities.) . . . .
Another relevant outcome of my first and subsequent trips to India was that they reinforced my conviction about the potential efficacy of World Federalism, not as a global panacea, but as the most suitable system (among other possibilities) within which to address global problems, I viewed the diverse nation of India as a microcosm of the world and reasoned that, If India, despite its enormous problems and limited resources, could maintain a viable system of federal democratic governance, so too, could the world as a whole, with its comparable problems, but vastly greater resource endowment. . . . . .
I offer below what I regard as my only significant criticism of your work, namely its excessively hagiographic portrayal of Nehru and Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit [Nehru’s sister and a leading Indian diplomat]. (Your recognition of the genius and moral steadfastness of Gandhi, on the other hand, was warranted.) Of course, you are in good company in lionizing those two leaders and there was a time when I would have subscribed to your views.
As you point out , Nehru and his sister were children of enormous privilege. They moved in elite circles and habitually captivated the intelligentsia (even most of the impoverished intelligentsia), political leaders, diplomats and the media. Their vision was truly global. But, while they struggled mightily on the global stage for an independent India, embedded in “One World” [Nehru was immensely impressed with Wendell Willkie’s 1943 book with that title] with equal rights for all human beings, they never, to the best of my knowledge, engaged themselves wholeheartedly in the struggle to bring equal rights and opportunities to India’s own marginalized groups, in particular, the scheduled castes [the official name for ex-untouchables] and adibasis [tribal peoples]. They could have made a big difference, but failed to do so. They were more concerned, it appeared, with the plight of black and native Americans, than with the counterparts of those groups in India itself. . . . .
It is one thing, when one is out of power to rail against the injustices of a system that denies many groups — especially colonized peoples — their political and social due. And Nehru and Mme. Pandit were superb spokespersons for a moral agenda to which millions of people worldwide could resonate, And they basked in the adulation that came their way. (I think here of Barack Obama’s undeserved Nobel Peace Prize.) But talk is cheap. What really constitutes a test of character is what one does when one actually holds power and has to make tough and binding decisions. Nehru failed the test in Kashmir, in Goa and later, disastrously so, in his handling of the Sino-Indian boundary disputes. [The failure in Kashmir was not following through on his 1947 promise to hold a UN-directed plebiscite to determine the state’s future; in Goa it was the seizure in 1961 of territory by military force; and in the dispute with China it was India’s unwillingness to consider very reasonable compromise proposals put forward by Zhou En-lai in 1960,]
On p. 161 of your book, you quote Nehru as saying, in the wake of the 1962 military debacle in its border encounter with China: “We were living in a world of illusion. … [W]e were getting out of touch with reality in the modern world and were living in an artificial world of our own creation. We have been shocked out of it.” You then go on to argue that, Nehru’s disillusionment notwithstanding, Mme, Pandit kept the faith. I disagree. In 1963 or’64 (as I recall),when the University of Pennsylvania, where I was then teaching, awarded her an honorary doctorate, she made a speech about India’s border disputes with China that I thought was exceedingly bellicose, inappropriate, and often factually inaccurate. It went over well, however, because China was then the bad guy du jour (not to mention her enduring charisma); so I found myself in a small minority of dissenters.
To return to the global stage, it is one thing to proclaim lofty goals, such as those embodied in the two major human rights conventions and pretend that they have the force of international law (which, in theory, they do), but quite another thing to follow through meaningfully on the implicit promise of such conventions by establishing a system of enforcement and of punishment for offenders. The longer the disconnect continues, the greater the loss of respect for the system as a whole. Happily, a beginning has been made in rectifying this problem globally with the creation of the ICC and the adoption of the R2P paradigm. But we have a long, long way to go.
Once, when I was having dinner at the home of Ashish Bose, India’s leading demographer, another guest, his aunt, a member of the Lok Sabha [the lower house of india’s Parliament] from Assam, asked him, “Well, what do you think, Ashish? Should I introduce a bill raising the legal age for marriage from 16 to 18?” I then asked her: “Wouldn’t it be better to enforce the laws you already have than to enact bigger and better laws that few people will take seriously?” To this, Ashish responded: “You don’ understand, Joe, India wants to be judged by the enlightened nature of its laws, not by what it actually does?” This applies, I’m afraid, to much of what Nehru and Mme. Pandit were doing , or arguing for, at the UN. They knew the problems in theory, but they didn’t demonstrate a good grasp of what the real world was like.
This criticism, I would argue,applies to most of my World Federalist friends and renders them fair targets for the accusation of being naive utopians. Obviously, ideals are important; but to achieve lasting changes, one has to find or create a workable mix of idealism with an understanding of real world power relationships. Otherwise, one loses credibility and effectiveness. That is why I’ve scaled down my emphasis on World Government as our common goal (while noting that it remains my preferred goal; cf. 2nd full paragraph of page 2 of my book and 1st full paragraph of p.297). I argue instead for the creation of a workable, though clearly imperfect, world. That is a general goal on which virtually all people of good will can agree. But it will garner little support unless one can demonstrate that there are, in fact, ways of dealing with problems much better than those on which the UN presently relies, mired as it is an anachronistic Westphalian rule system. Hence, the “Designs” in the title of my book.
Joe
================
[Manu Bhagavan]
Dear Joe:
Thank you, so much, for this careful reading of my book. I am grateful for the considered engagement. I’d be very happy if you chose to publish this somewhere, either as a review, or, less formally, as a blog post. It’s a great way to promote debate around the issues. . . . .
I’d love to see the Paliwal interview and to discuss other aspects of your experience. I’d really appreciate your insights.
Of course, I think we may have a few disagreements, but perhaps not as many as you describe. For instance, I concede in the book that Kashmir, Goa, and the Sino-Indian war were tripping points. But mistakes or shortcomings do not negate everything else, and there is much that Nehru and his sister accomplished, and where they were true to their ideals.
On the 3 major faults: I have a paper coming out on human rights, self-determination, and the question of Kashmir. I concede, as I indicate in the book, that this was the one issue on which Nehru ultimately was not able to rise above. Goa and the Sino-Indian conflict I largely chalk up to Krishna Menon, [India’s then Minister of Defence], though of course Nehru went along. I have another paper coming out where I discuss the Sino-Indian issue briefly, . . . . I’ll be bringing out an edited book that will address some of this in more detail shortly. . . . .
I agree that Nehru could have done much more to address the problem of caste, though I think we could have a fruitful discussion on the issue, and on locating Nehru somewhere between Gandhi and Ambedkar [an ex-untouchable who was the chief architect of India’s Constitiution] on the spectrum of moralism and law in change making.
I don’t think that your assessment of Mme Pandit, based on her Penn talk, is particularly fair, as you might have guessed. I don’t know what she said there, of course, but considering the nature of the setback and the humiliation following the war, and her brother’s despair, I think it hardly unexpected that she would give a rousing defense of India’s position in a foreign forum in the immediate aftermath. But she did deal in more internal ways with the critics, as I indicate. And, importantly, she also returned to speak for the old internationalist vision in the years that followed, in public and private settings. Her general position remained Nehruvian internationalist, and the talk you mention seems the exception. Most significantly, she and her daughter broke publicly with Indira Gandhi, and suffered for it, when they thought she was going down a dark path [initiating a period off emergency rule that lasted from 1975 to 1978], and taking the country with her. I’d say that that is indeed indicative of someone who “kept the faith.”
I don’t think it fair, either, to claim that Nehru was about showpiece laws and not about real change. Almost all of the new scholarship reassessing the Nehruvian period, whether economically or socially, reveals substantive progress on many an issue. This isn’t to say that everything was perfect. Nehru was powerful, but he wasn’t a dictator. He held the foreign minister portfolio, and so was much freer to act internationally, and domestically was much more constrained by cacophonous parliamentary democracy.
My position . . . . is that Indira Gandhi systematically undermined and destroyed the Nehruvian state. Nehru’s was an imperfect model, but what it could accomplish was going to take time. . . . .
Both the ICC and R2P [International Criminal Court and the Responsibility to Protect] have come under withering criticism from numerous scholars for being neo-imperial western tools. I don’t think that they are an unmitigated good. But I agree that they are, overall, positive steps, but ones that must take place in concert with other major changes to make the system more effective and fair. (I say this as someone who has heard Kofi Annan explain the reasons for R2P and who has met Ocampo and Bensouda [ICC prosecutors] on occasions, and who deeply admires Bill Pace and the work he has done.)
Anyhow, I say all of this only in the spirit of engagement. Not at all to be defensive. I love the fact that you have such a passionate take on the book, and that you have taken the time to write. Thank you!! . . . .
Cheers,
Manu

#1047 – Dick Bernard: Three books at the lake.

August 1, 2015/0 Comments/in History, International Relations, War /by dickbernard

We just returned from a week “up north” – for us, at a time share at Breezy Point Resort near Pequot Lakes MN. You’re not far from the “madding crowd” at a place like Breezy – “Elvis” does his thing, pretty expertly, each Saturday in the summer, but nonetheless it was a change of pace, and while we were watching Chris Olsen do Elvis, we saw a pretty nice sunset as well.
(click on all photos to enlarge)

Breezy Point sunset July 24, 2015

But my leisure time was with my nose in three books I’d brought along:
1. “The Clansman“, by Thomas F. Dixon, a “romantic novel” of the horrors (to many) of the emancipation of negroes after the Civil War (1865 forward), and the attendant founding of the Ku Klux Klan. My copy was apparently 100 years old, a reprint of the 1905 original, apparently re-published in 1915 in synch with, and including a few pictures from, the release of the photo play “A Birth of a Nation”, based on the book.
2. A 1920 book, “Leslie’s Photographic Review of the Great War“, celebrating the great victory of the allies, particularly the U.S., over Germany’s “Huns” in WWI.
Both of these books were found in the detritus of my grandparents farm in North Dakota.
3. The 2011 book, “In the Garden of Beasts” by Erik Larson, a #1 New York Times bestseller, an “enthralling work of novelistic history” (front cover) about the new American ambassador to Germany in the first year of Hitler and the Third Reich, 1933-34.
This book was loaned to us by our friend Annelee Woodstrom, who grew up in Adolf Hitler’s Germany, and turned seven during 1933-34.
It would be a fool’s errand for me to attempt to review these books in a limited space.
Suffice, that I spent my week reading them all, and if one has any interest in tying threads together, of one event spawning another, yet another; and the useful scourge of labeling some collective “them” for the purpose of instilling fear in the collective “us”; or of “superior” and “inferior”; and of the insanity of feeling one can really “win” a “war”: taken together these three books give a huge amount of food for thought. They would be a powerful trilogy for a book club.
For just a single example, most are familiar with the deadly Nazi obsession with the ideal Aryan racial stock.
In The Clansman (United States, 1905), the first use of the word Aryan comes on page two, in a note to the readers from the author: “How the young South…against overwhelming odds…saved the life of a people…one of the most dramatic chapters in the history of the Aryan race.” There is no question, in The Clansman, as to who is superior, and who is hopelessly inferior….
Leslie’s…Great War is an almost rhapsodic account of the power of the United States in WWI with no consideration of the possible future consequences of humiliating Germany. One of many cartoons in the book (below) brings the notion of a world pecking order of nations home.
It is interesting to note the future of the relationships of those six powers after 1918 up to today.

From the book “Leslie’s Photographic Review of the Great War” (WWI)

Finally, In the Garden of Beasts lays the foundation of Nazi Germany and its rapid rise to power. It didn’t occur to me until I read the book that Hitler and the Nazi’s ascension to power in Germany coincided almost exactly with the arrival of Franklin Roosevelt in the White House, both in 1933.
There was a very steep learning curve…and easily exploited fears, about things real or imagined.
What do we learn from war?
We certainly don’t seem to learn that war means anything other than stoking flames leading to another war.
But war – at minimum the constant threat of war – seems to be the default position of our supposedly civilized society.

POSTNOTE:
For me the reading of The Clansman caused me to think about Haiti, the nation born of a revolt of slaves against France which gained independence in 1804, 17 years after the United States came into existence.
I was interested, while reading The Clansman, whether Haiti, a place and history which I know reasonably well, would appear in any form. Haiti was, after all, not a benign presence in the early U.S.; it was a state formed of slaves who had successfully revolted, not far from a nation, the U.S., much of whose economy depended on slave labor.
Sure enough, at page 291 of The Clansman, this quote from one of the actors: “In Hayti no white man can own land. Black dukes and marquises drive over them and swear at them for getting under their wheels. Is civilization a patent cloak with which law-tinkers can wrap an animal and make him a king?” Of course, “The issue…is civilization…whether Society is worth saving from barbarism.”
No wonder, The Clansman, to this day, is popular among White Supremacists. And the post Civil War southerners were terrified of slaves now free.
And there is still no freedom for Haiti.
July 28, 2015, marked another 1915 Centennial: when the United States occupied Haiti and took control for many years (some feel we still occupy it). This is another history worth revisiting. Here are a couple of links which can help: Ezilidanto, and Mark Schuller (Parts one and two of three).

#1045 – Dick Bernard: On "Warriors" and "American Heroes". Remembering First Sergeant Strong

July 21, 2015/0 Comments/in Colorado, History, International Relations, Politics, War /by dickbernard

(click to enlarge)

If one follows national politics at all, one staple is obvious: the cult of American superiority as played out by its military “warriors” and “heroes”. It has most recently erupted in the Republican political debate, largely brandished by candidates and members of the political echo chamber who never served in the military, and conveyed to a public who have also, by and large, never served, and have a John Wayne movie (or, for the youngers, Transformers) view of the fantasy of invincibility of American military prowess.
For those who’ve been there, war is hell, something to be avoided…like the religious concept of Hell: Hell is a place you think you know about, but don’t want to go there to visit.
A few days ago, in this space, I published a photo of North Dakota farm boy and Marine Francis Long. Private Long was killed on Saipan on July 2, 1944, 13 days after the battle began; 7 days before it ended.
Late Sunday afternoon, I turned on public television, and it happened they were rebroadcasting part four of Ken Burns powerful series on WWII. This segment featured the horrors of Normandy, and of Saipan….
Francis Long gave me context for Ken Burns re-creation in images of the Saipan campaign, and about the reality of war…for all sides. About 50,000 dead during the battle of Saipan alone. Saipan was hell for U.S. GI’s and the enemy Japanese combatants; no less, it was hell for the Japanese who lived on Saipan, a great many of whom, civilians for whom Saipan was home, committed suicide by jumping off a cliff rather than surrender to the Americans.
War is hell.
But this post is about another soldier I knew: First Sergeant Fred Marcus Strong.
I was 22 when I met him in Company C, 1st Battalion, 61st Infantry, 5th Infantry Division (Mech) at Ft. Carson Colorado in 1962. For more than a year I was his Company Clerk; and he was top enlisted man in Company C. There were perhaps 150 of us in the Company. I got to know Sergeant Strong pretty well, though he seemed really old at the time (he apparently was 39), and he was my superior. Our desks were adjacent to each other, and our office was “Grand Central Station” for the company; as it was when we were on maneuvers, which was often.
He and I related well, in a quiet sort of working way. Sometimes we conversed about home, and he told me about growing up in the Tennessee/Virgina border area.
Our Division was training, it turned out, for Vietnam.
Time passes, but I never forgot Sergeant Strong. He had a powerful and positive impact on me. He was a gentle man. I made some failed attempts to find out if he was still alive. Search technology had not reached today’s sophistication.
This Memorial Day a friend forwarded a powerful tribute to GIs sponsored by a grocery chain out of Bristol Tennessee. You can view it here, the link is in the first line.
Sergeant Strong came back to my life. I knew from long ago conversations that he was from the general vicinity of this place, and I decided, once again, to look him up.
Sure enough, he had a mailing address, near Fort Carson, so I wrote him a long catch-up letter, not knowing if I’d ever hear back.
Presently came an e-mail, from his daughter: “My Mother wanted me to contact you when she got your letter to let you know that my Dad passed on June 9th 2014. Mother was so happy to get your letter and it made her feel very good to know someone cared enough about Dad to write after all these years…She is so lonely without him. We all miss him.”
A little later, about July 10 came an envelope with a brief note, and Sergeant Strongs obituary, which leads this post, and speaks for itself. Look deeply at the picture: that is the Sergeant Strong I remember.
I was struck by this memory card, stark in its simplicity. This was as perfect a summary of service as I’ve ever seen. The customary biographical sketch is not on this card. But it doesn’t need to be.
Anything more would have been a distraction from the essence of a life of service by Sergeant Strong which most likely included World War II and Korea:
Military Honors. “Army”
The memory card and note from his daughter has joined the goblet made by my Uncle Frank on the USS Arizona before he went down with the ship December 7, 1941.
Thank you, First Sergeant Strong.
POSTNOTE: In my followup letter I included a couple of memories of 1962-63, which you can read here: Ft. Carson 1962-63001
Some years ago, I happened to meet the mail clerk for Company C, just a kid like myself, and we were reminiscing. He recalled, back then, that he really wanted to become a helicopter pilot, but Sergeant Strong quietly counseled him out of that idea.
Doubtless, First Sergeant Strong knew war, and not from the abstract.
We were training for Vietnam. He knew that. He knew the coming reality. We didn’t understand what was ahead.

#1043 – Dick Bernard: Going to Peace. A Reflection on Detente with Iran.

July 16, 2015/0 Comments/in Family History, History, International Relations, Minnesota, North Dakota, Peace & Justice, War /by dickbernard

POSTNOTE, July 18: see “The Women in the Yard. Looking for Clara”, here.
Going through old papers and photos of a deceased relative can be tedious, but occasionally something pops up, as did this photo a few days ago.
(click to enlarge)

A farm family, the summer of 1943

While not of my town, or my family tree either, I have some knowledge of this farm family in the summer of 1943. Sr. Victorine, of the Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondolet in St. Paul, was a good friend in her last years. She passed on in October, 2010.
I never knew that her brother was Francis, at right in this family photo taken in the summer, 1943, in rural ND. (The entire family is in the photo, save their mother, Clara, who was probably taking the picture. On the back of the picture are written the names of the Charles Long family. From left, as identified by a family member, they are: Leonard, Clem, Marcella, Charles, Sr. Victorine, John and Francis Long.)
The 1976 town history (Berlin ND) says that Francis was “Killed in Saipan, July 2, 1944“. A short article from, likely, the Fargo Forum, says that Francis dropped out of high school to go in the service. In the Berlin history, he is listed as “deceased” in the class of 1943.
A letter from my Grandma Rosa to her son, my uncle Lt. George W. Busch, officer on the USS Woodworth in the Pacific, dated August 20, 1944, sums it all up well: “[W]e had a Memorial Mass for Francis Long killed July 2 on Saipan in action Sister Victorine was here to come to visit us on Fri afternoon is done with school now has one test to take then she has her Masters Degree in Science she did very well looks so good too but all felt so badly….”
So goes war, willing heroes, full of all of the brash confidence and invulnerability of youth. Francis was probably 19, just starting life, when he died.
I think of Francis and family this day because this week a major agreement was reached between U.S. and Iran negotiators.
The media is full of commentary about this agreement, and people who stop by this blog can find far more than adequate information in other sources, on all sides about the technical details, and dead-certain positions and opinions about it.
President Obama framed this pretty well, yesterday: “Either the issue of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon is resolved diplomatically through a negotiation or it’s resolved through force through war.”
Either we figure out how to get along, or there will be more and more people with names who perish, and not only ours.
This won’t stop the drumbeaters for War, for unconditional surrender of the Enemy, whoever that happens to be at the time.
Peace is a very hard sell in this country.
Peace is, I think I can fairly say, considered by the traditional Power People in our country to be an instrument of terrorism…It threatens their prosperity or their authority.
For the media (and the people who watch or read it) Peace is boring as a generator of revenue (just watch your local and national news and see what is prioritized for coverage.)
Peace is costly – a competitor – for the military-industrial complex that President Eisenhower so correctly identified as a big and looming problem way back in 1961.
For others, an enemy is absolutely essential to retain power and control. It is useful to keep people in fear, and portray yourself as the only safety buffer between “us and them”.
Eisenhower was as military as they come…he knew, however, a reality to which we’ve paid too little attention.
My friend, Tom White, who spent a great deal of time for many years establishing accurate numbers concerning military and other costs in this country always estimated that over half of the U.S. discretionary budget related to military.
He’s out of the card business now, but the general information on his last one is still pretty accurate.
All that military money goes somewhere, and the vast majority not for the peace and general welfare of our or other citizens.
We live or we die by our priorities.
Francis and millions of others have died defending the premise that war is necessary for peace.
*
A postnote from the present:
I’ve been a member of the American Legion for years. I’m a vet. The Minnesota American Legion seems to enroll perhaps 1 1/2% of Minnesota’s population. It is a small, and decreasing in membership (old soldiers do die), but still a powerful entity.
In the most recent American Legion newspaper, announcement was made of the 2015 Minnesota American Legion Convention, including the Resolutions it would be considering, among which was this one.
(click to enlarge)

Are our (America’s) priorities:
“Constitution
Military Power
Faith
and
Capitalism”
as stated in the Resolution?
The drafter of the resolution seems to think so, and I can predict that this resolution will sail through. Look carefully at the four pillars of the resolution.
If we choose survival, we choose peace: that is my opinion.
And I thank the administration of President Obama for forcing us to begin this conversation, since an alternative to his forced choice is a third way, which he did not mention: to stay the course of our dismal reality of fear of anything and everything but war.

#1042 – Dick Bernard: Under Renovation: Two Flags, Two National Anthems, Two Nations, 56 years.

July 7, 2015/0 Comments/in Community, History, International Relations, Minnesota, North Dakota, Peace & Justice, War /by dickbernard

Here is the video we all saw at Orchestra Hall on Sunday afternoon (see below)
(click on all photos to enlarge them)

Cuba flag at Orchestra Hall, Minneapolis MN, July 5, 2015

July 1 found me heading east after a tiring three days in North Dakota. I stopped in Valley City, and decided to refresh by stopping at my alma mater, now Valley City State University, and walk around my campus from 1958-61 before getting back on the freeway. A major renovation of the old auditorium, in progress, which turned out to be accessible to this visitor, caught my eye.

Vangstad Auditorium under renovation, Valley City (ND) State University, July 1, 2015

Workmen happened to be testing lighting on the stage at the time I was there. Everything was a mess, as one would expect. One told me that their objective was to keep the auditorium appearance as it had always been. Back in my day, that auditorium was home for any college cultural event. I took photos, as I usually do, never expecting them to become relevant a few days later.
Then came Sunday morning, July 5.
Friend Bill Haring called and said they had two extra tickets to the performance of the the visiting Cuban group Coro Entrevoces, appearing with the Minnesota Orchestra*. Was I interested? No brainer. My wife couldn’t attend; so I asked if my granddaughter Kelly, who’s in chorus, would be interested. Sure enough, so off we went to what was an historic event, a real cross-cultural exchange between the U.S. and Cuba, brought about by a recent trip to Cuba by the Minnesota Orchestra back in May.

Core Entrevoces at Minnesota Orchestra Hall Minneapolis MN July 5, 2015

The performances, three sets by Coro Entrevoces interspersed with orchestral sets by the Minnesota Orchestra, was phenomenal, electric. During the performance I thought back to that recently visited auditorium in Valley City North Dakota. Back then, nearing the end of my college career in summer, 1961, a program called the Afro-Cuban Review came to the auditorium. It was written up in the college newspaper, the Viking News, on page one, and you can read the release here:
(click to enlarge)

Viking News, Valley City ND State Teachers College, July 5, 1961 page one

Remember, this was 1961, 56 years ago, and two years earlier revolution had brought Fidel Castro to power in Cuba. The failed Bay of Pigs invasion had happened a couple of months earlier. The Cuban Missile Crisis was down the road a year or so. We were in a war with our nearby neighbor. So, while the program was Afro-Cuban that day, there were no Cubans to be seen. One can never be too careful.
For 56 years that official animosity has continued. Now a welcome thaw is in progress.
We witnessed Sunday, and back in May, part of the beginning of a new relationship between two proud countries, the U.S. and Cuba. The diplomats: musicians and singers.
I’m a proud American, and have never been to Cuba, but the playing of the Cuban National Anthem with backdrop of the Cuban flag from the stage of Orchestra Hall was an emotional event for me, and I’d guess for others in the hall as well.
Yes, the Star Spangled Banner came first, equally rousing, but there was great symbolism present in Orchestra Hall on this pleasant day. It was good to see flags of peace on Sunday, rather than of war; anthems of pride complimenting, not condemning….
Friendship begins with engagement: you have to get to know a person as a person in person.
The same goes for countries. As a single citizen, I applaud what is happening now between Cuba and our country. And we need to continue similar rapprochements with other countries, Iran, North Korea, and on and on.
We are, after all, citizens of one planet, all of us on a single stage, depending on each other for survival.

U. S. Flag at Orchestra Hall, Minneapolis MN July 5, 2015

* – The program notes can be viewed here: Core Entrevoces 7-5-15001

#1031 – Dick Bernard: Taps. A Memorial Day to Remember in LaMoure

May 27, 2015/0 Comments/in Community, Family History, History, International Relations, Quietings, War /by dickbernard

POSTNOTE, May 29, from Kathy G: A one-minute ad without a single word, for Memorial Day. “This is a one-minute commercial. Not a word spoken and none is needed. Food City is a Southern grocery store chain with headquarters in Bristol, Tennessee.”

May 25, 2015, American Legion, LaMoure ND

Reunion over, and about to leave LaMoure ND, we and my brother John decided to attend the annual Memorial Day observance at the LaMoure American Legion post. It is always moving and inspiring – an honor to attend, as is the usual observance by the Veterans for Peace in St. Paul MN which I had to miss this year.
I had been to several observances with my Uncle and Aunt in LaMoure over the years, so I knew what to expect, but brother John, long retired from a 20-year career as an Air Force officer, and long-time Californian, was deeply impressed with the local observance, as was my wife, Cathy. Neither had been there before.
Monday was an iffy day, weather-wise, but the place was packed as usual, with music provided by local high-schoolers, with the reading of names of departed veterans, and a couple of very good speeches. (I can’t name names: my program departed the car enroute home during a windy and rainy stop to change drivers at Fergus Falls.)
At the end of the formal presentation indoors, we adjourned to the vacant lot beside the Legion where crosses were planted, poppies affixed, an honor guard with flags and rifles for the traditional salute, and then taps, expertly played by a young woman, probably high school age.
We had a mix of near sunshine, and light rain, almost perfect.
It was all deeply moving.
(click to enlarge all photos)

May 25, 2015, LaMoure ND

Inside, the narrator had earlier read the names of all local military veterans who have died.
Even in this small community, it was a very long list of names, particularly for World War II, and World War I as well. As I remember: departed veterans were named from the Civil War, and the “Indian War” during the same time period; the Spanish-American; Korean, Vietnam, Gulf, Iraq and Afghanistan Wars.
This observance emphasized the physically dead. Back home in the evening I noticed that the national observance on the Capitol mall now recognizes also those veterans permanently physically disabled by war. The Vets for Peace recognizes all of these, but also those mortally wounded psychologically: PTSD, mental illness, drugs and alcohol, homeless….
Saturday, I’d seen the reader of names at the fish dinner at the same Legion, and he said that every year somebody mentions somebody not named who should have been on the list.
Little did I know that I’d be writing him my own letter today. He read the names of my uncles, Shipfitter Frank Bernard (USS Arizona), and Lt. George W. Busch (USS Woodworth); but not those of Uncle Arthur Busch (U.S. Army 1945-46), nor Art and George’s cousin next farm over, Capt. August Berning, Marine in the Pacific Theatre WWII, both deceased.
So next year, the narrators list will be even longer, thanks to me, and to others who also add names, and, of course, more veterans who have died in the days to come.
*
The recitation of names by War caused me to think about categories of Wars in which the U.S. been engaged, and how people have engaged in those wars. (In a previous post I included an American Legion summary of these wars: America at War001)
Of course, the early wars, including the Revolutionary, came as our country grew to today’s boundaries of the lower 48 states. Wars brought us into being, over 150 years ago, against England, etc.
But by far our most deadly war was our own Civil War: the same war which birthed the very concept of Memorial Day. We were at War against ourselves, then. It is not an abstraction to think that perhaps the current “war” between Sunni and Shiite centered in Iraq and Syria might not be such a novel occurrence. There are far more similarities than differences to our own Civil War. In our own country, the Civil War was brother-against-brother; slavery or not was the main issue; plenty of Old Testament scriptural basis supported slavery.
Then there were the Teddy Roosevelt adventures: Spanish-American War, Cuba, the Philippines, etc. That was my Grandpa Bernard’s War: North Dakota’s were among the first volunteers to go to the Philippines in 1898, and Grandpa was on the boat with the others.
The deadliest wars so far, WWI and WWII, the U.S. entered long after they began, reluctantly. There was debate whether we should have entered earlier, or not at all. Wars are complicated things, after all. In WWI my Grandpa Busch’s hired man, whose name I do not know, was killed. Grandpa wanted to volunteer, but there was the matter of his being ethnic German, which complicated things a whole lot for Germans in this country.
Then there were the anti-Communist Wars, like Korea and Vietnam, and the near miss with Cuba and Russian Missiles in 1962 (I was in the Army, then). It’s been years since the Soviet Union became Russia and other countries, but the “Communist” card is still played by some, perhaps yearning for the good old days of the Cold War. Wars have an unfortunate way of living on, far past their reason.
And there have been wars just for the hell of it (it seems to me): Grenada comes to mind. Remember the Grenada War?
*
Through Korea, Wars were very personal things: if you were at war, you were at war against someone who could shoot you dead. The days of massive standing Armies and compulsory draft are long past, the times when (as in my own family) we three boys all served; or four of my five uncles (the fifth was needed on the farm). The notion of a citizen Army (males of a certain age) ended with the end of the Draft in 1975 and (in my opinion) will never be successfully marshaled again, even in times of major crisis.
Memorial Day remembers old wars….
Now war has become a video game, threatening every single one of us, if we can’t figure out how to deal with each other, including the top guys who have led and will lead people into these ever deadlier things called war.
“Evil” will never end (not always restricted just to the “bad guys”). Yes, we can be the bad guys, and have been.
And, there is much to be said for “duty, honor, country”.
But the reality of evil, and those honorable concepts can be and are misused by all “sides”, including our own.
There are lots of alternatives to war, and while peace can be very messy in itself, it far exceeds the never-ending problems with attempting to win the peace by war. That has never, and will never, work.
Thanks, LaMoure American Legion, for a most respectful and sombre Memorial Day 2015.
I will not forget.

LaMoure ND May 25, 2015

SAMSUNG CAMERA PICTURES

The Reader of the Names

The Student Speaker

The main speaker

The traditional Salute

#1030 – Dick Bernard: Memorial Day 2015 Thoughts about the War About War

May 23, 2015/0 Comments/in Community, History, International Relations, Minnesota, Native American, Peace & Justice, Politics, War /by dickbernard

We’re out of state on Memorial Day so this year, for the first time in many years, I won’t be at the annual Vets for Peace gathering on the Minnesota State Capitol Grounds. Of course, the event doesn’t need me to go on. Here’s the info about Monday in St. Paul. This is always a meaningful event, of, by and for veterans.
Memorial Day with the Veterans for Peace
Vietnam Veterans Memorial (Minnesota State Capitol grounds)
Monday, 9:30 AM
Music, poetry, speeches,
solemn ringing of bells,
and the reading of the names
of the Minnesota casualties
of Iraq and Afghanistan Wars
(click to enlarge photo)

Entasham (at left) interviewing Native American author and Vietnam War vet Jim Northrup at the MN Vietnam Memorial Vets for Peace event, Memorial Day, 2014. Cameraman fellow Pakistani, Suhail. See Postnote

There are many thoughts this Memorial Day, particularly when politicians are attempting to justify war and blame someone else for it.
I’m going to propose taking some time to watch and read the items which follow. They will take some of your time, but you might find them both interesting and instructive.
Personally, I am a military veteran, from a family of veterans. I’m a long time member of the American Legion and Veterans for Peace. I have a grandson who’s in Air Force ROTC in high school, and I consider it a positive experience for him in many ways. This does not make me, or him, pro-war. It is helping him grow up. And he, too, is proud of his service.
My focus this weekend will be on a person I never met, the brother of my good friend, Jim, who died this year from the lingering and severe effects of exposure to Agent Orange during Vietnam. His suffering is over. Our national confusion continues.
All this makes me a complicated individual when it comes to a conversation about this annual Memorial Day which is interpreted in so many ways (the Legion post in the town we’re visiting this weekend will be having a fish fry on Saturday night). Not all is somber on this day remembering death (though many victims of war are very much alive, though suffering PTSD or other long-term effects of war).
Here’s my recommendations:
1. March 20 I and many others listened to seven persons tell seven stories of the Vietnam War from their perspective. The film is excellent and runs for about 90 minutes. You can watch it here. I was there. It is a somber and thought-provoking presentation.
2. In recent months, out at the family farm in North Dakota, I have come across some very interesting and historical documents about World War II BEFORE Pearl Harbor. The American Legion has helpfully provided its summary history of American Wars. You can read these in the first section “POSTNOTE” here.
3. This year is the 70th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations. On June 1 will be what appears to be a very interesting webcast of talks by many experts which at minimum I’d like you to be aware of. You can access the information here. Another perspective, by my friend and UN expert Dr. Joe Schwartzberg can be read at the end of this post from Jan. 1, 2015.
My friend, Lynn Elling, is fond of the mantra that we are in “an open moment in history” to change course.
I agree with his assessment, but even more so.
We will, collectively, decide on global progress towards peace; or continuing on a death-spiral for our entire planet through war, lack of attention to crises like man-induced climate change, etc.
We cannot pretend that the past is present; that simple belief about this or that suffices; or that there is a rosy future without deep and painful changes in our behaviors.
The mantra of the energy industry, for instance, pronounced over and over on TV ads, that we are energy independent and will be (it is suggested) okay for the next 100 years is very dangerous.
My grandparents were married 110 years ago, long ago, but a blip in human history. Who will be around 110 years from today who will remember us fondly?
It is long past time to wake up.
POSTNOTE: A year ago, this time of year, it was my privilege to meet Ehtasham Anwar, a Pakistani civil official in one of Pakistan’s largest city – as big as the Twin Cities. Ehtasham was completing a year as a Humphrey/Fulbright Fellow at the Human Rights Center of the University of Minnesota Law School.
We talked about many things in the month we worked together on his year-end project, on the issue of peace. And one memory is vivid in my mind, since he mentioned it to me more than once.
Paraphrasing what I remember, he said this: “Throughout this year in Minnesota I have been so impressed with how friendly and peace-loving American people are. Why is it that American foreign policy towards others in other parts of the world is so negative and dominating?”
Difficult question.
I gave him my answer, what I thought was our national problem. Hint: it is every one of us, our disinterest and lack of engagement in the greater questions of who we are with the rest of the world, even with our fellow Americans. We are individualists. Too many of us have had it far too well, for far too long. We feel we are entitled to what some call our “exceptionalism”.
What is yours?, I ask you.
Ironically, overnight came a personal commentary remembered from a fifteen years ago conversation in Paris by my favorite blogger, Just Above Sunset. You can read it here. Remember, this is from near 15 YEARS ago. While at this blog space, the previous several posts have summarized the last couple of weeks of posturing by presumptive U.S. presidential candidates for 2016 on the issue of war. The other columns are very well worth your time.

#1026 – Dick Bernard: The Minnesota Orchestra goes to Cuba, and some related observations from the early 1960s

May 12, 2015/0 Comments/in History, International Relations, Politics, Technology, War /by dickbernard

UPDATE May 14, 2015: from the Minnesota Orchestra on landing in Cuba.
Save Our Symphony has an excellent ongoing compilation of news from/about the Orchestra in Cuba.
Monday’s Minneapolis Star Tribune had as its lead story the Minnesota Orchestra’s pending visit to Cuba.
Wherever you are, you can listen to the live performances in Cuba this Friday and Saturday at 7:30 pm on Minnesota Public Radio 99.5 FM or on-line.

Henri Verbrugghen, conductor of the Minneapolis Symphony Orchestra at the time of their last visits to Cuba in 1929 and 1930. From a Symphony Ball poster ca late 1980s, courtesy of Alan Stone.

We’re regulars at the Orchestra and I’ve posted frequently on Orchestra topics, particularly during the long and very painful lockout 2012-14. The Orchestra is amazing; and the mutual intention to recover from the disastrous lockout seems amazing, for both sides.
But today seems a good time for some brief comments about another relationship, Cuba-U.S., as remembered by one who’s never been there.
As a geography major in college, I certainly knew the essentials of Cuba. The first evidence that Cuba reached out into North Dakota comes from a release which was in the July 5, 1961 Viking News (click to enlarge):

I am quite certain I went to this performance, since such events were few and far between in the town and on campus. One quickly notices that the “Afro-Cuban Review” apparently is missing the Cuban element. This is likely due to the fact that on January 1, 1959, the Cuban system of government changed, and for 56 years, now, the relationship between the U.S. and Cuba has been, officially, non-existent (with a lot of “winks and nods”, especially by business interests: where people exist, there also is a market….)
Back to early 1960s: a year or so later, out of college and in the Army, I witnessed the Cuban Missile Crisis of October, 1962, as an Army infantryman, mobilized for possible action. We were a long ways from Cuba, but nonetheless in the bullseye of the Russian missiles, and it was a scary time.
In October, 1962, we soldiers watched President Kennedy address the nation on a tiny television screen in our barracks near Colorado Springs.
Very soon, life went on. American and Russian leaders saw the implications of escalation; there was no war. But Castro’s Communist Cuba became and remained a ripe political opportunity in the U.S.; one might say, a North Korea near our shores. Fear is a useful emotion to manipulate and use….
Of course, if you happen to be the resident of the weaker enemy state, as Cubans are, you are unlikely to attempt to overthrow your government; while the stronger enemy, the U.S., in effect punishes you for the supposed sins of the leader, Castro.
Some years ago, likely at my Uncle’s farm in North Dakota, I came across a well-used college text: History of Latin America from the Beginning to the Present by Hubert Herring. This “Second Edition Revised”, 1963, includes a 21-page chapter on Cuba which drew my interest, particularly the Cuban history from 1895-1963. In this chapter on Cuba, Theodore Roosevelt was not even mentioned; nor was the then-more recent nuclear brinksmanship of the Cuban Missile Crisis era.
At the end of the chapter, the author states: “Reflecting on the sorry state of Cuba in 1960, the onlooker could say that two things are reasonably clear: Cuba was indeed overdue for a revolution, and revolutions are never mild and gentlemanly.” (p. 422)*
Thankfully, the walls constructed so well over 50 years ago between Cuba and the United States are now, finally, breaking down.
I will listen with great interest to the Minnesota Orchestra in Cuba this weekend.
A previous post with reports by two visitors to more recent Cuba can be read here.
* POSTNOTE: Here’s the entire Cuba chapter, made easy by pdf, hopefully so ancient and unavailable as to not get me in trouble with the author or publisher from over 50 years ago: Cuba to 1963001