Speeches
Search in Speeches:
 
printer friendly document

Lecture of the President of the Republic at the Budapest Economic University
14.05.1997

L'Union est mort, vive L'union!


Rector Magnificus,
Mr. President,
Excellencies,
Ladies and gentlemen,

At first glance geography only divides our kindred nations: the Estonians, Finns and Hungarians. The distance between Helsinki and Budapest is greater than between Helsinki and Moscow. Yet we are united, among other things, by a geographic dimension. When the meridian was measured between Torneo - a river in the finnish Arctic, - and the Danube last century, the geodesists used the Astronomic Observatory in Helsinki, TÄHTITORNIMÄKI, - ''the mountain of the star tower - in Helsinki and the Church of St. Nicholas in Tallinn as points of reference. The spire of St. Nicholas, dedicated to Estonian seamen lies at the co-ordinates 59§ 26' 14.679'' northern longitude and 24§ 45' 00.216'eastern longitude. One capital was mapped in relation to the other capital and the location of both, in relation to the rest of the world, was defined more accurately. The gold cross of St. Nicholas, calculated with an accuracy within 30 centimetres in relation to Washington, Paris, Berlin and St. Petersburg, provided during peacetime greater accuracy for shipping and, consequently, in relations; during the Estonian War of Independence, the cross guaranteed more accurate cannon fire and, consequently, independence. The effectiveness of a state depends on the accuracy of its political time and space. In short, I will speak about coordinates under the title: L'union est mort, vive l'union! A few hundred years before the great meridian was measured, Ambassador Olearius set out from Holstein to Persia with the young German baroque poet Paul Fleming in his delegation. Even after the great age of the Hanseatic league, the roads from Western Europe to the Middle East passed through Tallinn. Just to remind you: The Hanseatic League, uniting Tallinn with Lübeck, London, Bergen and Novgorod through common economic interests and developing a common legal system to protect her economic interests should be regarded as a distant forrunner of the European Union. The Hanseatic League developed her own structure and played a central part in Northern Europe for more then three centuries. Which reminds me the saying that everything new is a well forgotten past. To come back to Olearius: his noteworthy trip resulted in a beautifully illustrated book of travels.

When the Estonian Association of Writers wanted to publish an excerpt from Olearius' book in the 1970s, Soviet censors would not allow it. This seventeenth century text was doomed by the mention of co-ordinates: under the totalitarian regime, neither Estonia nor its capital was allowed to have its own co-ordinates, that is, her own relationship with the rest of the world, not to mention with the Observatory in Helsinki. This may seem comical to the rest of the world, and I am sure for Hungarians as well, but above all it sounds to my fellow - hungarians all too familiar.

By knowing and analysing these and other details. Hungarians and Estonians reached the conclusion that the Soviet totalitarian regime was doomed much faster than the Western democraticies believed. A totalitarian regime may effectively produce rockets, euphemistically called sputniks, but this only prolongs her agony. A totalitarian regime is unable to reproduce itself. Estonians considered Soviet totalitarianism to be temporary. True, it was cruel and dangerous, we lost one quarter of our citizens; the regime was feared, but even more, it was ridiculed. At no other time in history has Estonia produced such a mass of beautiful sarcastic anecdotes - and the world's greatest nuclear power was defensless. Witch hunts, which already in the middle ages accounted for more deaths than war and in the former Soviet Union accounted for the deaths of more than sixty million people, were of no use. The root of the Estonians' desperate yet confident optimism lay in our accurate sense of co-ordinates: we used the co-ordinates of Europe.

This was sensed by Hungary even more strongly, possibly due to its more lengthy experience with statehood. Thus it was not by accident that recently Visegrad, the spot where Europe's most important waterway, the lifeline known as the Danube bends decisively toward the South, was the place where the foundation was laid for an organisation of states bearing the same name. Co-operation between the so- called Visegrad states developed into a new and fruitful stage in the unification of post-totalitarian Europe. Together they set an example and broke free, not from their geographic borders, but from the stagnant political regimes imposed on them during the Cold War. They broke free from inaccurate co- ordinates locked into an outdated dimension that would not be suited for democratic states. They brought together the experiences of the small and medium reforming countries at a time when the very idea of new co-ordinates threatened to swallow all the positive energy and political courage of many more powerful states and organisations. Unfortunately, we have experienced in this closing century what such periods of weak will can bring about. Fortunately, however, both Hungary and Estonia today, in this beautiful spring of 1997 have sufficient grounds to hope that this time small, medium and large states will all learn their lessons from history.

Having mentioned Visegrad in Hungary, it would be unjust not to speak of Keszthely. Ladies and gentlemen, I am pleased that at the end of this visit to Hungary I will see the town and fortress where recently in the best Hungarian tradition and in a spirit of joint renewal, the presidents of European countries were called upon under the chairmanship of president Göncz to take a close look at the current performance of their respective duties. And please be advised: Estonia will not arrive in Keszthely as an inquisitive late-comer or premature guest, but instead will arrive as a congenial partner. We have come to Hungary to convince others and ourselves: in all the reform countries, be it on the coast of the Baltic Sea at the Northern end of the Amber road or in the middle near Balaton, we have rolled up our sleeves and are working towards a better home and a more secure future. We take our partnership and candidacy for membership in both the EU and NATO very seriously and we are giving it our all.

Yesterday, addressing the Hungarian parliament, I emphasised the unity of Estonia's and Hungary's strategic goals and the need to co-operate and share experiences while we are still candidates for the European Union and NATO. The status of candidate cannot last forever. For this reason, Rector Magnificus, Mr. President, honoured academic audience and dear guests, allow me to further define the dimension in which we live.

Estonia is on its way from the Soviet Union to the European Union and NATO. Hungary is moving in the same direction. Hungary is not coming from the Soviet Union, but from the Soviet sphere of influence. Thus Estonia's and Hungary's directions are the same, but our starting points seven or eight years ago were in many ways different.

For this reason, I am sure that people here in Hungary are much less likely than many in Estonia to ask: look, we just managed to escape one union, to get out of one union. Do we really need to immediately go and demand a place in new unions, with new dependencies, that is, in the European Union and NATO?

On the other side: Estonia's experience as a colonial province of the Soviet Union was more severe than Hungary's as a vassal state. So much more severe that all of us who currently support Estonia's membership in the European Union and NATO do so upon careful consideration, very clearly, and based very significantly on real-life experience.

For us, this is of course a matter of security. As it is for Hungary. And even more. It is for us, for Estonia, even more poignantly than for Hungary, a matter of European indivisibility. A matter of indivisibility in which we become an organic component in an indivisible continent. During the past fifty years, Europe's eastern border has been shifted once, by Stalin, to the Elbe, and once, by Gorbachev, almost to Kamchatka under the banner of ''our common European home. ''Despite these shifts, no one has ever seriously questioned the fact that Hungary belongs in Europe. That the Baltic States belong in Europe has, however, even recently been challenged, at least surreptitiously. However, the Baltic States have together with Hungary been an organic part of Europe for one thousand and nine hundred and even more years. To surrender these states to extra-European structures would be to reach out Europe's hand and to concede to three of its fingers being chopped off. Europe would continue to survive with this traumatised hand. But as what? Such trauma would be morally more fatal than anything Europe could remember or fear.

In addition to the network of temporal, spatial and political co-ordinates, the moral axes, the meridians and intersecting points would be irreversibly confounded and destroyed. They, however, and in fact only they can support the hope of peoples and humanity in this age of globalisation. No matter what one does: democracy and freedom cannot be bought.

Thus, in the hope that an honest memory and efforts for advancement based on a spirit of partnership will guide us into the future along more favourable co-ordinates, I leave you, honoured audience, and myself with a question to think about and to keep us in line in our everyday lives: Have we perhaps already forgotten how the post-cold war or perhaps already the post-post-cold war era was created and what exactly it entails?

Part Two

This era is experiencing two trends which on the superficial level may seem contradictory. On the one hand, our world is becoming increasingly mosaic. The diversity of colours on the political map of today's world is the most convincing evidence of this development. The number of members states in the United Nations Organization is approaching two hundred. On the other hand, however, the processes of integration are just as powerful. The earth is covered by organisations, alliances, unions of all kinds, with innumerable overlaps.

These trends are in principle forces majeures. And our destiny, welfare and probably even survival depend on the ability of the nations of our world to conform to these general trends, to keep them more or less in balance and to check their manifestation in violent forms.

The world is integrating in all areas, and we together with it. We know and believe that this will bring both advantages and disadvantages.

It will guarantee security, will increase prosperity, but will leave a nagging doubt in our hearts. What will become of our lifestyle and language, of our two small islands in the great Indo-European ocean which surrounds us on all points of the compass? How can we remain true to ourselves in the midst of so many demanding friends? If the millennium of the European Union actually comes to pass, will we not lie dormant there for eternity?

To be honest, we have no choice. It is inevitable. But inevitable situations can be directed and corrected. Here we can support one another, assist, even defend one another. Estonia and Hungary have survival experience they can share.

We both know that without our own states, our peoples have no future.

At the same time, we must recognise that our states do not have a future outside of unions of states. Today's world is simply so, our corner of the world in particular. And if it is so, then our place is in the best possible union, in the best possible unions. In the best possible world. There are no doubt better unions, but the choice of worlds is limited.

History shows that all economic, political and military unions of states are, compared to the age of the states, relatively brief and unstable. If a union of states wants to last over time, historic experience shows that it has no other choice than to transform into a state, or at least into a state-like structure.

How to cope in such a state-like union, how to make use of its potential advantages while avoiding the disadvantages, this will be one of our common and most interesting concerns. A concern we can share and share alike.

In order to maintain the mosaic, we must, paradoxically, integrate. Indeed we can only speak of integration if the mosaic is preserved, otherwise we would speak of cultural destruction or assimilation. There are no older or younger brothers in the family of Finno-Ugric nations. All of our peoples are equally ancient. The latest theories assert that we are all native peoples of Europe, regardless of whether we have survived on this or the other side of the Ural Mountains. Some of us have simply lived in politically and historically more favourable conditions than others. Those Finno-Ugric nations who have achieved statehood can and must use their ability to resound the voices of our kindred peoples who have had so little exposure in Europe and to communicate their experiences. The inclusion of these peoples into European integration will equally enrich Germany, Hungary and Greece - it is in the interests of Europe as a whole. It will strengthen us all and, ultimately, humankind.

In our time, distances have been diminished. On foot of course, the distance between us remains the same, but computer networks allow us to converse with one another as if we lived in the same ancient tribal home. We must simply find a common language of communication since before, when we moved on foot, only neighbours were able to communicate, but today we are united in a common Finno-Ugric cyberspace.

Unfortunately, the great distances have meant that we do not understand one another's languages, despite the fact that they are related. Thus, we cannot get by in our common cyberspace in Hungarian, Finnish, Estonian or the Ostyak language, rather inevitably we must use English, the lingua franca of the computer world. We all must learn it, just as we must learn to shape the new Europe. For together we must shape a Europe in which the unique characteristics of all peoples are preserved, equally for the 15- million Hungarians as for the remaining 12 Livonians.

That Estonia wants to act as a catalyst for this type of an integration process is evident if only from the list of related events organised during this year: in April at the ''Internet in the Finno-Ugric Cyberspace'' seminar held in Tallinn, representatives from nine Finno-Ugric nations agreed to create a joint informatics working group; in July, a Finno-Ugric folklore festival will be held in locations throughout Estonia, not in a large stadium, rather closer to the people: in the villages, parishes and small towns; in the fall, Estonia will welcome young people representing the different Finno-Ugric peoples who will hold the congress of the Youth Association of Finno-Ugric Peoples.

Estonia is prepared to assume responsibility.

Part Three

Estonia's drive toward the European Union is a manifestation of its coming of age, of a need and desire to make a decision. The question is whether the European Union has grown accustomed to the new dimension. And whether or not it is ready to decide.

The new dimension is of course much more pleasant than that which existed for example in 1940 or 1944. The options are not only better, but there are more of them. It sometimes even seems that the massive growth of options, such as the multitude of possible scenarios for EU or NATO enlargement, tend to blur the greater picture and pose an increasing burden on the decision-makers.

On a human level, this is easy to understand. Freedom of choice is life's crowning glory, but the price for a life so crowned is rather high. Freedom of choice imposes an obligation to make decisions, and an obligation to execute them. And this, as every citizen and every politician knows, is a most difficult obligation. No wonder that the most common decision, the first instinctive decision of both states and men is usually the decision to procrastinate in deciding. An if a decision once taken can no longer be withdrawn, it is ever so natural that we at least try to delay the most difficult part of all, its actual execution.

This is where the moral imperative axis should bring the decision-makers to order: just as at some time in the future, a decision should be made here and now.

Mr. President, honoured guests,

Finally, and almost in conclusion, allow me to make one reference to classical geopolitical co-ordinates, which are usually referred to as eternal constants. How could they not. They allow us to explain expansion and reaction as well as stagnation, victories and conquests, competition for Lebensraum, invasions at times to the East, at time to the West. There are politicians today who try to play geopolitical games even where the geopolitical situation should not instil fear or helplessness, or a sense of failure in meeting the political or moral challenges of our time. Unfortunately this is true even where new premises and situations, even at seemingly outdated geopolitical co-ordinates, should give rise to a strong hope that from here on forward it should be possible to avoid repetition of the same old mistakes.

For this reason I would like together with you, dear colleagues and friends in this academic audience to be a confident optimist and to demand of those who hold in their hands the power to make the EU's pressing decisions and who bear the shiny swords and helmets in NATO: do not proceed blindly along the path of former compromises, because you were not the ones who had to pay their full price. I do not speak of money. Look at the efforts of our peoples. You will see evidence of our hard work, which should be the sole point of reference in today's world. Let the speed with which the reforming states find acceptance in the European Union and NATO be determined solely based on objective and individualized criteria. Regardless of how many there are and of their so-called geopolitical significance. Let us adhere to our agreements and present an uncompromising challenge to the empire of evil or, more accurately, to the shadow of its former self, which of its own will did not before nor would today relinquish its hold on any one of us.

If we in our globalising infovillage are nevertheless unable to come up with anything better then at least we could hold as a unifying moral co-ordinate in our hearts the steadfast meridian that I spoke of at the beginning of my speech; which, as before, extends from the Arctic Torneo river and the Observatory in Helsinki to the Danube, passing through Estonia through the reference point marked by the golden cross of St. Nicholas' Church in Tallinn.

To hold a clear position, to make clear statements and to exhibit a clear pattern of behaviour - this is the minimum right and duty of any free country or any free nation in working towards a brighter future for itself and others.

I thank you.

 

back | archive of speeches | main page

© 2001 Office of the President of the Republic
Phone: +372 631 6202 | Fax: +372 631 6250 | sekretar@vpk.ee
Reden Kõned Speeches Statements Interviews