Cejiss

Large segments of American international relations scholarship have become lost in the political quagmires presented by the post-Cold War period; after all this is a time when former ‘enemies' have been ‘rehabilitated' and become US allies, while more traditional allies attempt to shed a US yoke that has become repressive and, in many ways, repulsive. In this more nuanced international political environment many US scholars have sought comfort in what is simple rather than what is truthful and intelligent. After all, to live in peaceful ignorance certainly trumps having to spend your days in thoughtful agony. However, it is a moral crime to publically whitewash the dynamic, unfolding trends in international relations so that the US's self-portrait of an ethical actor is proliferated. This problem is magnified when the perpetrators of such punditry capture sizable audiences, who cling to the nostalgia of US moral superiority.

Benny Morris is one such pundit.

Morris's commentary, ‘Old Europe,' (The National Interest, 11 November 2010) is a feeble attempt to morally castigate the Czech Republic (as part of ‘Old Europe') through the deployment of Bush-era logic and sentiments intertwined with issues related to the history of the Jewish population of Ceske Budejovice. In all its absurdity, Morris attempts to demonstrate that the disappearance of the Jewish population - at the hands of the Nazis - and its failure to regenerate were due to some of the more unfortunate episodes in the 16th century!

At the onset of his work Morris notes that ‘Southern Bohemia is at the heart of what George W. Bush called the ‘Old Europe.' With this in mind, readers are treated to a shallow glimpse of the role the Czech Republic played in the Cold War, are then bounced to the early relationship between Israel and (then) Czechoslovakia, and wind up in an unmarked Jewish cemetery just outside of Ceske Budejovice. After a disturbingly superficial account of Jewish life in Ceske Budejovice - omitting the vibrancy and prosperity of other Jewish communities throughout Czech lands - Morris concludes (one can almost see him pitifully shaking his head) with ‘Old Europe, as George W. said.'

Three clear errors are evidenced from the commencement: first, it was not Bush but rather Cheney who coined the infamous ‘Old and New Europe,' second, ‘Old Europe' referred to the US's traditional allies (re: France and Germany) while ‘New Europe' referred to the US's new European allies (re: the Czech Republic and Poland), and third, Bush is not a moral authority and using him as a moral compass is ridiculous.

Using this initial set of empirical errors, Morris sets out to undercut the Czech Republic. For what purpose, one can only guess since the work has no added-value, makes no argumentation and only glazes over important issues. Readers are thus invited to form their own opinions over Morris's intent and that is precisely what this brief rebuttal aims to do.

Europe is an old continent though it is bursting at the rim with new peoples who boast novel approaches to internal and international affairs. While it is true that history weighs heavy in Europe, it is precisely because of the wanton violence, ethnic cleansings and genocides which have occurred on this continent that such new approaches were needed, and indeed heralded at the end of the 20th century. Since those heady days of democratic revolution and reform there has been an unquenchable thirst among Europeans to construct a viable and prosperous European Union, to reconnect the artificial severing of Europe at the hands of the ‘super-powers' and generally to re-enter international political life with both a vision and confidence. Certainly, it has not been an easy task, internal bickering has brought EU members into one crisis after the next. Yet, on simple reflection, the members of the EU have anchored themselves into a framework of regional and international cooperation, international law, human rights and democracy and generally act to reinforce the international community through ‘civilian power.'

Alternatively, the US of 2010 is reminiscent of the US during the Cold War; seeking to maintain its international leverage through the deployment of force, its leading political personalities (particularly in the Republican Party) deploy the language and logic of simplicity because they (wrongly) believe that their own body-politique could not handle the current political realities. At the same time, the US is internally racked by endemic ethnic tensions, racism, xenophobia, violence and a myopic view of universal ‘good' versus ‘evil.'

Within the bubbling chasm that is the current US, it is right to ask whether Morris, and his counterparts, are symptoms of a failing US or its main cause; after all they are charged with informing the wider US public and are responsible for shaping the opinions and motivations for the generation on the rise. Instead of looking out across the Atlantic for solace - from its own warped present - wrapped in Czech history, perhaps increased introspection in the US would now be in order.

13 December 2010