VITAL SIGNSrnRELIGIONrnA Christian Critiquernof AmericanrnForeign Policyrnby Jean-Marc BerthoudrnMy last (and only other) visit to thernUnited States was early in 1986. Irnwas visiting the Capitol at the invitationrnof a friend who, at the time, was workingrnfor a Republican member of the Senate.rnIt was on the day of President Reagan’srnState of the Union Address, hi the silencernand solitude of this huge building,rnI experienced a feeling of awe which Irnshall never forget. When in Versailles orrnin Paris, among the palaces of Genoa orrnwalking down Whitehall toward Parliament,rnone has a vivid sensation of thernpower which went forth from these greatrnbuildings. But what one senses are thernvestiges of power, not its reality, hi thosernsilent spaces of the Capitol, I was overwhelmedrnby the presence of a very realrnpower. And I said to myself “I stand herernin the seat of the mightiest power thisrnearth has seen. Woe betide the nations ofrnthe world when such a power falls intornevil hands.”rnThat same week, I had arranged arnmeeting with a personal advisor to thernPresident on European and Soviet affairs.rnI wanted to share with him —and,rnthrough him, with the President —myrndismay at the extraordinary cordialityrnRonald Reagan had displayed towardrnPresident Mikhail Corbachev of tiie SovietrnUnion during their meeting inrnCeneva early in December of the previousrnyear. Such warmth contrasted withrnReagan’s recent public denunciation ofrnthe “Evil Empire.” I thought that suchrneffusions could only weaken the Westernrnperception of the great danger that thernSoviet Empire represented. Wlien suppingrnwith the devil, goes the Englishrnproverb, use a long spoon.rnOn that cold morning in Februaryrn1986,1 shared such tiioughts with the advisor.rnHe listened in silence, then strodernacross his office and took a document outrnof a cabinet. “Look at this,” he said. “Irngave exactiy the same advice to the Presidentrnbefore he went to Europe. He paidrnnot the slightest attention to my recommendations.”rnThese anecdotes illustrate the greatrndistance which lay between Reagan’srnrhetoric and the underlying political rcalitvrnof cordial fraternization. Wliat reallyrnmattered, of course, was the realpolitik,rnnot the rhetoric. The events of the nextrnfew years were to show that the internationalrnpolitical scene had already radicallyrnchanged.rnWhen Reagan was verbally attackingrnthe Soviet Union, the C’old War had virtuallyrnended. East and West, communismrnand capitalism had struck a secretrnbargain. Since the early 60’s, Leninistrnand Stalinist confrontation with the capitalistrnblock had been replaced by thernGramseian revolutionary strategy ofrnpenetration, infiltration, seduction, andrndomination so well described and propheticallyrnanalyzed in the 60’s and 70’srnby Anatoli Colitsyn.rnFrom the balance of two hostilernblocks, the leaders of the world werernmoving in the direction of a joint directoraternof world affairs, which would unifyrnthe planet under a single atheistic, .socialist,rnand pantheistic government. Fromrnthe communist perspective, this reorientationrntook on the names of Eurocommunismrn(in Italy); the Prague Spring (inrnCzechoslovakia); communism with arnhuman face (all over); and finally, therncoup de grace, perestroika and glasnost.rnIn the West, tiie major turning pointrnwas 1968, when all the vital institutions ofrnWestern soeietv—the media, the universities,rnthe major churches, the judiciary,rnthe educational organizations, etc.—rnwere penetrated by Gramseian methodsrnof cultural revolution. The results havernbeen spectacular. It is instructive to drawuprna short list of this New Class, this universalrnnomenclatura: Prodi, Solanas,rnJospin, Blair, Schroeder, Mandela, Mbeki,rnand last, but not least. President WilliamrnJefferson Clinton. The convergencernof E.ast and West was symbolizedrnbv diat extraordinary display of Russianrncommunist flags over Washington at thernend of riie Reagan era. Tlie new form ofrninternational communism had takenrnover the levers of command. F.cologistsrnand pacifists (the German Greens, for example)rncould now, without a qualm, rainrndeath and destruction on the Balkans becausernthey held the reins of power. Forrntheir purpose, in the end, was not ecologicalrnstability or the promotion of peace,rnbut a new revolutionar)’ agenda. And thernmaintenance (and exercise) of the mostrnbrutal power was no obstacle in advancingrnsuch aims.rnCommunism, unlike fascism or Nazism,rnis not a national phenomenon, butrna long-term international enterprise. Mterrncommunism totally exhausted the humanrnresources of Russia, the revolutionrnnimbly transferred to a relatively hcaltlnrnorganism: the United States of America.rnWashington replaced Moscow as therncenter of world revolution. This, itrnwould seem to mc, is one of the basicrnlessons we can draw from the Clintonrnera.rnWhat else explains why such men asrnAugusto Pinochet and Helmut Kohlrnhave become the objects of judicial persecution?rnWhy not attack left-wing figuresrnwho, by their utopian ideolog)’, arcrnfar more liable to become political killersrnor candidates for corruption? The answerrnis simple. The socialist axe now beingrnwielded by the governments of thernWest has fallen into the hands of ourrnnew-style revolutionaries. And such menrnare determined to exact revenge on menrnwho, in various ways, destroyed the communistrnrevolution. One of the reasonsrnYugo.slavia has been subjected to such astonishingrndisinformation, calumny, andrnbrutality in recent years is the simple fiietrnthat this nation had (under Tito) committedrnan unforgivable crime: It had escapedrnthe domination of the Comintern.rnTo accuse a person or a nation of beingrn”communist” or “Marxisf’ bears littlernopprobrium. If one wants to demonize arnnation or a political adversary, the currentrngambit is to identif}’ him witii I litler,rnwith genocide, or with diverse crimesrnagainst the human race. This has obviouslyrnbeen the case with Jorg Haider, thernleader of the Austrian Patriotic FreedomrnParty, whose political program incUides arnvibrant opposition to the anti-patrioticrnbureaucratic socialism of the EuropeanrnUnion. No one would have batted anrneyelid if he had been called a communistrn42/CHRONICLESrnrnrn