The threat during the Cold War was not just communist ideology, but imperialism. Controversial at the time, that principle was highlighted in Public Law 86-90, a joint resolution of Congress passed in 1959. It highlighted the plight of those languishing in what was later called the evil empire, and “authorized and requested” the president to proclaim the third full week in July as “Captive Nations Week”, until such time as “freedom and independence shall have been achieved for all the captive nations of the world.”
The captive nations were initially defined as “Poland, Hungary, Lithuania, Ukraine, Czechoslovakia, Latvia, Estonia, White Ruthenia, Rumania, East Germany, Bulgaria, mainland China, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, North Korea, Albania, Idel-Ural, Tibet, Cossackia, Turkestan, North Viet-Nam, and others.” Admittedly, the initial list was an odd one (what’s Cossackia?). But it worked.
The story behind the resolution and its aftermath is told in a new book, “Unyielding Resolve” by its instigator, Lev Dobriansky, Another story is how critics, sometimes helped by the KGB, heard echoes of Nazi-led wartime efforts to resist the Red Army’s advance westwards, and tried to tar the captive nations campaigners as war criminals, and as supporters of fascist death squads in Latin America. The Cold War was never as simple as it seems in retrospect. Lobbyists for post-1991 Russia said talk of “captive nations” was an anachronism. Look how that turned out.
The Russian foreign ministry now explicitly praises the Soviet Union’s annexation in 1940 of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, and decries their progress since 1991. The Turkic and Finno-Ugric peoples briefly represented by the Idel-Ural proto-state in 1918 still languish under Russian linguistic and cultural chauvinism. Chinese Communist Party (CCP) repression in Turkestan (home to the Uighurs) and Tibet is far harsher than it was in 1959. Ukraine is fighting for its survival against the old colonial hegemon.
Yet commemoration this year was, to put it mildly, patchy. The Victims of Communism Foundation marked the week’s start with an event focusing on the dismantling of the Chinese empire. But where was the White House? Donald Trump’s first administration marked the event punctually each year with a proclamation on the preceding Friday. In 2017, it quoted President Reagan’s words from 1983, that America is a “shining city upon a hill” with a duty to “shine its beacon light on freedom-loving people around the world.” In 2018, it quoted him again: “Free people, if they are to remain free, must defend the liberty of others.” In 2019, it denounced “tyrannical and coercive governments”. In 2020, it denounced the CCP, blaming it for the COVID-19 global pandemic, and for snuffing out freedom in Hong Kong, a “bastion of liberty.”
But this year, nothing. On Thursday, I began making a fuss and encouraging others to do the same. A text, it seemed, had been prepared, but was awaiting signature. I asked the White House press office about the delay: no answer. More messages, including to friends who work for the president. At lunchtime on Friday (a week late by past standards), the proclamation was finally issued, “advancing a new era of peace where freedom is cherished, sovereignty is respected, and every nation can live without fear of tyranny or oppression.”
The annual proclamations always have a topical twist and reflect the administration’s priorities. This year’s was perhaps not the White House wordsmiths’ finest effort. It mischaracterizes Captive Nations Week’s origins as a response to the“emerging” threat of communism in 1959 (ten years out of date). It contained no mention of Ukraine’s struggle for freedom. But campaigners are just glad that it was issued at all.
Europe’s Edge is CEPA’s online journal covering critical topics on the foreign policy docket across Europe and North America. All opinions expressed on Europe’s Edge are those of the author alone and may not represent those of the institutions they represent or the Center for European Policy Analysis. CEPA maintains a strict intellectual independence policy across all its projects and publications.
