Czech Foreign Minister discusses moving Roma to their own state, Czech President criticizes him
Remarks made recently by Czech Foreign Minister and TOP 09 chair Karel Schwarzenberg have caused an uproar. Yesterday Schwarzenberg told Czech PM Petr Nečas that refusing to sign the European Union’s pact on fiscal responsibility would damage the Czech Republic’s interests, and alleged the PM was “causing tension to show what a big champion he is.” The main opponent of the pact and of greater EU integration in general, Czech President Václav Klaus, took exception to the Foreign Minister’s remarks, saying he should not have chosen such harsh language. To make matters worse, while Nečas was attending complicated negotiations in Brussels, Schwarzenberg made a statement on the “Fakta Barbory Tachecí” program which Klaus believes has harmed the country’s reputation.
In the interview, Schwarzenberg responded to Tomio Okamura’s idea that Romani people should get their own state – so as to stop bothering people here – by saying the following:
“If a solution for evil could be found, it would be nice [Editors’ Note – the audio is not clear]. Of course where would this be, if Mr Okamura knows of a place in the world that could be voluntarily put forward for a viable state, it’s an interesting idea. However, such a place was known once – the Americans tried something similar in the 19th century, when they moved some of their slaves, blacks, because of their own bad conscience (which would suit us as well) and built the state of Liberia for them. There are difficulties with it to this day.”
TOP 09 has defended its chair. In a press release, the party claims Schwarzenberg meant his statement ironically.
“The minister may think he can say whatever he wants off the cuff in his cute Czech [Editor’s note: the minister has a very recognizable accent in his spoken Czech]. When asked whether he liked the statement by Tomio Okamura that a ‘final solution to the gypsy question’ should be undertaken and that a separate state should be created for these citizens, Mr Schwarzenberg replied: ‘If he [Okamura] could find a solution, it would be nice. If Mr Okamura knows of a place in the world that would be voluntarily put forward for a viable state, it’s an interesting idea’,” Klaus quoted from Schwarzenberg’s remarks in an interview for the daily Právo.
Klaus said no European politician should ever be forgiven for such a statement. “Under no circumstances can I forgive Mr Schwarzenberg his statement. This is why I am of the opinion that it is Mr Schwarzenberg who has harmed our reputation, not Prime Minister Nečas,” Klaus said.
In order for readers to make up their own minds, we are publishing below a transcript of selected sections of Bára Tachecí’s interviews with both Karel Schwarzenberg and Tomio Okamura:
“Fakta Barbory Tachecí” 30. 1. 2012
This is a transcript of the relevant section of Bára Tachecí’s interview with Karel Schwarzenberg. They both discuss eventual presidential candidates, specifically, entrepreneur Tomio Okamura:
Bára Tachecí (BT): What do you say to Tomio Okamura, he’s been brought up…
Karel Schwarzenberg (KS): … he’s more of a shooting star, who appears and then falls away… but I wouldn’t rule out that he too could be considered…
BT: I think Prime Minister Nečas used the term “straw man” – that straw men turn up. Would you be offended if someone called you that?
KS: I wouldn’t call Mr Okamura a straw man. He is someone who has built something. He has a business that is going the distance. He is someone, forgive me, he is no straw man. If he decides to seriously run, it will be interesting. To a certain extent it would naturally be a change in the Czech Republic if a person who is half-Japanese became president. I would have nothing against that. It would be an interesting shift in attitudes in the Czech Republic.
BT: His opinions haven’t surprised you?
KS: I haven’t taken note of his opinions yet. I noticed he has a pretty girlfriend, I noticed his travel agency, I noticed he crashed [Editors’ Note – the audio is not clear] a beautiful Aston Martin, which I have to say I sincerely envied him, but I have not noticed his opinions.
BT: The phrase “final solution to the gypsy question” has come up in relation to him, which is why I ask. It is Mr Okamura who recommends Romani people be given their own state so that they won’t, in quotes, “bother” us.
KS: If a solution for evil could be found, it would be nice [Editors’ Note – the audio is not clear]. Of course where would this be, if Mr Okamura knows of a place in the world that could be voluntarily put forward for a viable state, it’s an interesting idea. However, such a place was known once – the Americans tried something similar in the 19th century, when they moved some of their slaves, blacks, because of their own bad conscience (which would suit us as well) and built the state of Liberia for them. There are difficulties with it to this day.
BT: I also believe that Hitler’s men came up with that in 1939 before they came up with the gas chambers.
KS: No, they came up with the term “final solution”. As for their own state… they didn’t have one to offer them.
BT: No, no, they came up with the idea of deporting the Jews and then the gas chambers came along because they were cheaper.
KS: Well and exactly, mainly there would [Editors’ Note – the audio is not clear] have not been anywhere to go.
***
Interview by Bára Tachecí with entrepreneur Tomio Okamura, published by the daily Mf DNES
The following is an excerpt from an interview published in Mladá fronta DNES on 2 June 2011. A link to the video footage of this interview (Czech only) is here: http://zpravy.idnes.cz/cesi-jsou-vietnamci-romaci-i-zidi-a-nechci-nic-cistit-rika-okamura-phs-/domaci.aspx?c=A110601_171516_domaci_jw
Q: Do you know how to govern?
A: No. I don’t have that ambition and I don’t even know how to govern correctly.
Q: Then why did you write a book called “The Art of Governing” (Umění vládnout)?
A: I wrote down my vision. The book is about what to do so that abroad people will pat you on the back and say “Yes, you’re a small nation, but a clever, intelligent one.”
Q: Do you offer any new ideas of your own?
A: I dust off the old truths. Behave normally, decently and honestly – that’s the essence.
Q: The problem is that everyone understands decency differently. For example, the National Party (Národní strana) certainly thinks it behaves decently. So we should know how to distinguish between decency and extremism.
A: I describe that there. By the way, people like you should set an example for others and say what you think. A normal person will follow the example of famous, successful people, and when a leading figure has correctly configured moral values, then we will move forward.
Q: I agree. That’s why I say my opinions during all of my interviews and I will keep on doing that today. Why don’t you want to get into politics?
A: What would it bring me? An MP’s salary is CZK 60 000 gross, I would be much worse off. I also don’t need it as an “elevator”, to be famous.
Q: You say the main message of Japanese people to the world is the general truth that “Our value is not in what we have, but in what we give others.” It seems that what you have is more important to you.
A: It’s not.
Q: You have mentioned financial loss in all your interviews as the determining reason for why you don’t want to go into politics.
A: That’s true.
Q: So is what you have more important for you, or what you give to others?
A: That doesn’t have anything to do with politics.
Q: That’s the basis of politics.
A: You may be pushing me to want to go into politics, but I…
Q: You give the impression of knowing how to comment on anything. For example: “We write of the National Party that it is extremist, but what is it really? How is the opinion extreme that the Gypsies should found their own state and the Czech Republic should support their emigration to the country of their ancestors?”
A: I said that in the context of the emigration wave abroad, they decided themselves to go to Canada.
Q: No. You said it in the context of the [National Party] pamphlet entitled “Final Solution to the Gypsy Question.”
A: I see a synergy in this with the founding of the Jewish state, when the powers voted at the UN to create the Jewish state. It was for the Jews who wanted to emigrate – and that’s where I saw the synergy with the Roma wanting to emigrate to Canada. Why not facilitate it for them?
Q: Don’t you see an essential difference in that the Jews strove for the creation of their own state for years and asked for such support, while the Gypsies have no such ambition and are having it forced upon them from outside?
A: My last sentence in that article also says the Jews are much more ambitious.
Q: So once more: Do you see any difference between someone’s effort to establish their own state and forcing that idea on someone who has no such ambition?
A: Well, there is a difference. However, I just thought of that as one of the ways to facilitate it for them if they want to get out of here.
Q: From your blog I have understood that you don’t know why the National Party is considered extremist. Do you still not know?
A: I am not interested in that party, I don’t know it. It’s abstract to me.
Q: Yet you are asking the question of how exactly it is extremist, so it evidently does not seem extremist to you.
A: Well forgive me, if it was officially registered by the Czech Interior Ministry, it’s a normally permitted party.
Q: Yes. Like the NSDAP.
A: Just so. So that’s a question for the Interior Ministry, why…
Q: No, it’s a question for you, if you are thinking.
A: Well, forgive me but if it’s legal, then it seems in order to me and that’s enough for me.
Q: Once again: You know the NSDAP in Germany was a legal party? Was that enough?
A: Well it must have corresponded to the German laws.
Q: And that’s reassuring? Or should those people have thought about it more?
A: Well, most people agreed with it somehow. When you quoted me out of context, approximately 95 % of the readers agreed with my blog.
Q: So if 95 % of the readers tell me we have to gas the Jews, that’s supposed to mean something to me?
A: I’ll tell you what it means. We have a real problem here that is bothering 95 % of the country. The fact that I am sparking discussion of this topic is, on the contrary, a defense against xenophobia, because if we don’t name the problem and say what the solutions to it are… then real xenophobia will come.
Q: Those are two different things. We have problems with Romani people and for the time being we don’t know how to resolve them. However, I am now talking about extremists who have elaborated – or who don’t see anything wrong with – the idea of repatriating Romani people, in a publication entitled “The Final Solution to the Gypsy Question.” In this pamphlet, the ideas of which you don’t see anything wrong about, the author points out the effectiveness of resolving disputes between different ethnicities by repatriating those who “have no historical right to a given territory” – does that sound like a great idea to you?
A: No. That I reject.
Q: However, you don’t see anything extremist about it.
A: It’s true that I read it about three years ago, I don’t remember anymore.
Q: Shouldn’t it be the obligation of any decent person – at least according to my definition of decency – to look at a paper entitled “The Final Solution to the Gypsy Question” and say “I want to throw up?”
A: Well the title is horrifying. However, I’d rather look at the content.
Q: So you looked at it and you did not tell the nation that the title was horrifying, you did not say that you definitely disagree with it, the only thing you said on this topic was that it was not promoting anything ugly.
A: I don’t know what your aim is here, but my aim is to debate what 95 % of people here are interested in.
Q: My aim is to show how you think, just like any guest. Do you know the gas chambers started with the idea of repatriating the Jews? Whoever knows that is sensitive to proposals about repatriation and sentences of the sort that say someone doesn’t have an historical right to this territory.
A: I reject that, I already said I did. I don’t know what it’s like in your family, but my grandfather was taken from Bytřice pod Hostýnem as a non-communist rebel and imprisoned and tortured first by the Nazis and then by the Communists.
Q: Do you think your grandfather would applaud your opinions?
A: Well excuse me, but my blog was read by 80 000 readers and this is a discussion that needs to be developed. My solution is completely different, I am not interested in the National Party. Until I was 18 everyone here cursed me out as being everything possible – Chinese, Vietnamese – I was constantly harassed.
Q: That is exactly why I would expect you to think more about historical experience before you write something.
A: I do think. My blog is in order.
Q: How far is it from a voluntary project to a forced one if a project has a title like this?
A: That I don’t know, I am not a political scientist. Any sort of violent deportation, pogroms, gas chambers, turns my stomach – I naturally reject all of that, that should be clear.
Q: People for whom that is clear are able to see the initial signs that could lead to that.
A: I know. You are right about that. I agree with you on that.
Q: What do you think of Jewish people?
A: I completely love all of the nations of the world. Jewish people are a very ambitious nation and I like that about them.
Q: If there were enough people who didn’t like that about them, we could repatriate them to Israel, what do you say?
A: I like that about them. I have many Jewish friends. Gypsies too. Homosexuals too.
Q: We are really only differing on one small thing: I don’t feel the need to discuss this because I don’t even know who is who. One last thing: Would you be against the idea, if it were supported by enough people, of just proposing, for the time being, the transfer of Jewish people to Israel?
A: What are these weird questions? I don’t want to transfer anyone anywhere.
Q: No, I know. You want to offer the option of repatriation.
A: I never said that.
Q: I am quoting you here for the last time: “We write of the National Party that it is extremist, but what is it really? How is the opinion extreme that the Gypsies should found their own state and the Czech Republic should support their emigration to the country of their ancestors?”
A: I never considered that. I am addressing people who take more than they give in this state. It’s all the same if it’s a white homeless person or a Rom or a black person.
Q: Hitler had no problem getting into power because German elites said it was nothing to worry about, that he just wanted to clean up here a little.
A: That’s a crazy idea. I feel completely sick when I hear that. I don’t want to clean anything up. That’s just horrible! I just want everyone in our country to be satisfied. I just want to point out these problems and discuss them. Otherwise that racism and xenophobia really will come here!
Q: I have the feeling that racism and xenophobia have already arrived. For example, a person of your experience and qualities is not disturbed by these parties and their little papers. If the elites don’t say this is heinous, if instead they ask “How is the National Party extremist?”, “How is this little paper extremist, it’s just about voluntary repatriation?” – that’s how it starts! Do you understand that?
A: I get it and you’re right. This whole hour has been spent on one question.
Q: A completely fundamental one.
A: You know, I am sorry that even promoting the fact that we are Czech is passed off as extremism. People immediately say “Bohemia for the Czechs”. Be careful, in my book I write that Czechs today are Czechs – and Roma, and Slovaks, and Vietnamese. I write there that all of these are Czechs today! I even wrote the Jews there too.
