by Sandy » Fri Sep 10, 2004 9:41 am
I'd expect Walesa to say some kind words about Reagan on the occasion of his death. Poland is somewhat of a democracy politically, though it has more of a socialist economy, and still receives foreign aid from the US. Why would he put that at risk by pointing out that he practically had to beg for financial help because his movement was a labor union and Reagan was reluctant to support it, lest some of the money wind up benefitting the workers, or that the country would be run by organized labor when it was free from communism? Check the record, and you'll find that Reagan's stream of supportive words and belligerent language against the Soviet Union wasn't backed up by money until Solidarity's takeover of the Polish government was an accomplished fact. Even then, it was a Democrat, Texas Congressman Jim Wright, who spearheaded the effort to get Congress to appropriate the aid. You'd think that such an important strategic position would be deserving of significant financial support. Compare our aid to Poland with our aid to Israel. Enough said.
The economy of the Soviet Union was bound to deteriorate over time. The communist economic system took over a country that was still practically feudal under the Czar and never had the resources to build the kind of economy that could continuously support the military machine that Stalin and his successors built. World War II drained the bulk of resources that were taken from the people originally, and the nuclear arms race sucked the rest of the remaining resources dry. With constantly declining productivity, the shrinking resources got to the point where the Soviet Union was no longer able to prop up the economies of its satellite countries. Their grip loosened, first on Hungary and Czechoslovakia (during the Carter administration), then slowly on all of the countries. It took a while for the realization of this to be realized by the various anti-communist groups. Solidarity pushed against the wall of the rotten barn, to test its strength, found the planks rotted, and pushed harder. When did Reagan send troops to help as the Polish workers battled in the streets of Warsaw? I guess being a cheerleader in Washington was better than nothing. The French sent more money and equipment.
As to Afghanistan, had Reagan provided the "freedom fighters" with real assistance, they would not have turned to Osama Bin Laden in desperation. Even when they were "freedom fighters" they were still Taliban, and still held their restrictive fundamentalist Muslim views. If your line of reasoning, and interpretation of events is correct, then you must give Reagan credit for putting the Taliban regime in power in Afghanistan. The war in Afghanistan was a clear sign that the Soviet Union did not have the resources to sustain its reach. That was a signal to advisors in his administration to push his rhetoric, and make it appear that he was the one who was responsible for bringing it down.