1. Prague Spring

1.
Prague Spring

Josef Smrkovský, What Lies Ahead (February 9, 1968)

In the immediate aftermath of World War II, the Soviet Union created a buffer of satellite states in eastern Europe, including Czechoslovakia. By 1957, when the presidency there passed to Antonín Novotný (1904–1975), a politician committed to communist unity with the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia had become an authoritarian state with collectivized property and suppressed civil liberties. However, a group led by Josef Smrkovský (1911–1974) and Alexander Dubcek (1921–1992) calling for more political and social openness secretly gathered strength in the highest ranks of the Czechoslovakian Communist Party. In January 1968, Dubcek succeeded Novotný as the head of the party, and he initiated a broad range of reforms, including free speech, an independent press, the right to assemble, and religious freedom. The following newspaper article excerpt, written by Smrkovský a month after Dubcek gained power, became the new government’s most important manifesto. In it, Smrkovský emphasized a break with the “old” party, while calling for all the people of Czechoslovakia to build a “new,” liberal Communist Party. The reforms were not to last. In August 1968, Soviet dominance returned after Soviet and Warsaw Pact troops invaded Czechoslovakia, killed more than one hundred people, and arrested Dubcek and his allies.

From Jaromir Navrátil, ed., The Prague Spring 1968: A National Security Archive Documents Reader (New York: Central European Press, 1998), 45–50.

On the Conclusions of the January Plenum of the CPCz CC1

The questions that the Central Committee of the party considered and resolved in December and January have set the entire party in motion, and the public at large has been paying great attention to them. This is so even though we failed to ensure the prompt and sufficient release of information. We must put this right, and that is precisely what we are doing, since there must be no discrepancy between our statements of Leninist principles and democratic traditions, on the one hand, and our future practical activities, on the other.

We can already say that in general the last Central Committee session has met with a favorable response in politically active sections of society. As more information has become available, discussions have been gaining momentum, and this in turn has generated greater enthusiasm for political activity. Yet even sincere persons who in the past have often been disappointed still show signs of skepticism. Old practices are still embedded in the activities of many of our organs and in the minds of people working in them. This creates doubts and insecurity. People are demanding guarantees. . . .

A Common Republic

Still, the common interest in truly maintaining the republic’s internal unity demands that we rely on proven traditions, stemming from the joint anti-fascist liberation struggle, and that we come to grips with the issue of our relations in the interest of a modern socialist community. . . . For the first time in the history of the CPCz, a Slovak communist has been placed at the helm of the party. Cde. Dubcek has become first secretary as an honest and experienced communist. At the CPCz CC session it was not at all a question of a “power seizure by the Slovaks” as we sometimes hear because of a lack of information in Czech circles.

Confidence in the Intelligentsia

By the same token, no one has threatened the working-class nature of the party. Those who spoke in the discussion could not be divided into intellectuals and workers, as is claimed erroneously in certain quarters. The open and passionate debate included intellectuals as well as workers and peasants, who were motivated by the same sincere concern for the cause of the republic, the interests of the people, and the improvement and consolidation of socialism. As a workers’ official, which I consider myself to be, this is something I wish to emphasize. . . . The present era of the scientific-technical revolution—in which, unfortunately, we are badly lagging behind—demands more than ever that the creative forces of the working class, the peasantry, and the intelligentsia combine their efforts. . . .

Even further from the truth is the suggestion that what happened at the recent sessions of the CPCz CC was no more than a personal quarrel and a rotation of individuals. Of course, no one finds it easy to set aside his personal biases, not even at sessions of the party’s Central Committee. Nevertheless, the personnel changes were in fact motivated by considerations that are of far greater urgency and importance to the party: the imperative to remove the obstacles that for some time have been obstructing the party’s progressive efforts, and the need to remove everything . . . that inhibits the activation of all healthy forces in the party and among the people. . . . It is also essential to eliminate everything that has been distorting socialism, damaging people’s spirits, causing pain, and depriving people of their faith and enthusiasm. This means we must do whatever is necessary to rehabilitate communists and other citizens who were unjustly sentenced in political trials so that we, as communists, can look ourselves in the face without shame. . . .

The CC session attempted to find the cause of the passivity and indifference in our country, things which we can no longer conceal. There is a conviction growing that everything we have achieved in transforming the structure of the society will facilitate—indeed will absolutely necessitate—a basic change of course. Such a change must be aimed at the democratization of the party and the society as a whole, and must be brought about consistently and honestly; it also must be backed by realistic guarantees that are understood by the majority to ensure that it will not be undermined by hedging and reservations. . . .

. . . What, then, lies ahead? We shall find no ready-made solutions. It is up to us, both Czechs and Slovaks, to launch out courageously into unexplored territory and search for a Czechoslovak road to socialism. . . .

The Example of the Central Committee

The first task is to inform the party, the whole party, of the content of the discussion at the CC session. . . . Scope must be given to a sincere and frank exchange of views from top to bottom, with priority to be given to the cogency of the arguments rather than to the power of the voice or the office. Priority also will be given to action instead of to indifference and passive submission. All truly progressive and responsible trends must be given a chance, and their chance must be given boldly and judiciously, sooner rather than later.

No mistake would be greater than to start carrying out these tasks on the basis of obsolete procedures, in the form of a one-off campaign that would, as usual, pay lip-service and then wither and die a few months later. . . .

The whole set of tasks and problems that are accumulating today before us can best be characterized as a steady process of democratization within both the party and the state. This process is the main precondition for a truly mature and thus voluntary form of discipline, without which the party would lose its capacity to act. Although we must cure and revive the whole party organism, we cannot do so through some “back-door” method. Nor can we compensate by relying on even the most hard-working apparatus. The entire party and each of its members must be convinced that the party as a whole is responsible not only for the implementation of tasks, but also for their conceptualization—that is, for the formulation of party policy, in which each communist must participate so that they can then regard it as their very own.

No doubt, we must “clear the table”—a phrase one often hears among comrades nowadays—but this must be done peacefully and in a businesslike manner so that we can prudently return to our former work and can reaffirm and develop whatever has been successful in the past, while rectifying shortcomings and mistakes in a just and sincere manner. Let us give to the past what it deserves—truth, purity, and justice. Let us do this without further delay and without scandals and recriminations, and let us do it consistently so we can then fully concentrate on what has always been the main interest of all communists: the future. . . .

The Position of the Party

. . . Let us not have any illusions. Nothing will happen on its own, without a struggle, or without some effort. Nothing will fall into our laps, and no one should expect charitable donations. There must be a sense of responsibility both “at the top” and “at the bottom.”

People have emerged from various quarters who talk about a shake-up and turbulence; more such people will emerge, and the talk will continue. This eventful session, where people spoke frankly, openly, courageously, critically, and self-critically, may appear turbulent to some. But there are different types of turbulence. I think it will be a good thing if the December and January plenary sessions bring a real shake-up—a shake-up that is beneficial in releasing and reviving new and fresh forces that can move our society and our socialist republic forward into a new phase. All this is fully within the power of the party and within the power of our 1.5 million communists, who can count on the total help and support of broad masses of the population who want the same things that we do.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

  1. Why do you think Smrkovský devoted so much of his newspaper article to dispelling the skepticism, doubt, and insecurity of his readers?

    Question

    /boSvwOIv4al/+Gaoj/hylzVbi/Nzkzh6jtOXZLNB29PWc7b8i+XKXmgge98X2eQxq+LGTZlW3POXkaYQJi18DBhgDo0SasrWEREoJg7P4aXSpWyIuXJnirmUSNOK3vewELGTfJoO0WBKI+53lanyxMK749kdk7cXmOE/kD77hqJq7nODkqXT5cURFE1hwvfOidAsUcQrWA30r2Q8NaG5GsaZGJY+3WJMc+MpdoxtIX5j5M9
    Why do you think Smrkovský devoted so much of his newspaper article to dispelling the skepticism, doubt, and insecurity of his readers?
  2. How did the practices of the Czechoslovakian Communist Party compare to the new proposals?

    Question

    +x16KHQFfgM55pfiOnP8n6dbY5MSr9Na6dUa+QqLLDk7BvfBpDG3SN2h6egGPdVgkY9EOvOQBJ309pmx48vJy7VEoAgdLHmF8N9LEk1zZShYAP7ZysNEuYodByuMMLyJZs0ERwyLKFhzGGtzyq+YMBPm/09SjSjf6Hacr3NlvUwZa9uB
    How did the practices of the Czechoslovakian Communist Party compare to the new proposals?
  3. How do you think this article was received when it was first published? What aspects do you think were most controversial then, and what aspects seem most revolutionary to you today?

    Question

    o4e4sPGGFFKza44cliayuyVngoZQj+zK7jzlleepEM6kd65VNcNUN3m44EGvQBv+znhfYhgFv5r09J3rGPkRMjMnoAg2Cm1je0WSZxZRL0wUWZekJBv2Y3hv9W+Kx8utF9ynwkPyKwUpRbFN1x1IDYnez49hXVzMTXNkzDxq5oTZ3y+g9Jr9tu8PkEDsSF9OBgYcvqsfoLeUYY0a7lUSRZVF6//tX6oLMGQvszt7lsCh8qBIPGKuzbXwZUWbgm4TJ8xqBPaGLU2mCNQyMDOOrPXyUq+e+ZmDXuisHR7Uxio=
    How do you think this article was received when it was first published? What aspects do you think were most controversial then, and what aspects seem most revolutionary to you today?