Romanian Exiles During the Most-Favored-Nation Period, 1974-1988 ______
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
COLD WARRIORS IN THE AGE OF DÉTENTE AND DIFFERENTIATION: ROMANIAN EXILES DURING THE MOST-FAVORED-NATION PERIOD, 1974-1988 ____________________________________ A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, Fullerton ____________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in History ____________________________________ By Maryam Morsali Sullivan Thesis Committee Approval: Robert McLain, Department of History, Chair Cora Granata, Department of History Bogdan Suceava, Department of Mathematics Spring Semester, 2017 ABSTRACT Throughout modern history, groups of people have emigrated without the ability to return home because of the regime in power. While living in exile, they form or join new communities. They also work to determine their role and relation to their host and home countries. This study focuses on the activities and culture of Romanian exiles in the West from 1974 to 1988. These were the years that the United States granted Most- Favored-Nation status to Nicolae Ceaușescu’s Romania. During this time, American foreign policy ranged from détente to differentiation. The culture of Romanian exiles during the Cold War developed into working to combat communism and lessen Romanian suffering, as well as serving as the voice of and preserving democratic Romania. Exiles never gave up hope that communism could be overthrown. When it became evident that their political activities could not achieve regime change, a group of Romanian exiles decided to diversify their goals. This included focusing on humanitarian aid and preserving Romanian democratic traditions. They allied with the neoconservative wing of the U.S. Congress that originated in the Democratic Party to focus more on humanitarian victories, raise awareness in the West of what they considered to be the truth about Romania, and find means to provide a threat to or weaken Ceaușescu. Exile groups were most successful in their advocacy for individuals and in providing an alternative viewpoint in the Western media. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............................................................................................. iv COLD WARRIORS IN THE AGE OF DÉTENTE AND DIFFERENTIATION: ROMANIAN EXILES DURING THE MOST-FAVORED-NATION PERIOD, 1974-1988 ...................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1 Human Rights in Romania and Relations between Romania and the West ......... 11 Romanian Exile Culture in the United States and Western Europe ..................... 54 Radio Free Europe and the Romanian Service ..................................................... 103 Conclusion ............................................................................................................ 125 BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................................................................................................... 127 iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would first like to thank the Staff at the Hoover Institution Library and Archives at Stanford University. Their assistance in obtaining archival materials made this project possible. I would also like to thank my parents, Bijan, and Karen Morsali, for their encouragement of my academic goals. Finally, I want to express my gratitude to my husband, John Sullivan, for all of his encouragement and support throughout the research and writing process. This project would not have been possible without you. My interest in Romanian history and culture developed after travelling there in 2008 and 2010. When I began this academic program, I decided that I wanted to explore this interest through my research. After examining the collection of exile papers at the Hoover Institution Library and Archives, I discovered that I personally related to my research subjects because of my family history. My father immigrated to the United States from Iran in the 1970s and did not return after the Iranian Revolution in 1979. Additionally, my family had strong military connections to the overthrown Shah’s regime. Multiple family members lost their high status and some were lucky to survive the revolution. The Romanian exile attitudes towards Ceaușescu discussed in this thesis are similar to those of my family toward the current repressive Iranian regime. While writing this thesis, I read an interview with Iranian dissident and exile Shirin Ebadi where she declared, “While living in exile I have become the loudspeaker iv for the people of Iran. I am the voice of the people in Iran whose voices are silent and whose demands cannot be heard by the rest of the world.”1 Ebadi’s words encapsulate the exile experience for many Iranians as well as the Romanians discussed in this thesis. 1Bryan Schatz, “Iran’s Nobel Peace Laureate Speaks From Exile.” MotherJones.com, February 29, 2016, http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/02/shirin-ebadi-interview-iran-human-rights-election (accessed July 20, 2016). v 1 INTRODUCTION As Romanians we wish to re-state our belief in the free institutions which made us choose to live in this country in the first place, and to re-dedicate ourselves to the ideal of a democratic Romania where dignity of man will once again prevail. Ion Raţiu1 Throughout modern history, groups of people have emigrated without the ability to return home because of the regime in power. While living in exile, they form or join new communities. They also work to determine their role and relation to their host and home countries. The term “exile” is defined in this work as persons experiencing a prolonged forced or voluntary separation from their country out of fear of persecution. This project will provide an analysis of the activities of Romanian exiles in the U.S. and Europe during the Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) period from 1974 to 1988. Their shared experiences developed into an exile culture that revolved around politics, monitoring Western media, and humanitarian aid. It will also analyze their relationship with Romania and the neoconservative wing of the U.S. Congress. This relationship existed within the context of the disparities between the rhetoric of the United States towards communism and human rights and its actions in regards to Romania. The relationship between Romanian exiles and dissidents to their home and host countries and among themselves is essential to understanding the role that their communities played. What do we know about Romanian exiles in the later period of communism? How did 1 Letter from Ion Raţiu to Harold Wilson June 12, 1975, Georges de Serdici Papers, Box 10, Folder 8, Hoover Institution Archives. 2 their precarious place in the world, never fully abandoning their home country, but not fully embracing their host country, shape their beliefs, thoughts, and activities? What kind of shared culture did they develop and how can this help us understand the effect of exile on people’s beliefs and actions. What impact or influence did they have? What allies did they have and what obstacles existed? Answering these questions will help gain additional understanding and insight into the effects of exile. There are a number of historical studies, both pre-and post-1989, that deal with the Nicolae Ceaușescu regime. They particularly deal with human rights abuses, abuses of power, his megalomania and personality cult, and relations with the United States, Soviet Union, and the Warsaw Pact.2 However, the characterizations of Ceaușescu’s regime in these works are fairly standardized, focusing on the culture of fear that revolved around the secret police, the Securitate.3 Most works on Ceaușescu’s Romania include discussions of his attempts at economic and policymaking independence from the Soviet Union, as well as how the special economic and diplomatic relationship between Romania and the U.S. developed.4 However, these works are not exhaustive on the topic and rarely focus on exiles or neoconservatives. 2Some important works include Dennis Deletant, Ceaușescu and the Securitate Coercion and Dissent in Romania 1965-1989 (Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, 1995); Deletant, Romania Under Communist Rule (Iasi: Center for Romanian Studies, 1999); Vladimir Tismaneanu, Stalinism for all Seasons: A Political History of Romania Communism (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003); Gail Kligman, The Politics of Duplicity: Controlling Reproduction in Ceaușescu’s Romania (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1998); Katherine Verdery National Ideology Under Socialism: Identity and Cultural Politics in Ceaușescu’s Romania (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991); and Mary Ellen Fischer, Nicolae Ceaușescu: A Study in Political Leadership (Boulder: L. Rienner Publishers, 1989). 3They specifically discuss systemization, the natal policy, rationing and shortages of food, heat, and electricity. In addition, they commonly use terms such as “terror,” “neo-Stalinism,” and “despair.” 4Roger Kirk and Mircea Raceanu, Romania vs. the United States: Diplomacy of the Absurd, 1985-1989 (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1994). Kirk and Raceanu wrote this monograph based on their own experiences as diplomats. They also produced original research on the topic to enhance their recollections. For an exploration of the effects of Ceaușescu’s foreign policy see