Archive / Magazine / History / Prague 1968 / Interview | 20/08/2008

"The experiment came to a slow and sad end"

Rudi Dutschke in Prague, civil disobedience, mass emigration: Czech historian and reformer Jan Kren describes the events and ideas that moved Czechoslovakia in the spring and autumn of 1968.

euro|topics: On April 5, 1968, Alexander Dubček, the first secretary of the Czechoslovakian Communist Party, presented an action programme. Its goal: social but not political pluralism. At the time you were professor at the Party University in Prague. Why did you believe in "socialism with a human face"?

Because it was the most sweeping reform programme in the communist camp. It demanded not only the rehabilitation of condemned communists, for example, but also that of non-communists.

Jan Kren was born in 1930 in Prague, banned from exercising his profession between 1969 and 1990 and during that time worked at the Prague waterworks. He teaches Central European history at the Charles University in Prague.

Photo: Barbara Breuer

Not only that, it also considered compensating them. The original programme was short and could have been implemented quickly. The protracted negotiations with around 100 members of the reform commission were the first major mistake. The programme was only published after two months. Everything it contained had already been negotiated in public. In this way the reformers lost the initiative.

euro|topics: Was "Prague Spring" inspired by the 68er movement in the West?

Yes, Czechoslovakia strongly mirrored the Western movement. There were related reactions against the establishment – whether the Western or the Bolshevik one. There is even a book – if I remember correctly – dealing with the visit made by Daniel Cohn-Bendit and Rudi Dutschke to students in Prague. The major difference lay in the fact that the Czechs did not believe in revolutionary ideas. So the Western students considered the Czech students as "merely" reformers, while the Czechs tended to view them a little as crazy radicals.

euro|topics: There had already been liberalisations between 1963 and 1967…

Yes, above all because the divided Party was no longer able to lead society. Artists love to look back on this as a wonderful, creative time which manifested itself in a boom in Czech film production and an efflorescence of literature.

euro|topics: Dubček lifted censorship in February 1968. How did people react to the liberalisation?

Week for week the mood in the country expressed itself through different activities. Unofficial civic forums were formed, like the "Club of Committed Nonpartisans" for example, or an organisation for those persecuted and imprisoned in the 1950s. There was a platform for the renewal of social democracy. These activities slowly began to transgress the framework of the reforms "from above".

euro|topics: Was the pressure for reform limited to Prague?

No, in the summer of 1968 the provinces and the capital moved closer together. Typical here were the district Communist Party congresses, which almost without exception ended with reform advocates taking office.

euro|topics: In the night of August 20 1968, troops of the Soviet Union, Poland, Hungary and Bulgaria marched into Czechoslovakia. As a child you experienced the Nazi invasion of Prague. Was this a déja-vu?

Of course it was a shock. After 1945 the Czechoslovakians still saw the Soviets as liberators. And all at once the liberators were occupying their country. That put an end to sympathy for the Russians. And hope all but died that the system could be reformed.

euro|topics: After the invasion the leading reformers were supposed to sign the "Moscow Protocols", calling for an end to the reforms and agreeing to the stationing of Soviet troops [in Czechoslovakia]. Everyone except for Frantisek Kriegel, head of the National Front, signed the document. Was this a mistake?

Certainly, especially as it put them in a defensive position. On the other hand, as Soviet prisoners they were not free to act independently. But I believe the decisive swing was caused by the fact that the protocols did not stipulate any date for the withdrawal of the occupying troops. This had been the principle Czechoslovakian demand.

euro|topics: Although the government had called on people not to resort to military tactics, they did resist. How many victims did "Prague Spring" claim?

Most of them were young demonstrators shot by the Soviets. Around one hundred died. All of the victims are now known, and commemorative ceremonies are held for them.

euro|topics: In the first weeks of the occupation, Czechs and Slovaks attempted to confuse the Russians through acts of civil disobedience. Can you give some examples?

Popular resistance was colossal. It extended from Prague to the farthest-flung Slovakian village. People pointed sign posts in the wrong direction and hung posters on Russian provisions saying "Lenin wake up, Brezhnev has gone crazy". This civil resistance neutralised the huge occupying army for almost a year. The Soviets first had to find collaborators, only then were they able to crush the movement with brute force. The whole experiment came to a slow and sad end in August 1969. On the first anniversary of the Russian invasion, the number of demonstrators was just as large as those who were supposed to prevent the protests. So the repression was "home made".

euro|topics: You yourself had to resign your post as professor. How did you come to terms with that?

For the next 20 years I worked as a pump attendant at the Prague waterworks. Thirty-two people worked in my department – among them seven signatories of Charter 77. We were able to talk together and give each other support. For us it was a time of terrific inner freedom.

euro|topics: Up to 100,000 Czechs and Slovaks left the country after "Prague Spring". Why did you stay?

For me there was no question of leaving my home and family. And at the time we could never have guessed the occupation would last for 20 years.

euro|topics: In the Czech Republic the re-Sovietisation is cynically known as "normalisation"…

That was the regime's term, which was then adopted ironically by historians. At that time nothing was normal. After the invasion there was something you can only call "social mass deportation". Half a million people were not only excluded from the party but robbed of the opportunity to engage in any intellectual activity whatsoever. In this way Czechoslovakia completely missed out on the technological revolution, as well as other important developments of the 1970s and 80s.

euro|topics: How is "Prague Spring" interpreted in the Czech Republic today, 40 years on?
Things written in the media are pretty negative. The political right interprets the movement as nothing but a dispute among high-level communists. But things have changed in recent years because people have come to see that there was also democratic cohesion in society which had real ramifications in the artistic, academic and scientific communities.

The interview was conducted by Barbara Breuer, n-ost correspondent in Prague.

Further articles on the subject » History, » Czech Republic, » Slovakia
More from the press review on the subject » History, » Czech Republic, » Slovakia