Polands Solidarity Movement 1980 1989

SEM 416
As XXXX points out from the onset, the attendance of nonviolence is a daily effort. This is to say that nonviolence is not an automatic response, but rather a deliberate and considered course of action. There are numerous nonviolent movements that have been active in the past. In seeking to demonstrate that nonviolence is indeed achievable, it would be prudent to highlight two of these movements. The two movements that will be discussed in this text are: Czechoslovakia’s Velvet Revolution (1989) and Poland’s Solidarity Movement (1980-1989).
Poland’s Solidarity Movement (1980-1989)
It is important to note, from the onset, that the groundwork for Poland’s Solidarity movement was set in 1946 following the parliamentary electoral fraud perpetrated by the communists. This is more so the case taking into consideration the resulting civil resistance that went on until Solidarity become prominent – and the larger society found a way of embracing consolidation and coordinated efforts. In itself, Solidarity was founded in August 1980 (International Center on Nonviolent Conflict – ICNC, 2020). In essence, the new movement was firmly rooted in trade unionism. To a large extent, Solidarity was able to uncover inconsistencies being propagated by the regime at the time – especially in as far as the said regime’s worker-friendliness was concerned. Slowly, Solidarity was able to promote freedom of expression and encourage discourse on divergent perspectives. However, one key distinguishing factor an all the operations of Solidarity was the call for nonviolence (ICNC, 2020). From early on, the movement embraced the nonviolence principle and pursued a wide range of nonviolent approaches including, but not limited to, protests and strikes, slow-downs, distribution of underground publications on the cause, running of underground radio stations (i.e. Radio S), protest painting, etc. This nonviolent stance became the defining element of the movement and made it possible – in 1989 – for the transfer of power to be peaceful. Essentially, we could say that Poland is a successful democratic society today as a consequence of Solidarity to embrace a peaceful, as opposed to violent, course of action. Under the able leadership of Lech Walesa, Solidarity was able to facilitate the birth of Poland from a communist country to a democratic society having respect for the freedoms of the masses and promoting the wellbeing of all.
Several times, leaders of solidarity had their lives threatened – primarily through constant harassment and arbitrarily arrests – especially after the communist regime started fretting over the growing popularity of the movement that had already garnered official membership in excess of 10 million people (ICNC, 2020). However, all these measures were largely ineffective because Solidarity was an idea whose time had come. Although it was, from time to time, weakened by the communist regime’s oppressive hand, Solidarity forged on via the application of a wide range of tactics including underground organizing and the prompt replacement of detained leaders with other activists who were equally committed to the cause. With the problem posed by Solidarity and a deteriorating economic situation, the regime could not hold unto its hardline position for long. Towards the end of the decade, the communist government indicated its intention for negotiations and soon enough, an agreement was reached that allowed Poland to hold elections in 1989. All these achievements would not have been possible without the efforts and strategic maneuvers of the Solidarity movement. This is more so the case in as far as the embrace of a nonviolence philosophy is concerned.
To a large extent, the 1989 negotiations would not have taken place if Solidarity had from earlier on resorted to violence and war-like activities against the communist government. To be sure, casualties on both sides would have been high, and there are no guarantees that violent confrontations and the resulting bloodshed would have convinced the oppressive communist regime to permit free elections. Thus, we could say that the nonviolence philosophy of Solidarity created a conducive environment for constructive negotiations to take place. It is also important to note that the new government was able to hit the ground running as a consequence of the peaceful negotiations.
Czechoslovakia’s Velvet Revolution (1989)
This particular movement was led by the Civic Forum – a nonviolent coalition. In this case, it would be prudent to focus on the events following a peaceful student demonstration on the 17th of November, 1989. According to the ICNC (2020), this particular student demonstration was a commemorative undertaking marking 50 years since the murder, by Nazi occupation forces, of a student by the name Jan Opletal. In the words of ICNC (2020), after the official ceremony ended, protesters continued into downtown Prague toward the symbolic Wenceslas Square until confronted by riot police who began to beat them.” Soon enough, emotions reached fever pitch after a rumor spread that one of the students had been ‘martyred’ by government forces. A meeting was urgently organized by Václav Havel to deliberate on the unfolding events. Following the meeting, it was decided that a formation, known as the Civil Forum, would be created; with its key mandate being the organization of nonviolent public demonstrations as well as grassroots actions meant to pile pressure on the Communist party of Czechoslovakia to step down. To a large extent, Václav Havel was the embodiment of the teachings of Gandhi especially with regard to the need to denounce violence and embrace passive resistance. As Gandhi once observed, “the greater the spirit of passive resistance in us, the better men we will become” (XXXX, p. 105).
Thanks to the said demonstrations and strikes, specifically a 2-hour collective strike on the 27th of November, 1989, Communist Party officials finally embraced negotiations (ICNC, 2020). Indeed, as ICNC points out, “these swift developments, in turn, led to the resignation of the entire Politburo, the formation of a compromise government, and the regime’s resounding electoral defeat and creation of a democratic government.” It is instructive to note that all these efforts were nonviolent and were instead focused on enormous mass nonviolent civil resistance. One of the key strategies that protesters made use of in an attempt to register their defiance was rattling of keys in public. According to ICNC (2020), this was a symbolic action to signify that the end of the governing Communist Party of Czechoslovakia was nigh. Just as was the case with Poland’s Solidarity Movement, the move by Czechoslovakia’s Velvet Revolution to embrace nonviolent approaches paid heavy dividends. It also created a conducive environment for the creation of a compromise government – without necessarily crippling existing social and government functions.
Conclusion
In the final analysis, it should be noted that on the basis of the discussion above, violence is not the only way to make progress even in scenarios of civil disobedience and unrest. History has plenty of lessons to backup this particular claim. In Libya for instance, where the NATO-backed rebels were able to kick out the dictatorial Muammar Gaddafi through armed and violent means, peace and tranquility is yet to be achieved – close to a decade since Gaddafi was ousted. The country remains largely lawless and chaotic. The nonviolent approach adopted by Czechoslovakia’s Velvet Revolution (1989) and Poland’s Solidarity Movement (1980-1989) offers very important lessons in as far as the preservation of peace, wellbeing, and social tranquility is concerned. These examples indicate that violence is, almost always, not the best course of action. However, we ought to be aware of the fact that embracing a pacifist stance is not easy in a world that is preoccupied with fanning fires of war. Nicholas Murray Butler found this to be a rather difficult undertaking. At one point, he was committed to peace, while at another, he was supporting war. His dilemma indicated how difficult it was to “differentiate between individual loyalty to one's conscience and group loyalty to a national government” (Howlett, 1984).
References
Howlett, C.F. (1984). Nicholas Murray Butler's Crusade for a Warless World. The Wisconsin Magazine of History, 67(2), 99-120.
International Center on Nonviolent Conflict – ICNC (2020). Czechoslovakia’s Velvet Revolution (1989). Retrieved from https://www.nonviolent-conflict.org/czechoslovakias-velvet-revolution-1989/
International Center on Nonviolent Conflict – ICNC (2020, January 13). A Force More Powerful - English - Denmark / Poland / Chile (high definition) [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cM695veBSUU