Comunidad de los Rumanos en Espagna, Madrid, 1973

   At first, through the media of countries belonging to the communist block, and later on directly, the Soviet Union advanced its project for a conference on European Security from wich she expects considerable benefits. The following are the most important:

   - the homologation of the european status quo by an international legal document signed by all european countries and by the United States;
   - the consolidation of the soviet domination over Eastern Europe and the instauration of the "Brezhnev doctrine";
   - the ascertainment of the political stability in the West in view of a possible but more or less open conflict with communist China;
   - the elimination of the United States army from the defense of Europe since such presence creates an obstacle to the arrogant plans of the soviet expansion and, finally;
   - the reinforcement, the sanity and the developing of the soviet economy with the assistance of Western capital and technology to the effect of building the grounds for new assaults against the free world.

   According to proposals already advanced, the participating nations will not come to the Conference as members tied to one or the other existing blocks: they will be apparently free to adopt a political position of their choice and without taking in account confronting coalitions or ideologies. Nevertheless, the Soviet Union is already prepared to become the conference promoter. To reach this goal, the Soviet Union -while offering simultaneous abolition of NATO and Warshaw Treaties- lays out a network of bilateral agreements between communist countries. The agreements clauses and mutual obligations of military and political assistance are however identical to those prescribed by the Warshaw Treaty. Thus, in spite of -freedom for each country to adopt a position of its choice-, the communist block at the Conference table will be united while the Western nations -preoccupied by a variety of problems- will be desunited and even antagonistic, lacking of a joint position well prepared in advance. Should this Conference adopt the dissolution of the two treaties, the American Forces stationed in Europe will be compelled to withdraw, while the Soviet Army will remain the heart of the continent.
   In this way, and long before coming to the Conference, by the sole opening project, the Soviet Union will insure for itsself a considerable advantage: the confirmation by the participants of the Soviets appropiation of territories they have annexed in the confusion wich reigned at the end of the II World War. Or, ethnically, historically and economically the populations of these territories have nothing in common with the Russian conglomerate. It was only by guile and by force that Lituania, Letonia, Estonia, Finish Karelia, Eastern Poland, Oriental Prusia, Bessarabia, Bukovina, etc., etc., have been torn away from the European continent. At this moment, Soviet Russia hopes to annihilate with Western assistance one of the most important trump cards the Free World has in opposing such intention: the Eastern European nations awareness of their right of independence.
   Objectively, we believe that the West is ready to give up and without counterpart certain political elements wich until now have formed very efficient ramparts against the Soviet Union efforts for domination. Nevertheless, friction points exist and will co tinue to create grounds for insecurity since the European continent will be at the Soviets' mercy.
   The following list is certainly not limited:

  - Berlin and the German problem, in spite of the recent Brezhnev-Brandt agreement;
   - the Soviet Union obvious desire to extend its domination over Greece and Turkey, thus following the old russian policy of expansion and penetration in Mediterraneen, Atlantic and Indian areas;
   - the imprescriptible aspiration for emancipation and independence of all nations living behind the Iron Curtain;
   - the consolidation of Western communist parties wich in spite of Togliati's tactical swings, remain under Moscow's obedience.

   In our opinion, it is very difficult to conceive that the Soviet Union wich has patiently built during a quarter of a century a vast conspiracy of contradictions in Europe, will abandon one day everything and thus, will give up ways and instruments in the promotion of its long term foreign policy objectives. There is no doubt in our mind that these objectives are identical to the perenial goals of Russia during Peter the Great: the widening of Russia's territories in Europe and the penetration of Mediterranean and Indian areas. The collapse of the III rd Reich and the Red Army advance in Europe have already moved the Russian Empire's borders towards the West. To reach the second objective, a new assault to protect new conquest in the South and to dominate the Mediterranean Sea and the North of Africa seems strictly necessary. By covering South Europe, the Soviets facilitate the installation of the Communist Parties as heads of the West. From that moment on, the door to Brest is open.
   Facing the subtilty of the Soviet tactic whose strategical designs are largely recognized, one wonders how the West is acting?
   The Federal Germany having obtained after 25 years of har work and political moderation an unprecedent economic strengh seems to be convinced that its favorable political momentum has arrived. Other Western nations though understanding such point of view are obviously concerned about the ways and the methods chosen by the German government in its foreign policy. Struggling to insure for itself a prominent position in the development of the Soviet economic potential, Bonn is inspired by the traditional principle of the Imperial Germany: OST POLITIK. Such a conviction seems to be so deeply anchored in the political thinking of many governments that they are ready to go even further in their cooperation with the Soviets, forgetting that they are jeopardizing the present balance of alliances, the guaranty of the Western European Security.
   Italy claims the second place in the assistance given to the Soviet Union and follows Germany with some caution however. If one day, the Italian Government, under the Street pressure, changes its mind, the Soviet Union will gain another bastion, another key political platform and at the same time an excellent economic position .
   For the time being and in spite of all appearences, France seems less in a hurry to clarify her position. The unfolding of the German policy gives France very little room for negociations in her favor with the Soviets. France is carefully studying all facets of the problem since she has to soveguard major interests in Mediterranean and her involvment in Africa.
   Great Britain has drawn closer to Europe because its interests in the Mediterranean and in Near East coincide with French interests. Therefore, the British has to adopt an identifical attitude with the French.
   In the United States, 1972 is the year of presidential elections and all governmental actions are taken under this sign. The disengagement in Vietnam, the dollar position, inflation, budgetary deficit, unfavorable balance of payments, etc., are as many priority problems for the US Government. The Americans are, of course, very interested in the European Security Conference but do not wish to embarass the diplomatic offensive started by Moscow in view of an early meeting. The Americans, for the moment, seem inclined to leave European affairs to Europeans. One thing is clear: if the Soviets succeed in persuading European Government to participate at this conference the US Governement will attend the meeting from the very beginning.
   Eastern European Governments approved without exception the Conference project and based their position on a certain pragmatism: an agreement for collective security signed by all Western nations and the USA could attenuate the strengh of bilateral treaties which bind their countries to the Soviet domination, at least in the implemention phasis. One should understand that these governments cannot go too far in their position without risking the alienation of Moscow's protection, the sole guaranty of their present power and stability.
   Nonetheless, there is a social-political reality that we must consider at the European Security Conference: the communist governments cannot represent but their respective states and not the peoples whose voices have been strangled for more than a quarter of a century. THE HISTORY TEACHED US THAT GOVERNMENTS ARE TEMPORARY AND CHANGING JURIDICAL INSTITUTIONS WICH CAN LEAVE TRACKS, BUT THE ONLY PERMANENT REALITY IS THE PEOPLE.
   Under such circumstances, facing the Soviet Union efforts to call the Security Conference, we believe that it is time to put a major question: WHO IS REPRESENTING AT THIS CONFERENCE MILLIONS OF EUROPEANS FROM BEHIND THE IRON CURTAIN WHO HAVE NO POSSIBILITY TO EXPRESS THEMSELVES?
   A political event of such extent is concerning as well the French, the Germans, the Spaniards, the Italians, the Belgians, etc., as the Eastern European nations. Such event commands to responsible Governments in the West not to abandon these voiceless peoples and to take in consideration their destiny as well and, in a different way than their predecessors. A conference for European Security is the affair of all Europeans and therefore the first point to be inscribed in the agenda should be: the abolition of the unjust and aberrant agreements of YALTA, SINCE THESE AGREEMENTS WILL ALWAYS ENDANGER THE EUROPEAN SECURITY.
   Let us not forget 1954 (Germany); 1956 (Budapest); 1968 (Prague); 1970 (Stettin); 1972 (Lituania) and the constant agitation in Ukraina. Let us remember these national forces with are in effervescence all over the Soviet World, which have been forgotten by the West but who will nover give up. The Western powers should not miss the best opportunity offered now for correcting the great and humiliating injustices from Yalta.
   The Government system in the communist orbit has supressed the correcting brakes of internal opposition. Therefore, the only real opposition wich can be created and can give by its presence the caracter of integrality of these peoples are the refugees organizations.
IT IS FOR MULTIPLE CONSIDERATION THAT THE REFUGEES FROM EASTER EUROPE NOW LIVING IN THE WEST CONSIDER THAT THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO HAVE THEIR REPRESENTATIVES AT THE EUROPEAN SECURITY CONFERENCE UNDER WAY OF PREPARATION.
   If the Soviet Union wishes to hold you sincerely to Europe the olive branch, the participation at this conference of delegations formed by nationals from Easter Europe now in exile, there should be no embarassment for her. Since the Soviets expressed their great interest to attend all international organizations, they must accept the evolution of international idea which created them. Today, the Soviet Union cannot ignore anymore the million of refugees who escaped from its empire and are claiming their legitimate right to express themselves freely on European problems. The refugees presence at the Conference table will be a string guarant for the security of Europe and of the entire world. Without the consent of all representative and responsible forces of this continent it is an illusion to build a real an durable security in Europe.