Gandhi, King and Kuron

Jacek Kuron with Lech Walesa

If you are ever to be interrogated by the secret police, remember – they want you to grass on your friends. Refuse to tell them anything. Don't lie, it could be used against you. Don't give them information you may think not important, this could be used to break the resistance of other people. They will try to deceive you, don't be fooled. They will try to break your resistance by threats and lies, the law doesn't stop them lying but they are not allowed to carry out their threats. Tell them your name and address, to all other questions – no comment. Remember that you will have to face your friends when you are released.

I remember this advice very well. It was spread by word of mouth and on leaflets. It helped me a lot during all those interrogations. Perhaps I was lucky – I was never beaten up, I didn't have little children whom the secret police could harm, they never suggested to me that they would arrest my pregnant wife and she may lose her baby in the cell. In the end I did not grass and could meet my friends without shame after I came out. Recently the Institute of National Remembrance, which looks after the files of old communist secret police, certified that I did not grass and consequently I can have a status of a victim of the regime. To be honest I don't feel like a victim at all, for me it was adventure, actions of the secret police were the obstacles, how can you have adventures without obstacles? Can you be a victim of a high mountain like Everest because it is difficult to climb? Anyway I was given this status and was entitled to look into those files the secret police had on me. I did look into them. And what?

Just to be clear – I didn't look there because I wanted to know who grassed . Some people have problems understanding that those who then risked their freedom and sometimes even lives do not really want to know who was less than loyal. It is quite simple – grasses and moles are a pain in the arse of history and don't really deserve more attention than – well – a pain in the arse. Why did I look into those papers then? Well, mostly I was interested how the other side saw the events I remembered so well. What did they actually know? As a writer I was also interested in the style of prose of those police reports, I might even use this knowledge one day. However, in the process I did learn who either broke down or was fooled and agreed to cooperate with the police. And what should I do now? Should I condemn them publicly? Shall I demand that they should be punished because many years ago they broke down under pressure during an interrogation?

Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Jacek Kuron were three great leaders who lived during the 20^th century; all three were inspiration for me. They were very different people active in very different situations. Mahatma Gandhi resisted British Colonial Power in India, Martin Luther King struggled against racism and Jacek Kuron was a leader of Polish anticommunist movement that led to the formation of “Solidarnosc” in 1980. The personalities and situations are very different but they have a few things in common. All three fought in defence of human dignity but without violence. All three claimed that their goal is not to destroy the enemy but to lead to the situation where both sides see that the supposed enemy is not really an enemy but a partner to talks. The goal of non-violent struggle is reconciliation, not destruction of the other guys. The success is when the former enemy becomes a partner in talks about the common future. In 1989 “Solidarnosc” and the communists sat at the round table and so the communism in Poland ended without violence. It was agreed that the communists will not be persecuted in the new situation.

And what about those who weren't really communists but in the past were broken or fooled and “went to the dark side”? Shall we rubbish them publicly?

I refuse to do this.

Before I elaborate I'd like to point out something that may not be obvious to everybody – in the process of breaking there have to be two sides: those who break and those who are broken. In most cases the difference is very clear and in my opinion mixing the two only leads to confusion.

Here are some examples to illustrate the point:

Case one – a young man during an interrogation agreed to cooperate with the secret police but soon after he told us not to say anything important in his presence because he was forced to act as an informant. This man is of course registered in the police files as one and will never be given status of a victim but can we – the supposed victims of his actions – really blame him?

Case two – a young man was informed during the interrogation that if he doesn't talk his pregnant wife will be arrested as well and may lose the baby in a smelly cell. He started talking and a few people were arrested as a result. When he was released he told us everything and withdrew from any dissident activity. He will never get the victim status but can we not forgive him?

Case three – a single mum in a difficult situation, very active for a time but later avoided the dissident circles – this is how I remember her. I hear today she is registered as an informant. I have seen in my file a few reports that could have been written by her. What was in those reports? Things like “Wlodek Fenrych visited me today, we talked about the yesterday's concert”, few words and virtually no information of any relevance. Some say – no matter what she said, she did talk to them which means she betrayed us. Betrayed? What exactly did she betray? Her reports did not lead to me being arrested or my house being searched. It is clear to me that she conciously tried not to say anything important. Am I to rubbish her today? Well, I am not going to.

A different case is that of Zbigniew Konieczny, a proper mole in the dissident circles in Poznan. He signed all the protest declarations, distributed leaflets and co-edited an underground periodical but at the same time wrote verbose reports for the secret police. I have read those reports and it is clear to me that he was not one of those who broke down under duress, he was wholeheartedly on the side of those who did the breaking. What shall we do with people like that? Is it all right to rubbish them?

Jacek Kuron t-shirt

I have written earlier that I am a disciple of Gandhi, King and Kuron and will quote them to explain why I am not inclined to rubbish anybody. All Three maintained that victory is not the situation when the enemy is defeated and we take over the role of those who do the breaking. The proper victory is a situation in which they, too, realize that they, too, are human and can behave like humans. In other words victory is the situation when those who do the breaking cease doing so. With the exception of those who broke the law as it was then – is it right to rubbish those who ceased to do the breaking?

I'll add in secret that I am a disciple of one more person – that Jew from Nazareth in whose divinity Jacek Kuron could not believe. I have read carefully the four existing biographies of this Jew and between the lines I saw the following advice:

If you are ever to be interrogated, remember – they want you to hate them.

You should refuse.

You will find this story, and many others, in my book "ASK A GLOBETROTTER".