In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Document No. 141: Report by the Bulgarian Foreign Minister at the Unofficial Meeting of Foreign Ministers at Niederschönhausen near Berlin, April 10, 1989 ——————————————————————————————————————————— In a fascinating reversal of past practice, the foreign ministers of the Warsaw Pact met—without their Soviet counterpart—to discuss subjects of mutual interest. Meeting at a government castle outside Berlin, the so-called “closed circle” focused on the implications of Gorbachev’s reforms, including his unilateral force reductions. Not only did the meeting, described here by Bulgarian Foreign Minister Petar Mladenov, show that they recognized their interests did not always coincide with Moscow’s, but it placed the foremost supporters of the Warsaw Pact, the East Germans, uncharacteristically in agreement with the Pact’s main detractors, the Romanians. Of course, those two reactionary regimes had a vital stake in preserving the status quo in Eastern Europe. In sharp contrast to previous bloc crises in 1956, 1968 and 1980–81, fears that reform tendencies might spill over to other countries no longer originated with the policies of runaway satellites but with those of the Soviet Union itself. ____________________ […] Weareunderpressure,[GDRForeignMinisterOskar]Fischerpointedout,because we are rejecting the “import” of imperialist views concerning human values. The other side is not content with cosmetic changes only; it wants us to operate on and to amputate socialism as such. This has been expressed unambiguously by [Zbigniew] Brzezinski, [Henry A.] Kissinger, and NATO Secretary General [Manfred] Wörner. Following Vienna,22 the other side is undertaking an offensive in Europe to export bourgeois values. We are required, pointed out the GDR foreign minister, to pull down the [Berlin] Wall, to dismantle socialism. They are stating that they do not want to change the border. Actually, they are aiming at a revision of the state borders in Europe, in violation of Helsinki. They are talking about human rights, but they mean disrupting production relations. They want more markets and less Marx.23 […] Romanian Minister of Foreign Affairs Ioan Totu thanked O. Fischer for “the most serious issues” raised by him. At that moment it was difficult to give a direct answer to each question and to draw conclusions. The Romanian delegation, however, highly evaluates Cde. Fischer’s statement, which touched the most significant issues. Totu agreed both with the assessments and the principled approach of the GDR delegation leader. 22 CSCE review meeting from November 4, 1986, to January 19, 1989. 23 Pun in German: “Mehr Markt, dazu aber weniger Marx.” 629 Further on, the Romanian minister presented his detailed views on “the ratio of capitalist and socialist forces” and particularly on the “situation after Vienna.” According to him, there are no changes in the Western strategy. Capitalism is fighting against us and this has been explicitly declared by Western politicians like Reagan, Thatcher, Nixon, Kissinger and others. It was possible that they had changed their tactics; Helsinki, the common European process documents, the three components of the agreements, were evidence for this. However, according to Cde. Totu, the real outcome was discouraging. Little has been achieved on the first item; nothing on the second; on the third item they had played the game the way they liked. They did not want to hear about real human rights—right to work, education, housing—although there was much to be done both by them and by us. Owing to their tactics, stated Totu, they have gained a number of advantages. They applied the linkage approach. Their ideological and political advance has gained speed. They do not account for their intentions but their future plans are clear. The differentiated approach towards our countries is central. The Romanian position was clear; it had been displayed in Vienna for two years and they were not going to retreat from it. In his answer to Fischer’s question “what should we do next?” Totu repeated that everyone was free to act in a sovereign and independent manner. They [the Romanians ] were against any external intervention. The reputation of socialism was questioned, though. In order to advance against capitalism, in addition to the actions of an individual country, it was necessary to unite the revolutionary forces whose numbers around the world were large enough to exert resistance against bourgeois claims. According to Totu’s opinion, developing countries were a great reserve in this respect. “We have common interests. One of them is free development without external prerequisites. If we ally with those countries, we could solve a number of problems falling under item 2...

Share