The Rise To Power Of Richard Nixon Eduard Roth

Transcript

15 october 2013 THE RISE TO POWER OF RICHARD NIXON (Hollywood fantasia written in Spanglish) All characters are invented. Any similarity with historical events is purely incidental. Eduard Roth 1 . 2 . Sing Vietnan, you’ve been living hell to me You’ve hosted me since nineteen sixty three I’ve seen ’em come and go, and I’ve seen ’em die And long ago I stopped asking why Sinquan, I hate every inch of you You’ve cut and scarred me thru and thru And I’ll walk out a wiser weaker man Mister congressman, now you can understand Sinquan, what good do you think you do ? Do you think I’ll be different when you’re thru ? You bend my heart and mind, and warp my soul And your fake wars turn my blood a little cool Sinquan, may you rot and burn in hell May your wars fade and may I live to tell May all the world forget you ever stood And may all the world regret you did no good 3 . 4 I. Apocalypse yesterday Cuba was discovered by Columbus already in his first travel to America in 1492. It was also the last colonial possession of Spain in America. It was lost after the war between Spain and the US in 1898, and became a colony of the US, the same as Puerto Rico and the Philippine Islands. This military disaster for Spain was accompanied by a brilliant generation of writers and intellectuals like Antonio Machado, Miguel de Unamuno or Pio Baroja. For the same reason, the US defeat in Vietnam was accompanied by brilliant cinema like ‘Apocalypse now’, ‘Platoon’ or ‘Full metal jacket’. Once on american hands, Cuba became a big casino and a dictator called Batista came to power. In 1959, a coup launched by Castro’s guerrilla defeated Batista and justice was sought naively for this unfortunate island of the Caribbean Sea. Under the attack of the US (the CIA tried to poison Castro repeatedly) and after the invasion of Bahia Cochinos, Castro sought russian help. This crisis is known as the ‘Missile Crisis’ and lasted 13 days in 1962, when the world was in danger of a severe nuclear disaster. Finally the russian missiles were withdrawn from Cuba and the US committed themselves to spare Castro. But Castro destroyed himself more rapidly without american threat. He moved his regime, full of hopes at the beginning, to a banal banana dictatorship not different by any means to Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama or any other caribbean states under american rule. ‘They are the sons of a bitch’ said a president of the United States about those banana states, ‘but we are that bitch’ added he. The intellectuals of the Free World only became interested in Cuba when it started to export bananas to the Soviet Union. Anyway, since the Padilla incident in 1967, nobody considers seriously any more Castro’s regime as a model to follow by other developing countries. There is no guarantee however for freedom in Cuba after Castro’s regime 5 end. The powerful anti-castrist lobby in Florida is the natural successor, and that is much worse than Batista or Castro himself. They succeeded to turn down one presidential election in the US, by electing the candidate with less votes, for the first time in the history of the US. Revolts against spanish rule in Cuba had been endemic for decades during the XIXth century, and were carefully watched by the american. The american president of the time, Randolph Hearst, and his vice-president, Joseph Pulitzer, engaged in a press campaign to send an ultimatum to Spain. Spain declared war to the ‘United States of India’, without realizing that the maps they were using dated from XVIIth century. US expeditionary forces were decimated by yellow fever, as the spanish army was ravaged by malaria. This is the reason why the war was decided at sea. The obsolete spanish armada of 3 caravelles under admiral Colon was sunk by the 27 armored battleships under command of admiral Barbossa. Following the Treaty of Paris in 1898, the US took rule over Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Philippine Islands in exchange of 20 dollars. Sargent Batista made a coup against Machado in 1923 because he was too authoritarian, and appointed himself as colonel-in-chief of the cuban army and de-facto president of the Republica Platanera de Cuba. He was elected in 1940 but, facing electoral defeat in forthcoming elections, he made a coup against himself in 1952 and recuperated power in this strange way, until another coup in 1959 outed him forever as explained later. He was corrupt, was under control of american mafia, the same as drug, gambling and prostitution in Havana. His secret police practiced private tortures and public executions, ultimately assassinating anywhere between 1 000 and 20 000 victims. Few people protested about these crimes in the US. A notable exception was senator JFK. Batista was defeated by a nationalistic guerrilla under command of Fidel Castro and Che Guevara. Batista fled with his immense fortune of at least $ 300 000 000 to seek shelter under Franco in Spain, the most reliable dictator under control of the US at the time. Sierra Maestra is a mountain range in Cuba that runs from Guantanamo Province to Niquero, in the south of Cuba. At 2000 m, Pico Torquino is the highest point. It had a long history of guerrilla warfare, starting with the rebellion of Tainos under Guam´a, the so-called ‘ten years war’ and finally all kind of 6 wars against slavery and spanish oppression and colonialism. After spanish were out, war continued against Machado and Batista. Castro started there his uprise after the Moncada failure and his exile in Mexico. He joined Escopeteros (Smoothbore) and defeated Batista at the Battle of Santa Clara in december 1958. In this famous battle, 350 guerrilleros under command of Che Guevara fought against cuban troops consisting of 3 000 regular army soldiers, 10 tanks, 3 planes and 1 armored train. Havana was captured 12 hours later. It was the end of prostitution and the american way of life in Cuba, to date. There are 3 possible interpretations of the so-called ‘Missile Crisis’: a) the Russian wanted to eliminate the obsolete american missiles in Turkey by a trade with cuban missiles, b) the Cuban wanted to prevent another american invasion like Cochino’s by nuclear threat, c) the military lobby in the US, under command of LeMay and some paranoic admirals, wanted to push for a nuclear war to prove US supremacy, no matters if 1,000 million people were to die in this demonstration. Option c) is true more probably than not. Indeed, the enemy of the Kennedys was not Castro or the Russian, but his own military command, more probably than not. But at the end, options a) and b) prevailed. The story of this crisis was written for the general public (where I include myself) by A.Schlesinger Jr, in the book ‘Robert Kennedy and his times’. This book was written previous to the fatal campaign of 1968, putting emphasis on the outstanding diplomatic skills of RFK, and a film out of it outlined the potential dramatic issue of this crisis, an apocalyptic war. As a reader of Karl Marx, I suspect this drama was rather a comedy. More on that later. R Ernesto Che Guevara (spanish pronunciation [’t e γe’βara]) was born in 1928 in Rosario, Argentina, and died at age 39, in 1967, at La Higuera in Bolivia. He was a marxist revolutionary, physician, author, guerrilla leader, diplomat, theorist of guerrilla warfare, and above all a symbol of fight against oppression in the entire world. He was the black beast of CIA for his subversive activities, and was readily executed without trial after being captured by the american with the help of ex-nazi Klaus Barbie. This kind of assassinations has long tradition in the US since Lincoln and maybe even before. It is my understanding that assassination by CIA is now forbidden by law inside 7 the territory of the United States, but still not outside. I have to say at this point that Malaparte’s manual to achieve the overturning of a democratic government by brute force (‘pronunciamiento’ in spanish) is much more professional that Guevara’s one, and has indeed been applied with much more success by CIA in Chile, Uruguay, Bolivia, Argentina, and possibly many other places that I ignore. Herberto Padilla, a cuban poet initially supporter of Castro’s regime, was accused in 1967 of defending a ‘transfuga’, the novelist Infante Difunto and was imprisoned during 38 days. Under pressure of left-wing intellectuals from the entire world, he was expulsed to Spain, a dictature certainly, but under american rule. He later moved to Princeton University where he obtained a comfortable and well paid position. Surprisingly, he did not transform into a virulent anticommunist as expected, especially taking into account his large salary. Moreover, he came under control of the anti-american sweedish leader Olof Palme, later himself assassinated by XIA, and even criticized the embargo on Cuba. His family was expulsed from Miami and he died of a heart attack. Since river Pisuerga flows trough Valladolid, an US election took place in November 7, 2000. The key issue for this election was the result in Florida. Whoever was the winner in Florida would be the next president of the US, irrespective of the number of votes in the rest of the country, it’s just democracy. W.Bush obtained 2 912 790 votes and A.Gore 2 912 352. As a reminder, the person in charge of counting the votes was a cousin of W.Bush himself, it’s just democracy. According to the US census of 2008, the ethnic composition of the population of Miami was as follows: HOLAN (hispanic or latinos of any race): 62%, WASP (non-hispanic or black): 18%, BASP (black, spanish and protestant): 14%, IAAAN (indian, asian and Alaska natives): 6%, AAAA (asian, african, american or anywhere): 100%. Anyway, Gore got more votes but Bush was elected. Sorry it took to me so much garbage to reach this conclusion. Cuban Poet Jos´e Mart´ı wrote: 8 . I am a man truly From the land of the palm tree And before death I would plea To write a poem for thee My verse is pure clearly Slightly reddish maybe And through the mountain I flee To seek a shelter for me I’ll grow a rose readily In june as in january For the friend that sincerely Offers his open hand to me With the poor of thin belly I’d share my fortune happily I love them as I love Kennedy I feel better poor than wealthy 9 . 10 II. Apocalypse now Vietnam war is now under close scrutiny. As for many wars, when it ended in 1973, nobody remembered any more why it started some 30 years before. The opposing countries weren’t the same either. At the beginning, the vietnamese guerrilla backed by Mao was opposing the french colonial army. The american only entered the game after french defeat at Dien Bien Phu, as anticipated by Graham Greene in his ‘Quiet American’, the same as he anticipated the Missile Crisis in Cuba in his ‘Man in Havana’. At the end, the vietnamese guerrilla was not backed any more by Chinese but by Russian. I cant explain the rest of the war, particularly its confusing end, because I dont understand it. I still believe that nobody is able, even today, to explain why the war leaked to Cambodia, leading to a terrible genocide. Why the american army was defeated so piteously by a poorly equipped guerrilla, despite of modern weaponery of air-fighters, helicopters, bombers, aircraft carriers and the like ? I would naively answer that the war was on the land, not at sea or in the air. But Coppola’s film gives a better answer. The same as Napoleon was defeated by general Winter, the American were defeated by general Jungle. There is an alternative explanation: the war was lost in reality in the US rather than in the jungle. By the way, the same happened for the war in Algeria. You cant win wars you dont believe in. The Greek produced sculpture, architecture and theater. Rome poetry and history, Florence painting, Germany music, France novels, and the US cinema. This is the shortest desciption of western culture that I can make. Questioned about their best movies, the American selected ‘Blowin in the wind’, ‘The Whitehouse’ and ‘Citizen Cohn’, in reality 3 of the worst films 11 in the history of cinema ever. The first is long and boring, the second is what we call in spanish ‘cursi’, a word that I know not to translate, and the third has no beginning, no end and no plot, in artistic language it’s a ‘deconstruction’. You believe I dont like american cinema. Wrong, wrong, wrong ! I love Bogart as falconeer, Welles as Lady Macbeth, and Costner as a wolf. Needless to say, I love Coppola, should I still prove it ? I’m afraid Americans like other garbage. It’s their right to do so. Let me just tell you one thing: dont confuse film quality and victory in the Oskar ceremony nor statistical records measured in dollars. That’s like confusing the Nobel and the Guiness awards. In literature, you dont confuse Alexandre Dumas and Marcel Proust. I have nothing against Titanic, but I prefer the ‘Basketball diaries’ or ‘Rimbaud’, some unknown films by the same actor, and directors such as Gus van Sant, Todd Haynes, Ang Lee or Wong Kar Wai. I am not a lover of empty theaters either. I also watch filmakers with larger impact such as Coppola, Allen, Kubrick or Stone. How many American watch these masterpieces of their own culture ? Probably very few, but for the same reason, very few Spanish read Quijote or very few German read Zauberberg, even counting incomplete attempts. In fact, cinema is not a matter of director but a matter of public. Disney’s cartoons were marvellous for boys. Teenagers have their own category, called ‘teen sex comedy’ when it’s a comedy or ‘coming to age’ when it’s drama. There are ‘western films’ with indians and the federal cavalry, not in production any more, ‘love stories’, ‘hate stories’, ‘romantic comedies’ and ‘romantic dramas’ and mixed genre films for general public or films for mixed genre public. In fact it’s not category and even less director that matters. Since nowadays most public is composed by teen-age girls, sometimes accompanied by their reluctant boyfriends, beautiful young actors are in need. Their names: Dean, Phoenix, Lowe, Cruise, Depp, Dicaprio and Efron. You will recognize from this selection that I am a rather old man. Any of these charming actors can transform a bad film into an entertaining one. I can also add to this list Matt Klemp, Chris Stafford, Paul Dano and Kevin Bishop, but I suspect you dont know them. There isn’t any record of great american painters before 1960, with two exceptions: Singer Sargent and Hopper. Around that year, american painting moved from zero to infinity, in scientific language, or from Middle Age to Renaisance, in artistic one. The names of the masters: Kline, Pollock, 12 Motherwell, Rothko, etc,.... The expert called them New York School and claimed that this city replaced Paris as capital of arts. Paris was in lead since Manet until Picasso and Matisse. But Paris lost its lead not just in painting, but also in fashion and singing. Christian Lacroix, Dior, Paco Rabanne and Coco Channel were replaced by Calvin Klein or Jockeys, and at the same time Edith Piaf and Jacques Brel were replaced by Robert Zimmerman and the Stones. Of course, American themselves knew this phenomenon since long, but I only became aware about it later when I learnt about a prison with a funny spanish name, and that there was a war somewhere in Asia, and that we needed absolutely to stop this war. The song didn’t tell you where the war was taking place, just that it would be gone with the wind. How can the silence be so loud ? The explanation later. The NY school transformed into Pop Art: Warhol and factory. Rock and Pop hand to hand. I’m afraid it’s again a statistical victory, a Guiness Record for Christies and Sotheby’s. A kind of ‘manierismus’ in artistic language. Some artists started to use their cat, not to paint him but the inverse. They invented ‘collage’, they played with transparent acrylic colours resulting in invisible paintings. As a general rule, they called painting anything that wasn’t. But also as for cinema, excellent painters were at work. They will not be retained as such by our generation, but by future generations, as many great masters of the XVIIth century. Now let me tell you that I love Lisa Peyton (born 1965), her self-portraits, sometimes red, sometimes grey, like those of Picasso’s pink and blue periods. She likes to paint singers like John Lennon, Kurt Cobain, Julian Casanovas, Eminem, Keith Richards and the Gallagher brothers. More surprisingly, she likes also to paint unexpected models such as Napoleon, Ludwig II and the Kennedy brothers. Only a depressive person suffering strong headaches would like do that, in my understanding. If the Vietnam war was an excuse to achieve artistic creativity, the success was notorious, especially since NY school was running on empty as explained before. When at age 10 I heard ‘Yellow Submarine’, I was not convinced. When at age 14 I heard ‘The sounds of silence’, ‘Blowin in the wind’ and ‘Tambourine man’, it was a marvel. I abandoned the Beethovens and Mozarts from my father’s collection to adopt this new style. The ‘make love’ of the Beattles was now ‘make love and not war’, a more convincing message for people of the 1968 generation like me. Even ‘Let it be’ and ‘Imagine’ sounded now much better. I started to learn English by spending summers in Dublin 13 City, where girls are so pretty. But the real reason to go there was to buy ‘singles’ and ‘LP’ made out of vinyl. I know that the young generation ignores what that means. They only know about pirating films in the internet or downloading music to their mobile phones. I also was a pirate in a sense. A friend of mine passed me in maximum secrecy inside a magnetic tape songs by Baez, Seeger, Parra and others, strictly forbidden in Spain at the time, because they were in Spanish and so explicit that even the police could understand what they meant. English was poorly known at the time, so someone like Zimmerman was not really a risk, but the ‘Tres heridas’ by Baez, the ‘Quinto Regimiento’ by Seeger, or the ‘Que dir´a el Santo Padre’ by Parra, were highly subversive and unacceptable attacks to the best ally of the US in Europe. As I became older, I still enjoyed the songs of my youth. The singers I loved were still alive, but they moved to seduce the new generations of youngsters. My idol became a rolling stone, but I stayed quiet on my old-fashioned style. I heard names like Bowie, Jagger, Cobain, Morrison, Richards and others, not for their art, that I ignored, but for news on the newspapers about their sexual scandals, drug abuse, suicides and assassinations. More recently I learned about a charming teenager from Canada, barely 17, by an interview to a journal where he was explaining his philosophical views about religion. As a compensation, another charming serial killer appeared in the same country. Is there any link between both ? Of course. Be famous by any means, seduce the teen or fly Berlin. I know very little about (north-)american literature. The reason is that I used to consider it, wrongly, a simple by-product of british masters. I know more about it from cinema than from reading. Nowadays, I assume that this ‘lost generation’ of authors who elected to stay abroad, whether in Paris, Tangiers or Havana, is a generation of great masters. Their names: Fitzgerald, Faulkner, Hemingway, Steinbeck, 2Passos. I have seen ‘Wrapes of wrath’, the same as ‘East of Eden’ with a magnificent James Dean, and I read Hemingways’s ‘El viejo y el mar’, in a spanish edition. Then I learned how much I lost by neglecting these authors. I know a bit more about the next generation: Salinger, Capote, Roth, Auster. Salinger is easy to read, he only wrote one book but a masterpiece. Roth is famous for being the family name that has given birth to the largest number of famous writers. I know a bit of them. I didn’t like Capote’s Tiffany, but his ‘Cold blood’ is hot, the novel as much as the film. Black novels in the US are like ‘film policier’ in the 14 UK. The study in scarlet is now a study in black, and Conan Doyle is named Hammett or Chandler. These names are now maybe forgotten, but Bogart playing their parts will stay forever. As Greek discovered, Theater decouples from novel, and must be accompanied by poetry. There are 12 centuries between Homer and Petronius, but only 2 between Homer and Aeschylus. American theatre has at least 5 important names: Eugene O’Neill, Arthur Miller, Tennessee Williams, Edward Albee and Tony Kushner. Again here, I know them mainly from adaptations to the cinema. Long journey into the night, with Catherine Hepburn and Bogart, always Bogart, Iceman Cometh, Death of a salesman with Dustin Hoffman and John Malkovich, Crucible with Daniel Day-Lewis and Winona Ryder, Tennessee’s saga with Warren Beatty, Vivien Leigh, Paul Newman, Richard Burton, Ava Gardner, Liz Taylor and the young Brando. A young Brando exciting inside the streetcar named desire. Albee dancing between wolves and capricorn, and Angels in America with fabulous Al Pacino as Roy Cohn, and Meryl Streep and Emma Thomson as angels. Let us now make some dancing in the rain. Of course I know the cabaret of Bob Fosse with incredible Liza Minelli imitating Helmut Berger’s show by Visconti in the fall of the gods. Of course I loved this boy singing the nazi hymn, ‘tomorrow belongs to me’. Of cource I didn’t know that this film was adapted from ‘Farewell to Berlin’ by Chris Isherwood and that all queer scenes had been suppressed by censorship. Merce Cunningham and Balanchine, the Forsyth saga, something elevated, are things that you most probably dont know. I understand it, and move quickly to classical music, piano and violin mainly: Yehuda Menuin, Juliard School transposed to Barcelona in a magnificent film adapted from a novel by David Leavitt, ‘The page turner’, with a superb Kevin Bishop. Leavitt that I forgot while England sleeps, is as english as Rajmamujan was a clerk or Turing a tourist. God Wilson placed Einstein on the beach. The Bach’s suites for cello-solo, or better, the well tempered clavier. The world has only two capital cities, none of them recognized as such. They are New York and Saint-Petesburg. SP was built by italian architects who copied Venice on the Neva river. In this town, no tower is allowed above Peter and Paul acute roof, the same as in NY no building is allowed below the Empire State. SP has a winter palace, as NY has a metropolitan museum. Both of them have a world record: 20 paintings by Rembrandt at least. SP has Marinsky as NY the Rockefeller 15 Center. SP has Kronstadt as NY the Statue of Liberty. SP has the bridges over the Neva as NY those over the Hudson Bay. SP was called Petrograd or Leningrad, as NY was called Manhattan Island or New Amsterdam. SP has the Nevski Perspective as NY has the Fifth Avenue. When I visited NY for the first time, at age 19, I had my first love story in Central Park. Then I came looking for a job, but I got no offers, just a come on from the whores in Seventh Avenue. I do declare, I accepted their offer. I also trained in the actor’s studio, and spent nights in Greenwich Village playing guitar with Bob, Joan, Peter, Woody and Allen. I still remember the song: Hey father death, I’m flying home, hey poor man, you’re alone, hey old daddy, I know where I’am going, father death, dont cry anymore, mama’s there, underneath the floor, brother death, please mind the store, old aunty death, my heart is in New York city winters, they are leading me, bleeding me, going home. Philosophy is a broad concept. According to Aristotle, it embebbed both physics and metaphysics. Right. All other concepts invented by Aristotle proved wrong, from laws of motion, discarded later by Newton, to metaphysics, discarded by Kafka’s metamorphosis. Nowadays, philosophy includes concepts such as psychology, psychiatry, economy, sociology and in general any science ending by letter ‘y’, including astrology and alchemy. Real sciences end by letter ‘x’, as Physix, mathematix, chemix, geologix and biologix. To demonstrate this axioma you have just to solve the equation with 3 unknowns x3 + y 3 = z 3 , where x, y, z are any 3 positive intergers. If you believe my theories, which I suspect you dont, linguistix is a science. After this short introduction to philosophy, I go right now into the real issue, the famous polemix that opposed Chomsky, a linguist from MIT, and Steiner from Cambridge University, a theoretician of literature, discipline comparable to engeneering of language but not included in my definitions. Famous scientists from Cambridge were physicist Isaac Newton and mathematician Andrew Wiles, who demonstrated that any mental problem of third degree with positive integers has no solution, except in psychiatry, challenging a bit my own theories. Yes, the polemix Chomsky versus Steiner, in the late sixties, is as famous in anglo-saxon world as was the Sartre-Aron confrontation in the early sixties. In both cases, the context was a war, where their respective countries had been trapped for reasons that only Kakfa could explain. But the war was going on, following well-known recipees postulated by Churchill: ‘Never start a war, but when started never dare to stop it’. 16 Sartre was a brilliant philosopher from the prestigous ENS in Paris, the same as Aron. All of them were jews, except Sartre. Sartre and Chomsky where ‘creators’, while Aron and Steiner were ‘critics’, that means failed creators, but I dont want to enter this polemix. Steiner wrote the following letter to Chomsky on march 23, 1967: ‘Dear Prof. Chomsky, bla,bla,bla, will you stop teaching at MIT as long as torture by US army prevails and napalm is fabricated inside the lab near your office ? Will you help your students to escape to Mexico or Canada to avoid enrolment in the marines as Sartre did in the algerian conflict ? What shall we do ? I ask in deep perplexity an issue out of this complexity ? America is a democracy and none is elected in anti-war platforms, so you should not restrict yourself to ideas supported by just a few persons. Better join the mass of people like me. At least we win elections bla,bla,bla, and in a democratic country, bla,bla,bla, ... signed: Georg Steiner, NY University, former professor at Chicago, Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard and Princeton, (long list of awards follows).’ To that letter, Chomsky answered as follows: ‘Dear Prof. Steiner, I have never been professor in any of the brilliant universities you mention. My applications to Stanford and Berkeley were turned down, this proving to be a good thing since the experiments I wanted to join there turned into complete failure. I have never been more than assistant teacher in some unknown university for you, ranked above 300 in the Shanghai classification. But I am able to tell you that Hitler was also elected in a democratic election and therefore, according to your theories, was allowed to kill as many people as he wanted. Your american friends have killed already 5 million people across the world. Congratulations.’ 17 . I am just a poor boy Though my story is seldom told I have squandered my resistance For a pocketfull of mumbles Such are promises All lies and jests Still a man hears What he wants to hear And disregards the rest When I left my home And my family I was no more than a boy In the company of strangers In the quiet of railway stations Running scared Laying low Seeking out The poor quarters Where the ragged people go Looking for the places Only they would know Asking only workman’s wages I came looking for a job But I got no offers Just a come on from The whores on seventh avenue I do declare There were times When I was so lonesome I took some comfort there Then I’m laying down 18 My winter clothes and wishing I was going home Where the New York City winters Aren’t bleeding me Leading me Going home In the clearing stands a boxer And a fighter by his trade And he carries the reminder Of every glove that laid him down And cut him Till he cried out In his anger and his shame I am leaving I am leaving But the fighter still remains 19 . 20 III. Apocalypse redux The style of this chapter is of the type ‘All you wanted to know about economical science and you never dared to ask’, or if you like ‘A child’s guide to economy’. As for the other chapters, the only condition I impose to myself is the apocalyptic end. In fact, I will demonstrate using rigorous mathematical and physical concepts that the world’s economy will evolve to complete chaos. My source, as for the other dreams, is Kafka. Coppola’s redux, originally released in 1980, was two hours long, but a new version was produced later using discarded material, one hour longer. This version was released in 2000, after the Berlin Wall was down, and all enemies had vanished, apparently. Vietnam was now a past story to be forgotten, and the jungle was in the process of being replaced by the desert. Coppola introduced for his redux a long scene of old french colonials cultivating rubber in a lost location in the middle of the jungle, under the safety of a private guard. This scene is maybe a prelude to Apocalyse II, III, etc... dealing, I guess, with Irak or Afghanistan wars and similar events. I am ready to write the scripts if necessary. Liberalism, also called ‘Scottish school of economics’ or ‘capitalism’, is the exploitation of poor by rich people, to make them even poorer, at the cost of enriching the wealthy. The mean to invent this was the scottish economist Adam Smith. As for other schools, there are apostles, namely the gangsters from Chicago and the mafia from Palermo. Smith invented the ‘equity’ that works as follows: you buy an equity at a cost X and you sell it at cost nX with n > 1. After p exchanges the price of the equity is np X. When Log(np X) >inequality, you have lost all your money, X = 0 in 21 mathematical language. Note however that the last man to sell the equity enriched himself by an amount equal to np−1 X, so money is not really lost, it just goes from your hands into a fiscal paradise of the former British Empire. The situation X = 0 is also called ‘economical crisis’. Capitalistic systems generate regularly economical crisis to move money from poor to rich people. Communism, also called ‘Proletarian school of economics’, or more simply ‘anticapitalism’, was invented by Karl Marx. He analysed the repeated crisis of the english capitalistic system and introduced concepts such as ‘Kapital’ or ‘proletariat’. He predicted the formation a new social class without ressources by means of the mechanism I just described above. In fact some money should reach impoverished people, even in a capitalistic system, as explained later using the Second Law of Thermodynamics. But Marx proposed a drastic solution to suppress capitalism: Revolution. Proletarian take power and money (a redundancy since money is power). The only problem is that you transform plutocracy into dictatorship. Marx was aware of this weakness in his demonstration and claimed that the state should perish by itself. But the result is no better, since dictatorship converts into chaos. Also some people noted that one could go directly from plutocracy into chaos without need of intermediate steps. Marxism and Anarchy have failed wherever applied. Liberalism, in addition to empoverishing people, has other unwanted byproducts: inflation, hyperinflation, unemployment and militarism. In a typical inflation crisis, the variation of prices is proportional to prices themselves, and therefore the ‘price function’ f obeys the differential equation df /dt = f , the variable t being the time scale. The solution of this simple equation is f = exp(t), that means prices grow exponentially. Maynard Keynes, from Bloomsbury School of Economics (not to be confused with the London one), realized that state intervention may dump this growth to null. Note in passing that state intervention is in violation of liberalism. It may happen, however, as in Germany’s postwar years, that a typical inflation crisis is slightly perturbed according to the theory of Edward Rotten, from Elsinor School of Economics. In this case, the price function obeys the equation df /dt = f log(f ), where log(f ) is only a slightly varying function of prices, but the result is a catastrophic scenario, since the solution of this equation is f = exp(exp(t)). So, a tiny effect leads to an extravagant increase of prices. The solution may also be written as log(log(f ) = t, and can be compared to price increases in postwar Germany (see Table 1). We 22 see that log(log(f ) is indeed proportional to t, by just rescaling and shifting time a little bit. The solution to hyperinflation, as German authorities soon realized, is very simple: modify slightly the mechanism to correct inflation, and it will suddenly vanish. Table 1: Price increases in postwar Germany year f (in marks) log(log(f ) 1918 4 0.3 1919 10 0.8 1920 20 1.1 1921 100 1.5 1922 10 000 2.2 1923 1 000 000 000 3.0 1924 2.3 0.0 When Hitler came to power in 1933, he found 6 million unemployed people, due to the 1929 crisis. This high rate was one of the reasons of his victory in democratic elections. Hitler solved brilliantly this problem and should have obtained the Nobel Price of Economy, the same as Henry Kissinger later, who used the same techniques. This brilliant idea of the Nuremberg School of Economics, applied later by Geobbels, Goering, Himmler and Heydrich, was very simple: employ all that unemployed people to produce weapons to extravant amounts. And what for ? what a silly question, what do you produce all that garbage for ? a little war, and then ? 60 million killed ? that’s nothing compared to the 6 million we employed. By the way, the duo Nixon–Kissinger, from the Watergate School of Economics, achieved another brilliant record at 10 million assassinations, more on that later. The money to finance this costly enterprise ? pillage of occupied countries, explaining why the german war machine could not stop once started. The lesson: capitalism leads to periodic wars, the same as monetary crisis, and exploitation of under–developped counties to finance these wars. This pillage was called colonialism in the past, and continues nowadays by more sophisticated mechanisms called financial engeneering, fiscal evasion, corruption, fiscal paradises, and so on. I come back to this Watergate School of Economics, named in honor of Nixon, but started by Eisenhower and continued 23 by Reagan and W.Bush, under supervision of Milton Slaveman, from the mafia of Chicago. The carnage by these criminals expanded to a miriad of wars in a 60 years period across the planet. The most famous examples are Korea (1), Vietnam (2), Chile (1), Irak (1), etc... where I indicate inside the parenthesis the number of killed people in millions. The final amount ranges anywhere between 5 and 10 millions. They used weapons as classical tanks, guns, planes, ships, but also sophisticated rockets, bombs, laser guided missiles and infrared sensitive devices to shoot at night. All these material was financed by petroleum extracted from arab countries, whether allies or enemies, in which case they were invaded like Iran or Irak. The benefit enriched companies like Conoco, Exon, Shell, or armement industries like Boeing, Locked Martin, BAE systems, Ford, General Motors, Chrysler, United Fruit, etc... They are called ‘military-industrial’ lobbies, but are in reality a mafia, and they rule the economy and foreign policy of the US. Trivial discovered that economix is governed by laws of thermodynamix and founded the ‘Carnotic School of Economics’. The second law of thermodynamics, anounced by Boltzman after Carnot’s ideas, postulates that a variable called ‘entropy’ and noted S (chaos in common language) is due to grow. Whether this growth will go forever or not is unclear, but it may lead to apocalypsis. In mathematical language, S = log(P ) where P is the mathematical pobability of a given richness distribution. According to Pascal, P = CnN = N! n!(N − n)! where N is the number of $, and n those in possession of rich people. As an example, we have N=4. Then there are only 5 possibilities: n= 0,1,2,3,4, with probabilities Pn =1,4,6,4,1, respectively. The minimal entropy, S = 0 is reached if all money is in possession of poor people, an impossible situation as expected. The maximal entropy S = log(6) is reached when n = 2. That means that the poor people, 99% of the population, get the same amount of money as the rich, the remaining 1%. That is theory, but.... Slaveman discovered a way to violate this law by introducing external factors that make S evolve to minimal instead of maximal entropy, and absolutely all money goes in possession of the rich. He rediscovered ancient slavery. This brilliant idea was awarded by the Nobel Pizza of Economy in 1976. The problem is that the idea can only be applied by dictators, since external factors involve suppression of human rights, in a rough way if necessary. It was applied 24 successfully in Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Bolivia, and many other countries that moved from democracy to fascism, with help of the US. I should add that this unfair system was sharply critizised by american themselves, and Samuelson, from the ‘Cambridge School of Economics’ (Cam-Mass, not Cam-Bridge) proposed ‘Neo-Keynesianism’, an intervention of government against liberalism, applied in democratic systems at low cost. His idea was not just to give the poor people their 50% part of the cake, but still add an additional amount somewhere between 50% and 99%. This policy was applied by Democrat Presidents of the US and Samuelson got the Nobel Prize of Economy in 1970. 25 . Where are all the flowers gone Long time passing Where are all the flowers gone Long time ago Where are all the flowers gone Picked by young girls every one When will they ever learn ? When will they ever learn ? Where are all the flowers gone Long time passing Where are all the flowers gone Long time ago Where are all the flowers gone Gone to young man every one When will they ever learn ? When will they ever learn ? Where are all the flowers gone Long time passing Where are all the flowers gone Long time ago Where are all the flowers gone Gone to soldiers every one When will they ever learn ? When will they ever learn ? Where are all the flowers gone Long time passing Where are all the flowers gone Long time ago 26 Where are all the flowers gone Gone to graveyards every one When will they ever learn ? When will they ever learn ? Where are all the flowers gone Long time passing Where are all the flowers gone Long time ago Where are all the graveyards gone Gone to flowers every one When will they ever learn ? When will they ever learn ? 27 . 28 4. Godfather I Richard Milhous Nixon was born in 1913 in California. His mother was a quaker and his father a methodist. Milhous was therefore a very religious man, therefore extremely dangerous because these men believe all their sins can be forgiven by God. Atheists think more on the consequences of their acts. Milhous was also an earthquake that devastated America. North, Center and South, and not just San Francisco where he used to live as governor. He became known in 1948 for his great activity in UAAC (Un American Activities Committee) that defined most brightest american minds as unamerican. In Senate, he took a prominent position by opposing global communism and befriended witch-hunters, like Wisconsin’s McCarthy... until the late found also communists in the US army, irritating president Eisenhower. That was the end of his career. But he had fun. The electrical chair current passed through the Rosenbergs, but the electrocuted victims were religious and died properly in faith. It was a progress if we compare to Sacco and Vanzetti, who were atheist and could not reach paradise so easily. America was ready for all scandals that followed. All of them unprecedented in US history: assassinations, massacres, genocides, violation of all articles of US Constitution and international treaties like Geneva Convention, use of prohibited weapons, overturning of democratic governments in many countries, illegal wars across the planet, alliance with mafias.... The same as Capone was condemned for fiscal fraud, Nixon was condemned just for espionage, but inmediately pardoned. I saw him, around 1970, at some 5 meters distance, in the middle of Gran Via in Madrid. He was hand to hand with another serial killer, his friend General Franco. Serial killers of the world, unite! 29 With his impressive anti-communist record, he was naturally elected by Eisenhower as vice-president and served for 8 years in this post. Vicepresidents have no active role in US politics. But they are in-pectore candidates for the next election... that they normally lose. Following this rule, Nixon lost against an awful candidate, Kennedy, but only at a very, very tiny margin. The reasons why Kennedy, unexperienced and catholic, won, are explained later. His situation became desperate as Kennedy gained popularity. The fortunate assassination of JFK brought him new oportunities, but like Charlon Heston in the film ‘The Cid’, Kennedy ressurrected for the 1968 campaign, with just another first name. He had to be assassinated for a second time. Nixon opposed a second rank candidate, Humphrey, but only passed on a tiny margin, 43.4% against 42.7%. I was 12, and my history teacher asked me to report on this election. The teacher said after reading my work ‘I am impressed’. I had predicted that Democrats would lose the South but win the East Cost. As usual, you make correct predictions for the wrong reasons. San Francisco, I love every inch of you. As commented later, the policy of the US was at the time driven by foreign policy more than by internal affairs, as happens to all leading nations involved in endemic wars. Nixon’s problem was to stop the Vietnam war escalade, and other conflicts across the world, South America, Middle East or Africa. The Middle East crisis started to play a major role in american politics after the Six-Days war of 1967. These conflicts took so much importance, that the true president was not Nixon but his Secretary of State, Kissinger. Kissinger was much like Nixon, as religious and anti-communist as him, a jew born in Germany as criminal persecutor as he was once persecuted by criminals. The difference: he was an educated professor from Harvard and not a beggar found unshaved in a dirty street close to a cloaque as Nixon. The US constitution prevents somebody born without american nationality to be elected president. Nixon’s travel to China resulted in an opera: North Vietnam changed partner from Pekin to Moscow. In Vietnam, the world superpower was about to surrender to a yellow-hat and bare-footed armed guerrilla. In Spain, we started to see photographs of very young vietnamese, with hands tied to their back, half-naked, attached in line by a rope, prepared for torture or internment in a concentration camp, and worse... a girl crying with her falling skin, running desperately after a napalm attack. Normally, a war is lost in the public opinion before it’s lost in the terrain. On the Middle30 West crisis, there was another clash US-URSS engaging Israel against arab countries. A friend of mine told me one day at school ‘we face a nuclear war, US and URSS are fighting each other’. I believed him and was scared. Madrid was only 10 km away from a military US base called Torrejon and was therefore an obvious target for a nuclear attack. Before I ran home, the war was over. I have some excuse for my stupidity. When the Missile Crisis, I was only 5 and unaware of those events. I was learning at school: Do you believe in Almighty God creator of earth and heaven ? yes. Do you believe in the Saint Spirit ? yes. Do you believe in life after death ? yes. And so on. With my powerful protectors, what could I fear ? American officers from the military bases in Spain bought all houses near mine. On july 4th, they ejected all kind of rockets into the nightly sky. I started to work in my garage on my own device propelled by a mixture of sugar and potassium pills that I got in the pharmacy. I ended up in the hospital with burned hands. This was the start of my scientific career. A famous Nobel laureate once said: there is no good experimenter without at least ten electrical shocks in his record. Fortunately, electrical current was limited at the time at 120 Volts and I survived my new experiments. Then we landed on the Moon. I was totally pro-american. My father brought me to the naval base of Rota to see the american aircraft carriers, and I painted my toy-modelled Phantom F-4 airfighters in white colour to show that they belonged to the US Navy, not the Air Force. The second mandate of Nixon was a via-crucis. After an easy reelection in 1972, the Watergate scandal started. Many brilliant books have been written about the Washington Post reporters who triggered it, the tapes, the impeachment, the 1200-paged transcripts. Can anybody read this ? Don Quijote is only 1000-paged long and it took me 30 years to complete the reading. But my main question is: if you are a serial killer, why do you want to record on tape all your crimes ? If you search in Google for ‘Nixon why recording’, you get 30 million entries. I have found nothing that looks like an explanation after scanning the first 1 million. The resignation of Nixon was, according to a biographer, a masterpiece. He admitted no wrong actions by ‘I am marred by dust, sweet, blood, etc... but etc...’ Gerald Rudolf ‘Jerry’ Ford 31 Jr (GRJFJ) was born Leslie Lynch King Jr (LLKJ) so his complete name was GRJFJLLKJ, or in alphabetic order FGJJJKLLR, or even FGJKLR in compact form, what a long name for such a short mandate of only 2 years 72-73. He was the first american president to serve without being elected. He was totally unprepared to face the most complex problems: Watergate scandal, economical crisis, Vietnam War, Middle East crisis, and so on. Not surprisingly any of these ended up in catastrophy. He was defeated by the cacahuet farmer from the South Jimmy Carter. I switched myself from being totally pro-american to totally anti-american, until I visited a cousin of mine at MIT, where he was studying electrical engeneering. There, I changed my mind again. I was housed in a ΣK∆ or whatever fraternity from Harvard University and had a lot of fun. May I have another one to say: I saw a free world for the first time in my life. I returned to Spain decided to kill Franco. He died 3 months later. Quotations attributed to Nixon: People have to know whether or not their president is a crook. Well, I deserve everything I got. Some people said I didn’t handle it properly and they are right. I screwed it up. Mea culpa. They should be punished. Hoy can they evaluate such an idiotic president, so religious and morally lacking. I am full of jews and most jews are disloyal. You cant trust these bastards. Dont trust me. If anybody who has been in this chair ever had reasons to be anti-semitic, I did... and I am not. You know what I mean ? No. If I kill the jews, I kill myself, for I’m am fool of them. I was never the President. You know what I mean ? Yes. Why do the americans love Kennedy so much and hate me so much, I am as religious as he was. My insults don’t come from me but from the fool inside me. The Washington post is for a jew, that’s why they hated me. 32 This is North-America. The domestic policy of the US in the period 19602010 has been completely dominated by external crisis. Carter was defeated by Iran more than by Reagan, and Bush by the fear of another Irak war rather than by his stupid economy. The contrary may well happen: a president is elected after removing some external danger rather than by his economical ideas. This phenomenon is know in history as the ‘King of Bohemia’ effect. In 1789, the French Revolution went wrong after declaring war to this unexisting king. It resulted in all other european countries forming a coalition against France and the war lasted 30 years. Victories and defeats in distant places provoked the fall or reinforcement of internal governments. Power in France shifted from enlighted to foolish revolutionaries that responded to external dangers by internal terror. The US did the same after 1963, when the Vietnam war started, and even earlier, after the Korea war, that triggered enraged anti-communism, witch-hunting, un-american expulsions, struggle against civil rights, massive murderings and other illegal activities, all comparable to terror in revolutionary France in the period 1792-94. In those situations, police takes control of power. Indeed, the US was governed by CIA directors like G.Bush. This is Central-America. Cuba is discussed elsewhere. It became a hotspot for US foreign policy since 1960. Central America was considered by the US as his rear garden and dangerous liberation ideas started to grow there, watered by tropical rains. Gardening action to extirpate these evils was necessary in at least four parcels: Nicaragua, El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras. The enemies: sandinists, Farabundo Marti Front, guerrilla in Guatemala and Honduras. US friends were some of the most criminal dictators in the history of America: Somoza, Romero, Rios Montt and Noriega. The US under Killinger and Reagan applied usual massive murdering techniques. They achieved a record at 1 million assassinations. United Fruits retook power in Central America. This is South-America. Operation Condor was a campaign of political repression and terror involving assassinations and intelligence operations officially implemented in 1975 by US-driven dictators of South America. The number of deaths is in dispute, possibly 1 000 000 assassinations, but the total number of affected people by torture, emprisonement or exile may go up to a few millions. The Condor operation affected Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia and Brazil, and the US provided technical support until 1978. The first part of this plan was taken over by dictators under Nixon, like Stroessner in Paraguay, Banzer in Bolivia, Pinochet in Chile, Videla in Argentina. Just a few isolated murders: Carlos Prats, Bernardo Leighton, Orlando Letelier, from Chile, and 33 even the US congressman Edward Koch. This is the beginning. In 1951 Mossadegh was elected prime minister of Iran by parlamentary vote. He nationalised petroleum industries, a fatal decision for him. Eisenhower and Churchill arrested him with support of Sha Reza Palevi. The opposition leader became the Ayatollah Khomeini, in exile in France, but returning in 1979 to impose a theocratic regime. Many people did not understand the true nature of this regime and welcomed it. They trusted in God like many other nations. The US and allies had a brilliant idea: to invade Iran by Irak, resulting in a 10 years war with 1 million dead. Worse, Irak became a heavily armed country. It’s a typical example of pompierpyromaniac action. The US by that time specialised in creating artificially conflits were none existed, then suffocated them by creating others and so on. Brilliant examples are Central America, South America, Afghanistan, Middle East, the worse being the already discussed Vietnam case. All this could only end up in Apocalypsis. Americans only realised what was going on in the world when they saw the fall of the New York towers in 2011, something that outside the US was expected since long. This is the Middle-East, the story of some 15 wars in the period 1948-2012. The real issue, still unsolved, is how to share the territory called Palestine between jews and palestinians. The conflits were: 1948 war, 1950-60 operations, 1956 Suez Crisis, Six-days war in 1968, 1967-70 wars, and Yom Kippur in 1973. The US backed Israel, and arabs looked naturally at the URSS, so a local conflict was slowly shifting towards a new East-West confrontation like in Vietnan. In 1978 negotiations finally started under Carter and a partial agreement was obtained at Camp David. But the thing went wrong again when Lebanon wars started in 1982 and is still going on nowadays. I confess I was not interested too much by this conflict that I couldn’t understand well, until I saw in the TV images of Sabra and Shatila. I was a fool not to realize that this wars would end up in a massacre. I learned what happened by watching the film ‘Valse with Bachir’ produced by a brilliant film-maker from Israel. Peace attempts were made in Oslo in 1993, pushed by Clinton. I thought naively the conflict was over, and then Rabin was assassinated in 1995. Palestinians are now fighting alone in a kind of pacific guerrilla of Gandhi style called ‘Intifada’. First Intifada in 87-93, second one in 2000-05, Lebanon war in 2006, Gaza uprising in 2008-09, and so on. This stupid war has become a dangerous international conflict. Once URSS disappeared, radical arab countries invented ‘Yihadilla’, 34 a mixture of spanish guerrilla and arabic Yihad war and 11-S followed. This is the end. By 1971, Nixon and Killinger decided to bomb Cambodia for unknown reasons, but the anti-war movement was gaining momentum in the US. Scandals were outing like the My Lai massacre. Operation Lam Saon 719 was also launched against Laos. All possible wrong decisions were taken, with the exception of starting secret peace negociations. But when the agreement was finally reached, there was nothing to negotiate any more, because the war was lost. The Paris agreement of 1973 was a fa¸cade to mask the real outcome to US public opinion. The apocalyptic end of Vietnam war was the offensive resulting in the fall of Saigon and the US embassy, shown to the whole world by TV on april 29, 1975. Brilliant end. The US lost all its prestige gained after WWII and became, for many people of the world, a dangerous enemy. But the nightmare continued in Cambodia. There were terrible massacres that ended only by 1990. The balance of Nixon-Killinger was several million dead, many countries in ruins, US prestige lost. The plagues of Egypt. Fall of the Wall. Arabs say: if you dont want to fight your enemy, seat at the door of your house until his corps passes by. The corps of communism passed by the Berlin Wall on november 10, 1989. Many people claimed success: Reagan, Thatcher, Walesa, and even the Pope. But remember that Marx himself predicted the deperichment of communist states resulting in chaos. Done. Bye bye wall, hello hapiness, american jeans, cars, supermarkets. Fall of the Gods. Gorbatchev is one of the outstanding leaders of XXth century, like Kennedy in the US. He transformed his corrupted URSS empire into some almost-democratic nation called Russia. Without blood. After the rapid deaths of Brezhnev, Andropov and Chernenko, he was appointed in 1985 and stayed in power until the august 1991 coup. The URSS was some inmense empire similar to the french and english of the XIXth century, and exploded in the same way. I dont think economy played a major role in the fall of URSS, although I know Thatcher and Reagan invoked this reason to claim success. The Afghanistan war, on the contrary, was a major issue. This 10 years conflict, 1978-89, is comparable to the Vietnam war for the US, or to the Algerian conflict in 1954-62 for the french. I cannot explain more, beside recommending to read ‘Les bienveillantes’ by Jonathan Little on the Caucasus or ‘Samarcanda’ by Amin Maaloof on Iran, and above all the film about Afghanistan ‘L’´etoile du soldat’ by Chistophe de Pontilly. About 35 Poland, I found ‘The death of a President’ more interesting than Wadja’s saga. Fall of the Center. Yihadilla started in reality in 1992. The coup of september 11, 2001 in NY was the attack number 11 of the series. It was followed by some 100 more until 2012, where my statistics stops. The reasons were not understood at the beginning by the US and the response of invading Afghanistan was a mistake. Al Quaeda guerrilla was orignally trained by the americans to fight the russians and turned out to be another example of pompier-pyromaniac action. America started to pay for his blind support to Israel. Arabs were pushed to suicidical attentats to claim for justice. Irak wars and Guantanamo prison were more mistakes in the treatment of this conflit, and now we see all arab countries falling one after the other in the hands of radical islamism. Is it so difficult to understand that a key to solve this problem is an agreement between Israel and the Palestinians ? Victory after victory. I talk now about the period 1980-2008, where Republican presidents were in office with the exception of Clinton’s mandate in 1992-2000. We therefore have to examine 20 years of republican reign, when the US defeated, besides communism, the lybian bedouins, the terrifying army of Nicaragua, the over-powerful army of Irak, twice, and the Talibans in Afghanistan, among other dangerous enemies. The US went from victory to victory until its final defeat by the Talibans. How can we explain that some arabs armed with spears and arrows shaked the best army in the world, equipped with laser-guided guns and computers ? because the stupidity of generals is unlimited as demonstrated by general Custer, and later Westermore-land in Vietnam. Victory in Iran. In Iran, revolution, attack to the US embassy, the hostages and bla, bla, bla. On april 24, 1980, operation Eagle Clow turned to complete failure and Carter lost pitously the presidential election against the Reagan-Bush ticket, vice and crime hand to hand in famous sentence by Talleyrand. By the way, Bush was director of CIA until 1977. All possible things that could go wrong in this operation went wrong. The probability of this to happen is null. By the way Eagle Claw means George W. On march 30, 1981, Reagan was shot while Bush was at Dallas. The probability of this to happen is null. The name of the assassin was Hinkley Jr that means, also by reordering letters, J.Kennedy. Just little coincidences. Victory in Lybia. A discotheque exploded in Berlin and Gaddafi was guilty, God knows why. The Holy trinity, Bush father and son, decided to attack Lybia on april 15, 1986, killing a few children, one of them a daughter of 36 Gaddafi. This brilliant military operation was condemned by the UN assembly by 78 votes against 28, and 33 abstentions. The attack started using UK military bases, since Spain and Italy refused the give use of theirs. Victory in Granada. Rufufu operation was launched in 1986 to expulse 18 cuban workers constructing an airport in Granada (the island in caribbean sea, not the spanish town). The US marine corps landed 100 000 government issues and brilliantly completed the operation. Victory in Nicaragua. In 1986 a scandal shaked the Reagan administration. They were selling nuclear material to Iran to fund the ‘contras’ guerrilla in Nicaragua, by-passing an Act of the Congress, and also Saddam Hussein’s war against Iran. The money was also used in Reagan’s electoral campaigns. All possible illegalities were committed. The scandal was named ‘Irangate’. Victory in Irak (part 1). This brilliant victory is well known and I will pass quickly over it. The US army had 294 casualties by self-fire and 100 000 affected by the so-called Gulf syndrom, caused by a mixture of uranium powder, chemical gases and anthrax vaccins. In spanish we call that kind of action ‘aprendiz de brujo’. Victory in Irak (part 2). This illegal attack against Irak is also well known. The axis of evil was formed by various countries: Iran-Irak-Korea according to Bush, Cuba-Lybia-Syria, according to Bolton, and Belarus-Burma-Zimbaue, according to Rice. No single country is common. Nuclear material was sold to Korea to attack Irak, to Iran to attack Lybia, and to Burma to attack Zimbaue. With 9 countries you have 84 possible combinations of 3 countries, leading to as many wars. Why Irak was selected on march 20, 2003 ? I dont know. The result was at least 100 000 Irak civilians killed (some believe the number went up to 500 000), the country was destroyed completely and it has not recovered to date. Victory in Afghanistan. As commented before, after 11-S 2001, the US launched an attack on Taliban forces and al-Qaeda, under Bin Laden command, in Afghanistan. Then Guantanamo and illegal assassination of Bin Laden. US retreat from Afghanistan may be as ridiculous as Vietnam’s after 10 years of guerrilla fighting. Talibans and radical islamists are slowly taking power everywhere in in arab world. The US is what we call in Spanish ‘aprendiz de brujo’. 37 . How many roads must a man walk down Before you call him a man How many seas must a white dove sail Before she sleeps in the sand Yes’nd how many times must a cannon ball fly Before they’re forever banned The answer my friend is blowin’in the wind The answer is blowin’in the wind Yes’nd how many years can a mountain exist Before it’s washed to the sea Yes’nd how many years can some people exist Before they’re allowed to be free Yes’nd how many times can a man turn his head Pretending he just doesn’t see The answer my friend is blowin’in the wind The answer is blowin’in the wind Yes’nd how many times must a man look up Before he can see the sky ? Yes’nd how many ears must one man have Before he can ear people cry Yes’nd how how many deaths will take till he knows That too many people have died The answer my friend is blowin’in the wind The answer is blowin’in the wind 38 V. Godfather II John Fitzgerald Kennedy, JFK, was born in 1917 at Brookline (Mass), the second son of Joseph Kennedy, a wealthy cotholic businessman with irish origins, who served as ambassador in London during the Roosevelt administration despite his conservative political views. JFK graduated in 1940 at Harvard University with a degree in International Affairs, and inmediately enrolled the US Navy, just before the Pearl Harbour attack. He served in the Pacific theater as lieutenant in command of a patrol torpedo boat. He was involved in action with heroic conduct and was awarded a Navy medal. His elder brother, Joseph Kennedy Jr, was killed in action as pilot of the US Air Force in 1944 over France. After the war, in 1946, JFK won a seat at Congress in a Mass. district as candidate of the Democrat party and served 6 years. In 1952, he won a seat also in Mass. at the Senate and married Jacqueline Bouvier next year. He was a young and brilliant politician, so it was no surprise when he was elected Democrat candidate for the presidential election of 1960 at the age of just 43. He asked Lyndon Johnson to be his vicepresident to attract the vote of the South, traditionally democrat but more conservative. He opposed Nixon, current vice-president under Eisenhower, and was given null chance to defeat him for his unexperience and catholic faith. In other words, he was not a WASP. He won. It was not difficult to explain. His opponent was so confident, that he forgot to shave in a famous TV debate that resulted in a desaster for him. If you have to choose between James Dean and Dracula, you select the first, as simple as that. Dont’t ask what America can do for you, ask what you can do for America. He did a lot of things for America and was killed. He was anomalous in a country shifting into the hands of military and financial lobbies. Both tried to trap him in foreign policy affairs: Cuba and Vietnam. The military disasters in Cuba 39 and Vietnam deserve separate attention. He signed agreements with the URSS, like the Nuclear Test Treaty in 63, banning nuclear tests other than underground. This was a trigger for more ambitious future accords. JFK was also successful in domestic policies and gave a big boost to Civil Rights: abolition in practice of death penalty, suppresion of black people discrimination. He also pushed the space program. He was one of the best presidents of the US, together with Abraham Lincoln and Franklin Roosevelt. He was not in office, as many other US presidents, to make war, enrich the lobbies and reinforce secret illegal police actions. He cared for minorities: negroes, hispanic and sexually discriminated. He was assassinated in Dallas, Texas, at 12:30 pm on november 22, 1963. His assassin was Oswald, who was in turn assassinated by X. All are of course fake names. His successor, Johnson, named a commission chaired by X, that concluded that Oswald was the one guilty and no more. But, who killed the killer and why ? no one can answer that, still today. A 2004 poll showed that 66% of americans think that JFK was the victim of a conspiracy and 74% that there was a cover up. Then, who is X ? A person who has power enough to conspire and kill a president of the US, then his assassin and mislead the investigation. There are only 2 or 3 candidates, all inside the US administration, but they were not under close scrutiny. The discussions instead were on the number of bullets, the angles and velocities of them, the spead of sound, and so on. X was a very clever person, acting in the dark. This reduces the number of candidates from 3 to 1. Negroes weren’t slaves any more but had no rights. They were segregated even inside a bus, in seats reserved for them at the back. It was a matter of justice and JFK selected his brother Robert Francis Kennedy, RFK, to hold the post of General Attorney. He was critized for this choice, but it was an excellent one. RFK became the brain of JFK, he made the grand design of his electoral campaigns and solved the Missile Crisis in Cuba. He restablished Civil Rights by force. He searched not just the new frontier, but another world more fair than this one. In other words, he was more dangerous than his brother for the established lobbies. JFK was allowed to rule for 3 years, RFK for none. He was killed in troubled 68, with Vietnam war in its climax, riots at universities, Guevara killing, Luther King killing. I was 12, and a teacher of mine came to the classroom in despair shouting ‘Kennedy has been assassinated !’. I did not understand, since he was already dead. 40 It took to me 40 years to understand. They have a problem at Houston to defeat the russian Gagarine flying in empty space. NASA was the solution and von Braun its director. He constructed the V1 rockets for Hitler during WWII. ‘I believe this nation should commit itself to achieving the goal of landing a man on the moon... we choose to go there not because it’s easy, but because it’s hard’. He offered to the Soviets cooperation but Khrushev declined since he had the lead. He was wrong. The US landed on the moon in 1969, before the end of the decade. As predicted by Kennedy. Was it an adventure comparable to the discovery of America by Columbus ? the answer in a few centuries. The missile crisis has been misunderstood because logic has not been applied in its analysis. It wasn’t a conflict between US and URSS. It was the Kennedys against X. This time X was defeated. He launched the attack at Cochinos to force Castro to appeal to the URSS, which in turn triggered the Missile Crisis. This crisis was like Pearl Harbour with a few merchant ships againt the US, instead of the powerful japonese fleet. A comedy. Yes, there was no military russian naval forces involved. The missiles were as real as those of Graham Greene in ‘Our man in Havana’. Tell me where the drama was. It was only a subjet for Hollywood, and for a book to praise RFK before its 1968 campaign. Main facts about Vietnam: coup in 1963 at Saigon, arrest and assassination of Ngo Dieu Bien Phu, Buddhist crises, Quang Duc, Xa Loi Pagoda, Krulak, Mendenhall mission and McNamara. This is how historians explained the start of a war that ended in 1973 officially, in reality much later, in 1980. I remember only how it ended. The spanish TV showed clouds of desperate vietnamese trying to catch helicopters at the roof of the american embassy in Saigon. Then these helicopters landing on the platform of an aircraft carrier at a sea nearby. There was no time for removing the helicopters out of the landing deck and they were pushed down to the sea as soon as refugees were out. Later, there was not even time to land on the deck, they simply crashed on the sea, full of desperate refugees. This reminded me the crossing of the Berezina River by Napoleon troops. A chaotic retreat. Historians dont care much about how and why Napoleon entered Russia. Only how he managed to escape. Dont waist your time trying to understand how the Vietnam war started. In fact it started in 1946 rather than in 1963. If you want to understand the Vietnam war, watch Apocalypse Now, Full Metal Jacket, and Platoon. JFK married in 1953, at age 35, Jaqueline Bouvier. The Kennedy fam41 ily has produced 1 president, 3 senators and multiple other representatives. And assassinations and scandals. After the death of JFK, his wife married millionaire Onassis, at everybody’s surprise. Something went wrong in the president’s marriage. It took time to know what. He had 3 sons, but the last, Patrick Kennedy, died at birth. The elder, John, in a plane crash. Besides that, his brothers Joseph and Robert died in action. Edward K almost died in a car accident. His father Joseph was a gifted businessman, and had at least 3 sons with enough prestige to run for US presidency: John, Robert and Edward. They were wealthy people, but defended social justice and civil rights. Why ? Lets’s talk about mental health. All great men have mental disorders. What about private life ? Rare things happened in JFK’s life: happy birthday to you, mister president, do you remember this ? JFK said to UK premier Macmillan: if I dont have sex for 3 days, I get terrible headaches. Headaches ! what an interesting thing ! All great people have headaches. No neurology manual that I have consulted claims that migraine is cured by sex. And the other pains ? much after his death, it was claimed that he cured headaches with Monroe, Dietrich and many others, a long list of 1003 women. He had a mental disorder that triggered all kind of strange deceases, such that he was initially disqualified to serve in the Army. He had lower back problems, underwent several spinal operatons, and was ill most of the time ! incredible. Like Napoleon, Ceasar or Alexander. In 1947, at age 30, he was diagnosed with Addison’s decease, some extremely rare endocrine disorder. He suffered hypothyroidism, autoinmune polendocrinic syndrom of type II, a non-existing syndrom by the way, and doctors recommended a combination of hormones, animal organ cells, steroid vitamins, enzyms and amphetamines, which resulted in hyperactivity sometimes or hypoactivity in other occasions like the failed Vienna summit. But in fact JFK neglected all those cures and applied only his own therapy: sex. His disorder of type II was only in his head. Robert Francis Kennedy was born in 1925 in Brookline (Mass), the 7th child of Joseph and Rose Kennedy. He had in reality no links to Boston but rather to Bronx, NY. He was too young to be engaged in WWII, but enlisted in the US naval reserve, then entered Harvard university. He was 8 years younger than John, but more clever. He was able to digest thousands of documents and ciffers. He was a maniac. He used his marvellous brain to organize the electoral campaings of his brother and combat organize fraud 42 and crime. Both brothers were unseparable, but unlike his elder, Robert married very young and had many children. NY Times called him unexperienced and unqualified to serve as Attorney General. His elder brother joked: I don’t know what’s wrong to give him a little legal experience before he goes out to learn some law. RFK combined roles such as campaign director, attorney general, organizor, chief advisor of the president, and protector of his brother. He only failed on the last. JFK said about him: If I want something done, I ask him, he is the doer in this administration and his organizational gift has rarely been surpassed. He disregarded Edgar Hoover’s opinion, and attacked Hoffa, a mafia leader. His record is spectacular, but he disregarded the real criminal. In 1963, Hoover brought RFK proof that Luther King was a communist, but without any consequence. Hoover took action by other means, you know what aiming. RFK was busy at protecting civil rights as discussed before. When he shall die, take him and cut him out in little stars, and he will make the face of heaven so fine that all the world will be in love with night and pay no worship to the sun. That is what RFK said after his brother’s death. He was close to breaking down but recovered. Only 9 months later, He left Johnson’s administration to run for a Senate seat in NY. He was accused by his opponent to be an ‘arrogant carpet bagger’, but won the election. As senator, RFK cared about afro-americans, a newly coined name for negroes, and indians, and hispanic minorities. He opposed war escalation in Vietnam. I note in passing that many US casualties in Vietnam were afro-americans. Do you remember ‘he is only a pawn in their game’ ? I do. But in the game of who ? who is over. Last campaign of Robert Kennedy. Johnson got low support in a New Hampshire primary for the 1968 election. JFK declared his candidacy on march 16, 1963. I dont oppose a man but a policy, said he. Johnson dropped out the race, he knew only too well that he could not defeat a Kennedy, the same as Nixon. On may 7, RFK won the primary election of Indiana, lost in Oregon on may 28, and was due to win in California but the unexpected happened. On june 5, 1968, at the ballroom of Ambassador Hotel, he went to the kitchen after some hand pushed him into this direction. As you know, kitchen is normally the exit in any house, especially if you leave as smoke. There waited Sirhan Sirhan and... the rest is known. As for Ruby and Oswald, Shirhan-Shirhan has a meaning by reordering letters: Rishar-Nisan. A simple coincidence. 43 In 1950 Robert married Ethel Shakel and had 11 children: Kathleen, Joseph, Robert, David, Mary, Michael, Mary2, Christopher, Matthew, Douglas and Rory. The last one was born after his assassination. His biographer, Schlesinger Jr, said that he could be both ruthless and diligent. RFK said himself: if somebody calls me ruthless, I’ll destroy him. He had profound catholic faith. He had rapid changes of mood, many children, no extraconjugal adventures like his brother, and a strange faith in social justice. He was also a maniac and a fetichist of white objets. He changed several times a day his white shirt and always appeared in public in shirt unlike his brother, always in impecable blue suit. How can we put all this together ? the answer: Eschylus. In our sleep, pain that we cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart and in despair, against our will, comes wisdom through the awful grace of Gods. This citation from Agamemnon’s Eschylus was quoted by RFK in a speach only two months before his death. The last politician that I know to quote greek literature was Julius Caesar. He said αλǫα ιαγτ α ǫστ with the double meaning of ‘dice are ejected’ and ‘destiny follows its course’. It has not been studied enough, but RFJ was talking all time greek mythology: Agamemnon, Orestes, Oedipus, Achiles, Patroclus, .... Unlike his brother, he was not ill, physically. No migraine, no strange symptoms, no lovers except his wife, nothing. The only strange thing: too many children. Another example of a great man with many children is the writer Thomas Mann. He named his 6 children: Erika, Klaus, Golo, Monika, Elisabeth, Mikael. He was also a lover of greek mythology and used the greek letter ka=κ to form these names, the same as RFK used th=θ or ph=φ. Mann was bisexual but had no known love adventures except in his novels. The love of RFK was his other. He had no physical disorders, just a mental one. John Edgar Hoover (1885-1972) was the first director of FBI in 1924 and remained its director until death in 1972. He is credited to building a large and efficient police, able to kill hundreds of american citizens without leaving any trace. He actually ruled the US without being elected by suppressing his opponents in a rough way. It is a mistery why some FBI director can be in office so long. In the UK, the MI5 director is outed every few years after some sex scandal, defection to the enemy or the like. If you are responsible for the safety of the president, and he is killed, you remain in office for the case you need to kill another one. Morever you lead the commission that certifies that you are not responsible for the crimes you commit. Hundreds 44 of US citizens were killed in strange ways, never elucidated, especially in the decade 1960-70, with Hoover in office, and nobody cared. A serial killer was in action. Nixon’s America was like the third Richard’s England. Inmediately after taking his degree, Hoover was hired by Injustice Dpt. to work in the Incendiary Emergency Division. He soon became head of Division’s Allien authorized by Wilson Chambers to arrest without trial any innocent, with the only condition that he proved total loyalty. Apology of injustice was invented by the cynic school in ancient Greece, as noted by Diogenes Laercius. A list of 1400 suspected men was made and they were arrested. All suspect of criminal activities were left free. Besides that, Hoover is credited for fighting against civil rights, and in favour of mafia and gangsters. Fight against civil rights. Hoover was concerned about subversion and, under his leadership, everybody except mafia and gangsters were suspected. He tried to exagerate dangers and ‘overstepped his bounds in pursuit of perceived threat’ in biographer’s words. In fact, this behavour is described in books of psychiatry as a mental disorder called paranoia and may lead to massive murdering, as in the Stalin or Hitler cases. In the 50’s, evidence of Hoover unwillingness to focus FBI ressources to fight mafia became clear for the media and his detractors. His moves against people who maintained contact with civil right movements and his tries to undermine their reputation are notorious. The treatment of Martin Luther King is only one example. As commented before, Hoover directed personnally the FBI investigation on JFK’s assassination, but just a few days before Hoover himself testified in the Warren commission hearings, President Johnson suppressed the mandatory retirement of the FBI director at age 70 and appointed him for life. The Warren Commission concluded that Hoover was responsible for the assassination of Kennedy and therefore everybody except him was under suspicion. Besides that, Hoover was infatigable fighter in favour of mafia and gangsters. There were gansters wars. Everybody knows about prohibition. When in Boston, in 1975, I tried to drink a beer in a bar, I was asked to show my ID card that said I was about to be 20, but still not there, and under these circumstances I was reduced to drink a coca-cola. Coming to the gangster wars, Bonny and Clyde, Dillinger, Corleone, Soprano and all that. After 40 years of fighting in favour of them, FBI has succeded to keep them alive. 45 Was JEH homosexual ? of course he was. I won’t copy all the rubbish that has been said about that. Is that all the wrong things they can say about me ? if you want to be famous you must be gay or pregnant. I quote a famous actor from Hollywood affronting the press. People have to start to understand that it’s more normal to be a french gay than a french potato, a french kiss than a french piss, a greek love than a lock hole. The great disorder of JEH was not to be gay but mentally ill. He was clever and maniac, otherwise you cannot be the director of FBI for 40 years. But he used his power in favor of crime, he was paranoic. He thought himself invested of the divine mission of saving America from evils and the means were conspiration and murder. A lot is discussed about his sexuality except the only relevant thing: he liked black leather and SM, like the Gestapo agents. We are ready to conclude who is X by funeral clues. JEH died on may 2, 1972, and was honoured for his long-standing career at the service of crime. The FBI quarters in Whashington DC are named after him. In crime we trust. Nixon delivered an eulogy at the funeral service in the National Presbyterian Church of Washington DC. In Nixon we trust. Yes, he said truth for once in his life. He said about Hoover: ‘he brimmed over (with magificent achievement) and (dedicated service)’. By reordering letters: ‘he brimmed over (murdering john fitgerald chenedy) and (robert phrancis)’. 46 . A bullet from the back of a bush Took Medgar Evers’ blood A finger fired The trigger to his name A handle hit out in the dark A hand set the spark Two eyes took the aim Behind a man’s brain But he can’t be blamed He is only a pawn in their game A South politician preaches To the poor man You got more than black Don’t complain You’re better than them You’ve been born With white skin They explain But he can’t be blamed He is only a pawn in their game And the Negro’s name Is used, it is plain For the politician’s gain As he rises to fame And the poor’s right remains On the caboose of the train A bullet from the back Took Kennedy’s blood But nobody’s to blame The killer’s only a pawn their game 47 . 48 VI. Godfather III (after ‘Angels in America’) I am the angel of America, the bald eagle, the continent dominator, the light of philosophy, the incandescent candle ! I unfold my leaves, still bright, and in salutation I offer them to you wide open, I am the american prophet into night, into night I come, I who pierceth the dark, I american heart all hot for truth, the true great violinist, the knowledge mind, salt of the land, head of heaven ! Remove from their hidden place the sacred instruments, get a sword or an axe or tool of any kind for disrupting the tile and unearth your sacred desire of love, submit, submit to the will of heavens, be lead by your nightly dreams to the sacred place, for you were weak of body though not of will, my wrath is as fearsome as continence is splendid, and from the council of instrumental localities, meet in this time of sharp confusion heaven or reach down to death, and in touching you, I touch the Earth where lies your flesh, density of desire, gravity of skin, that makes run the engine of creation, the ectasy of love, the pulse, the pull, the throb, the universe aflame with angelic ejection, the heaven thrum to seraphic route, the fiercy glappling, the feathery joinings, infinite, unceasing blood pump of creation, despair and life. I am citizen Cohn. For the most part, the acts attributed to me, such as the illegal conferences with judge Kaufmannn during the trial of Ethel Rosenberg, are to be found in the historical record. But I am not fiction, a simple world of dramatic fiction. My words are not invention, nor the liberties I have taken. Bad news, Henry told me. Nobody knows what causes it. The best theory is to blame a retrovirus. Its presence is made known to us by useless antibodies that appear in reaction to its entrance into the bodystream 49 through an orifice. They are powerless to protect the body against it. Why ? we dont know. The body’s inmune system ceases to function. Sometimes the body even attacks himself. At any rate, it’s left open to a whole of horrors and infections from microbes which it used to defend against, like Kaposi’s sarcomas. The lesion in your throat is one of those. It may also be able to slip past your blood stream barrier into brain. That’s bad news. It is fatal in we dont know how many per cent of people who suppressed their immune response. This is very interesting Mr Wizard, said I, but why the fuck are you telling me all this ? Give me a diagnosis. AIDS ? No, Henry, no. AIDS is for homesexuals. I have just liver cancer. Why has democracy succeeded in America ? of course by ‘succeeded’ I mean comparatively, not literally, not in the present but in the past. What makes the prospect of some sort of radical democracy spread outwards and grow up ? Why the power once so carefully preserved by the original farmers of our Constitution is seen inexorably drawn downwards in spite of the best efforts of the left to stop it ? It’s our right ! The really hard thing about being left in this country is it trips over all these petrified little fetiches, freedom, equality, fraternity. You know, we’ll go on for God’s sake about freedom, and so what does that mean ? the words freedom, human rights ? You have Bush talking about human rights and so, what are all these people talking about ? they might as well be talking about the Mars planet. People don’t know what freedom ontologically is, or human rights, like they see these bourgeois property as right man type, but that is not frenchisement, nor democracy, nor something implicit, what’s potential within this idea, is not the idea but the blood in it. That’s just my liberalism, the worst kind of liberalism, like Reagan’s intolerance, bourgeois intolerance, and what I think that AIDS shows is the limits of tolerance, the intolerable, because when the shit hits the fan, you find out how much tolerance is worth. Nothing. And underneath all the intolerance there is passionate hate. It’s revolutionary in Washington. We have a new agenda and finally a new great leader. They got back to the Senate, but we have the Courts. By the nineties, the Supreme Court will be block-solid Republican appointees and the Federal bench-Republican judges like land mines, everywhere, everywhere. Affirmative action ? Take it to court ! Boom ! Land mine. And we’ll 50 get our way on just about everything: abortion, defense, Central America, family values, a live investment climate. We have the White House locked till year 2000. And beyond. A permanent fix on the Oval Office ? It’s possible. By 92, we’ll get the Senate back, and in ten years the South. It’s really the end of New Deal Socialism. The end of secular humanism. The downing of a genuinely american political way of life. And all modeled on Reagan, Ronald Wilson Reagan. It sounds great, Mr Hell. And Justice is the hub. Especially since Mr Mess took over. He doesn’t specialize in fine points of law, he is flatfooted, a cop, he reminds me Teddy Roosevelt. I can’t wait to meet him. Too bad, he’s been dead for sixty years ! yah. You said you want to... it’s a little joke. It reminds me the story about the... The great question before us is: are we damned ? will the past release us ? can we change ? at any time ? And we all desire that this change will come. And theory ? how are we to proceed without theory ? what system of thought have these Reformers to present to this mad planetary disorganization, to the inevident fact, event, phenomenon, calamity ? Do they have, as we did, a beautiful theory, as bold as grand, as comprehensive ? You can’t imagine. When you read for the first time the classical texts, when in the dark vexed night of your ignorance the seed words enlighted your mind, when the incredible bloody struggle came into it, it gave you Praxis and Theory. You who live in this sorrow little age cannot imagine the grandeur of the prospect we gazed upon. We are standing atop the highest peak of mighty mountains, and viewing in one all knowing glance the granitic order of creation. You can’t imagine it, I weep for you. What have you to offer now, children of this theory ? Market incentives, american cheese-burgers and pizzas, watered capitalism. A change ? indeed. Show me the book of the next beautiful theory and I promise that my blind eyes will see again and I’ll be with you at the barricades. Show me the words that will reorder the world or keep silent otherwise. If you want smoke and lies, listen to Bush and Reagan. But if you want to look into the heart of modern conservatism, look at me. Everyone else has abandoned the struggle, everything nowadays is just like taking tea with Nixon and Mao, that was so disgusting, did you see that ? were you born yet ? My generation had clarity. Unafraid to look deep into the pain of 51 the heart, of the world. What a pit, what a nightmare we found there. I have looked, I have searched all my life for absolute bottom, and I found it, believe me. It was myself. How tragic and beautiful life is. How sinful people are. The inmutable heart of what we are, bleeds through whatever we might become. All is vanity. I dont know the world anymore. After I die, they will say it was for money. But it was never the money. Forgiveness. Do you see this lady around here, this dummy lady, this stupid lady ? she is Ethel ! Ethel Rosenberg ! She is off watching the hearings, that treacherous bitch, and also the son of a bitch of his husband ! I got both of them into ashes by passing intense electrical current. That was great ! the top of my criminal career. I don’t understand, what the hell are they doing here ? why do they say ‘despair and die’ ? I heard this before, but where ? In a speach by Richard Nixon, o was it another Richard ? AZT ? you got it ? One real proof of the elixir of life. There are maybe thirty people in the whole country who are getting this drug. There are hundred thousand people who need it. Look at me. The dragon atop the golden horde. No, but as Jimmy Carter said, neither is life fair. So put your broken eyes back into your goldish head. I am not moved by unequal distribution of goods in the earth. It’s history, I didn’t write it though I flatter myself as a footnote. And you of course, sinister and sad phantoms. You repulse me, I hate you and your god-dammed friends, such a shock when a bill comes due. No one has worked harder than me. To end up knocked flat in this bed of hospital. Is that fairness ? they couldn’t touch me when I was alive, but now that I’m dying, I’m dead, I’m a god-dammed dead man ! The worst thing about being sick in America, Ethel, is you are booted out of the parade and later out of paradise. America has no use for sick. Look at Reagan, he is so healthy, he is hardly human, he takes a slug in his chest and two days later he’s out riding ponies in his ranch. That’s America, not a country for the infirm. Yisgadal ve’yiskadash sh’mey rabo, sh’mey de Kidshoh, Boray pre hagoffen... No, that’s the Kaddish... I know, I know, it’s no Hebrew, it’s Ladino... Shema Yisroel, adonai, Bechayeychon uv’yomechechon uvchayey d’chol beys Yisroel... Ba’agoto uvizman koriv... ve’imroo omain... Yehey sh’mey rabo m’vorach... L’alom ulolmey olmayoh Yisborach ve’ yishtabach ve’yispoar 52 ve’yisroman ve’yisnasey ve’yis’hadar ve’yisalleh ve’yishallol sh’mey dekudsho... Berich hoo’eylo min kol birchoso veshiroso... Tushb’choso venechemoso, daarmeeron b’lomo ve’imroo omain. Y’he sh’lomo rabbo min sh’mayo v’chayim olenu v’al kol Yisroel, v’ imru omain... Oseh sholom bimromov... hu ya-aseh sholom olenu v’al col Yisroel... Oseh sholom bimromov... hu ya aseh sholom olenu v’al col Yisroel... Y’imru omain... v’imru omain... Cohn’sono’fabitch.... 53 . The smoke ring of my eyes Down the floggy wings of time Twisted me by crazy sorrow Silhouetted by the sea Without memory and fate Let me forget about my aids Until tomorrow Though you might be cryin’ It’s just escapin’ on the run And I have no faces facin’ And I hear my veins pulsin’ Like a tamborine in time I would’t pay it any mind It’s just a shadow I’m seein’ Take me on a trip with you My senses have been stripped My hands can’t feel to grip I wait only for pain To start wandering I’m ready to go anywhere I’m ready for to fade Though I know my evenin’s Vanished from my hand Let me blindly here to stand But steel not sleeping My weariness amazes me I’m branded on my bed And dead for dreaming 54 VII. Trial of Oppenheimer Main characters LEWIS STRAUSS: Chairman of the AEC ROGER ROBB: Prosecutor ROBERT OPPENHEIMER: Defendant LLOYD GARRISON: Oppenheimer’s attorney GORDON GREY: Chairman of AEC Security Board G.GREY, T.MORGAN, W.EVANS: Members of the panel Oppenheimer’s witnesses: L.GROVES, K.GLENNAN, K.COMPTON, J.LANDSDALE, H.BETHE, G.DEAN, G.KENNAN, D.LILIENTHAL, J.CONANT, E.FERMI, N.RAMSAY, I.RABI, N.BRADBURY, W.WHITMAN, L.DUBRIDGE, V.BUSCH, R.BACHER, J.VON NEUMANN Prosecutor’s witnesses: L.ALVAREZ, K.PITZER, E.TELLER, R.WILSON, W.BORDEN, E.LAWRENCE All action takes place in room 2022 of AEC building, Washington D.C. AEC=Atomic Energy Commission. 55 Week 1 - day 1 (12 april 1954) (Enter Grey) Grey: I open these hearings by reading a letter from the AEC general manager, Kenneth Nichols, dating december 1953, mentioning requirements in the Atomic Energy Act of 1946, charging the commissioners to determine ‘character, associations and loyalty’ of individuals who work for the commission and referring especially to section 10 of the Act that AEC employers do not endanger the common defense and security and requiring that individuals be suspended if any information exists that employment would not be clearly consistent with the interests of national security. A panel will decide whether Dr. Oppenheimer can maintain his clearance or it has to be revoked. This panel is composed by myself, as chairman of the AEC Security Board, Thomas Morgan, industrialist, and Ward Evans, from the Chemistry Dpt. of Northwestern University in Chicago. The prosecutor is Roger Robb, Chief Counsel of the AEC, born in 1909 in Baltimore (Maryland) and with a law degree at Yale in 1933. Oppenheimer’s attorney is Lloyd Garrison, born in 1897 in New York, graduate at Harvard University Law School, Dean of Winsconsin University Law School since 1920 and member of the board of directors of the Institute of Advanced Studies, Princeton, since 1953. Week 1 - day 2 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel) Robb: Dr. Oppenheimer, can you tell us your name, profession and past activities ? Oppenheimer: I am Julius Robert Oppenheimer, Born in a jewish family in 1904. I studied Physics at Harvard University and went to complete studies to G¨ottingen and Z¨ urich. I came back and became professor at both Caltech and Berkeley, where I formed the best theoretical group in the US at the time. From 1942 until 1945 I was director of Los Alamos National Lab, New Mexico, as part of the Manhattan Project. In 1947 I was appointed director of the Institute of Advanced Studies, Princeton. I have served as advisor for nuclear energy matters, in particular as chairman of the AEC. 56 Robb: Members of the panel, I will demonstrate that the statements of Dr. Oppenheimer are in contradiction with existing documents. These contradictions are not simple errors but are more deliberate, extensive and sinister than previously thought. Oppenheimer’s opposition to the Super made him an unacceptable risk. Moreover, this risk originates in Oppenheimer’s wanderings with left organizations, falsehoods, evasions and misrepresentations. I advocate zero tolerance for this behaviour and ask to remove the clearance of Dr. Oppenheimer to consult secret information regarding our atomic energy program. Garrison: Members of the panel, I will prove that Dr. Oppenheimer has always been loyal to his country. That the services rendered by him to this country are outstanding, and his advice in nuclear matters is invaluable. That he is one of the most clever minds in this country and that removing his clearance would be an unjustified error, only possible in the context of hysteria and witch hunting triggered by senator McCarthy and coworkers. Oppenheimer: What impression made on you, members of the panel, my prosecutor, I dont know. In listening to him, I have almost forgotten who I am, so convincing was his speech. However, I assure you, he did not tell you a single word of truth. What amazed me, among so many lies, is that you should be warned against me because of my skills to make a speech. But what they call skill to make a speech is simply telling the truth. If this is what they call a good speaker, I am that one, but not in the manner they believe. You will not hear from me a speech with selected and well ordered words, but a speech without art, with the first words that come to my mind. But my speech will be fair, dont expect anything else from me. Let’s go back at the origin and examine these accusations against me, written by Lewis Strauss and Teller. What did they say at the end ? They claim that Oppenheimer is guilty on earth and heaven, that he makes a good cause from a bad one, that he teaches young people to behave like him. You are all my witnesses and I ask you to inform yourself and report what you know, what you heard, you that followed all my actions. Tell me if I ever behaved as my prosecutor claims. You will realize that all these rumors they tell on my account are false. Young people attached to me were my students. They took pleasure to listen to me and imitate me. They prefer me than other people that believe to know something but know nothing in reality. These people who know nothing take pleasure to say that there is a certain Oppenheimer that is misleading them. But what do I say that is so harmful ? They simply dont know. They claim that I dont do science, that I dont 57 believe in my country, that I transform a bad political cause into a good one. They pretend to know the truth, but are ignorant and harmful. They are full of calumnies against me. These calumnies fuel the hate of Lewis Strauss and Teller against me. They are vice and crime hand to hand. I would be amazed if I could remove so much hate from your minds, when it is so deeply rooted. Their calumnies are on my pursuit. Make an enquiry and you will not find anything true in them. Week 1 - day 3 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel) Robb: Dr. Oppenheimer, do you know Giovanni Lomanitz, Bernard Peters, Joseph Weinberg and Philip Morrison ? Oppenheimer: Yes, they were all former students of mine at Berkeley. Robb: Are they communist ? Oppenheimer: I believe so. Robb: What about your brother Franck and his wife, are they communist ? Oppenheimer: yes. Robb: What about your wife Kitty, is she a communist ? Oppenheimer: yes, she is the widow of Joe Dallet, who died during the Spanish Civil War. Robb: Dont you think it makes too many communists around you ? Would you have employed them in the Manhattan Project ? Oppenheimer: I employ people on their scientific skills not on their political views. Robb: Were you a member of the communist party ? Oppenheimer: I never had a party card, but I was member of about every communist front in the West Coast before 1942. Robb: Did you give money to support the cause of communists during the Spanish Civil War ? Oppenheimer: I contributed $ 150 per month (about $ 2000 in present days). Robb: Did you inform general Groves and colonel Landsdale about these activities ? Oppenheimer: Of course, I filled a security questionnaire for the Manhattan project where I included all this. I personally informed general Groves and 58 the head of security Colonel Landsdale in 1943. Garrison: What were the relations between the USA and communist Russia at the time, 1942-45 ? Oppenheimer: We were allied against nazi Germany. Garrison: Why so many communists in California in the 1930’s ? Oppenheimer: Because the great depression had created large masses of people in total poverty. Garrison: Why did you contribute to the cause of Spanish Republicans during the Civil War ? Oppenheimer: Spain was a democratic country that was abandoned by big democracies like the USA, England or France into the hands of the nazis and fascists. The only countries that helped Spain were communist Russia and Mexico. Week 1 - day 4 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel) Robb: Late in june 1943, did you spend a night with your old girlfriend Jean Tatlock ? Oppenheimer: yes. Robb: That was when you were working on a secret project ? Oppenheimer: yes. Robb: Was she a member of the communist party ? Oppenheimer: yes. Robb: Do you think this is compatible with security ? Oppenheimer: yes, we talked love not war. Robb: Let’s now talk about Haakon Chevalier. Did he belong to the same secret unit of the communist party as you ? Oppenheimer: To the same tea party meeting, yes. Robb: What were you discussing ? Oppenheimer: Les fleurs du mal, le bˆateau ivre and jadis et nagu`ere. Robb: What is all this rubbish ? Oppenheimer: It’s neither rubbish nor reddish. Robb: You told us four different versions of your incident with Chevalier in 59 the winter 1942-43. Which one is correct ? Oppenheimer: Chevalier asked me to spy for the Soviet Union and I refused. Robb: Did you tell the truth to Colonel Pasch ? Oppenheimer: No. Robb: Why ? Oppenheimer: I was an idiot. Garrison: Were you trying to protect Chevalier ? Oppenheimer: Yes. Garrison: Why not simply omitting the incident to Groves ? Oppenheimer: I wanted to demonstrate to Groves that I had broken with my communist past. Week 1 - day 5 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel, Groves) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Groves: I am General Leslie Groves, born in Albany (NY) in 1986. I graduated at West Point in 1918. I belong to the US Army Corps of Engineers. In 1942 I was appointed director of the Manhattan Project and supervised the construction of installations at Los Alamos, Tennessee, Hanford and Ooak Ridge. Robb: What is your opinion on Oppenheimer ? Groves: A hard working person. Sometimes I was afraid he would brake down. Robb: General, in the light of your experience with security matters and of the file pertaining to Oppenheimer, would you clear him today ? Groves: In the view of present evidence I would not clear him. Garrison: If we were back in 1942, would you appoint Dr.Oppenheimer ? Groves: Of course. Garrison: Dr.Oppenheimer had no experience in the management of any major project at the time, why did you appoint him ? Groves: I had this genial intuition and I proved to be right. (Exit Groves, enter Glennan) 60 Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Glennan: I am Keith Glennan, born in 1905 in Ederlin (North Dakota). I studied electrical engineering at Yale. In 1942 I worked at Columbia for the Navy. In 1950-52 I was member of the AEC. Robb: Would you clear Oppenheimer ? Glennan: Yes. Robb: Why ? Glennan: Because, as chairman of the AEC, his decisions were also the result of scientific evidence and not irrational fanaticism. Garrison: What work do you intend to do in the future ? Glennan: Aeronautics and Spacecraft technologies. Week 1 - day 6 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel, Compton) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Compton: I am Karl Compton, born in Wooster (Ohio) in 1897. In 1948 I became professor at Harvard University. In 1930 I moved to MIT as president of the university. I occupied this post in 1930-48 and in the period 1933-49, I was also science advisor of presidents Roosevelt and Truman. Robb: Would you clear Oppenheimer ? Compton: Yes. Robb: Why ? Compton: Because he is a real physicist, like me, and a real physicist cannot be wrong, and in case he is, he knows to rectify. Garrison: Have you anything to do with Arthur Compton, our Physics Nobel Prize winner in 1927 ? Compton: Yes, he is my brother. (Exit Compton, enter Landsdale) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Landsdale: I am Lieutenant Colonel John Landsdale, graduate at VMI (Virginia). I was appointed by general Groves Chief Security of Los Alamos 61 Project. I went to Germany in 1945 to prevent that nuclear material falls in russian hands. Robb: Would you clear Oppenheimer ? Landsdale: Yes. Robb: Colonel, as a lawyer you know that ‘Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus’. Landsdale: Yes, I use my A-model Ford but not the bus. Robb: If you demonstrate that a witness has lied, dont you argue to the jury that they should disregard his evidence ? Landsdale: ‘Quosque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra ?’. Robb: Da Silva was a professional, was he ? Landsdale: Yes, we were all professionals. Robb: More than you ? Landsdale: He was West Point and I was VMI, the same as general Patton. Do you want to argue about that ? Telegram from the Institute of Advances Studies arriving at Oppenheimer’s house in Princeton: ALL OF US IN PRINCETON TODAY WANT TO EXPRESS OUR ADMIRATION FOR YOU, BOTH AS COLLEAGUES AND FRIENDS, WE ASSUME OUR ENTIRE CONFIDENCE ON YOUR LOYALTY. SIGNED, Bram Pais, Freeman Dyson, Kurt Godel, Erwin Panofsky. End of week 1 62 Week 2 - day 1 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel, Bethe) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Bethe: I am Hans Bethe, born in 1906 in Strasbourg, at the time belonging to the German Empire. My mother was jewish. I took my doctorate with Sommerfeld in Munich. In 1933, when Hitler took power, I had to leave Germany and, after a short stay in England, I became professor of theoretical physics at Cornell. During 1943-45, I was head of the theoretical division of Los Alamos. In 1967 I will receive the Nobel Prize for my contributions to explain the production of energy by nuclear reactions in the sun. Robb: What is your opinion of Dr.Oppenheimer ? Bethe: He is absolutely loyal to his country, that he served very long and very well. I have absolute faith in him. Robb: How many divisions were there at Los Alamos ? Bethe: Seven or eight. Robb: Which division was Klaus Fuchs in ? Bethe: In mine. Garrison: Did you have any role in the appointment of Fuchs ? Bethe: No, he was part of the british contingent. Garrison: Who else was part of this contingent ? Bethe: Some 20 physicists, among them Chadwick, Nobel Prize laureate, Peierls, Frisch and Oliphant. Garrison: Were Frisch and Peierls german jews like you ? Bethe: Yes, Frisch explained with Meitner the fission of uranium and Peierls was the first to calculate the critical mass of uranium. (Exit Bethe, enter Dean) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Dean: I am Gordon Dean, born in 1905 in Seattle, graduate at Duke University Law School in 1932. I joined the Dpt. of Justice under Roosevelt Administration. I was spokesman of the Chief Prosecutor at Nuremberg, Robet Jackson. I was appointed chairman of the AEC in 1950-53. Robb: Do you believe in massive nuclear rearmament of the US to win wars like Korea ? 63 Dean: Yes. Robb: So would you clear someone like Oppenheimer ? Dean: I would clear him because we have our arsenal of conventional nuclear bombs thanks to him. Robb: Did you talk to Lewis Strauss ? Dean: No, I have my own criteria. Garrison: Was this nuclear arsenal of any use in Korea ? Dean: No, only foolish generals like McArthur wanted to make use of it. Garrison: How many people died in this war ? Dean: Nobody knows, maybe one million. Garrison: And what was the outcome of this war ? Dean: The border between North and South Korea stayed exactly at the same position as at war start. Garrison: And to achieve this, one million killed ? Dean: Yes. (Exit Dean, enter Kennan) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Kennan: I am George Kennan, born in 1905 in Milwaukee. I am diplomat and work in the Dpt. of State. I am in favor of a policy of appeasement with the Soviet Union and I have strongly supported the Marshall Plan. In 1951, I was appointed ambassador in Moscow but soon after became ‘persona non grata’. I am presently expert in international affairs at the Institute of Advanced Studies in Princeton. Robb: Are you in favor of the thermonuclear program ? Kennan: No. Robb: Would you clear Dr.Oppenheimer ? Keenan: Yes. Robb: Despite his numerous communist friends ? Keenan: We all have friends whose associations we regret. We cannot turn them abruptly, it’s just christian charity. Garrison: It seems you regret the large number of hispanic inhabitants in the south and west of the US. Keenan: Yes, they are outside the traditions that made America. Garrison: Do you know that the Spanish arrived to California around 1600, much before what you call the Americans ? 64 Keenan: No. Garrison: Do you know the origin of american cities like Los Angeles, San Diego, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz, San Francisco and Santa Monica ? Keenan: You mean ‘The Angels’ ? Garrison: I hate every inch of you. Week 2 - day 2 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel, Lilienthal) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Lilienthal: I am David Lilienthal, born 1899 in Morton, Illinois, in a jewish family. I graduated at the Harvard Law School in 1946. In 1946 I was appointed by the Secretary of State Dean Acheson to advice on nuclear energy matters. I advised to put nuclear weapons under international control. I was latter appointed chairman of the AEC. Robb: Are you in favor of the thermonuclear program ? Lilienthal: No, I am in favor of civil nuclear power. Robb: Would you clear Dr.Oppenheimer ? Lilienthal: Yes, because his views and mine are similar. Garrison: Are you aware of the waste problem in civil use of nuclear power ? Lilienthal: I was the first to discuss this problem. (Exit Lilienthal, enter Conant) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Conant: I am James Conant, born 1893 in Dorchester, Mass. I am a chemist and President of Harvard University since 1933. In 1919 I was appointed professor of Chemistry at Harvard and in 1941 chairman of the National Research Committee under Roosevelt administration. Since 1946 I participate in AEC activities. Robb: Would you clear Dr.Oppenheimer ? Conant: Yes, since I opposed the H-bomb as much as he did. Robb: Did you try to convince Lilienthal that Oppenheimer was not a communist ? Conant: Yes, I told him that all the information about his past activities were known, and that he was not any more under soviet control. 65 Robb: Would you clear him in case of any doubt about his communist relations ? Conant: No, I would not clear him under these circumstances. Garrison: Do you know about the fifth amendment ? Conant: Yes, I have myself endorsed the dismissal of academics that invoke the fifth amendment. Garrison: Do you know who are Bertolt Brecht, Joseph Losey, Orson Welles, Charles Chaplin, Arthur Miller, Dashiel Hammett, Leonard Bernstein and Peter Seegers ? Conant: They are not academics. (Exit Conant, enter Fermi) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Fermi: I am Enrico Fermi, born in 1901 in Rome. I studied at the Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa. In 1925 I became professor at Rome University. I formed one of the best nuclear physics experimental groups in Europe, competitive with Cavendish Lab., Curie Lab., and the Kaiser Wilhelm at Dahlem. In 1934 I elaborated the first theory for β-decay. In the 30’s I performed neutron bombardment on nuclei and found many new unstable isotopes. I was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1938 for proving that the crosssections increase dramatically for slowed neutrons. As my wife was jew, I decided to quit Italy for the US and became professor at Columbia first, and since 1942 in Chicago. I constructed there the first atomic pile and worked at Los Alamos as a consultant. After the war I became interested in particle physics. I formed a group at Chicago with five future Nobel laureates, in both theory and experiment: Chamberlain, Steinberger, Gell-Mann,Yang and Lee. Unfortunately I am going to die a few months after these hearings due to cancer. Robb: No more questions. Garrison: Are you the best physicist of the XXth century ? Fermi: We can argue about that. Garrison: What was your view about the thermonuclear program ? Fermi: I was concerned because it could weaken the conventional nuclear program. Garrison: Were the discussions lead by Oppenheimer on the thermonuclear program fair ? 66 Fermi: Yes. Garrison: Did Oppenheimer give everyone the opportunity to express his views ? Fermi: Of course. Garrison: Which are your political views ? Fermi: I am conservative, but independent. Garrison: Would you vote for a red like Oppenheimer ? Fermi: Without any doubt. Garrison: Do you have more communist friends ? Fermi: Yes, Bruno Pontecorvo, a jew born in Pisa in 1913, and member of my Rome group. He was not accepted at Los Alamos due to his political views, and finally went to Russia in 1950. He is the only physicist capable to defeat me at tennis Garrison: What about Emilio Segr`e ? Fermi: He is very good friend of mine. He is italian jew of spanish origins. He worked in my Rome group and escaped in 1938 to the US. At Los Alamos he performed a brilliant experiment to demonstrate that the gun design of the Pu239 bomb would not work due to Pu240 impurities. But the implosion type design did work. In 1946 he became professor at Berkeley and will soon discover antiprotons and get the Nobel Prize in 1959 for this discovery. He will write the best biography of mine and and an excellent textbook in Nuclear Physics. Week 2 - day 3 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel, Ramsay) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Ramsay: I am Norman Ramsay, born in 1915 in Washington DC. In 1915 I graduated in physics at Columbia and later went to Cavendish in Cambridge. On returning to the US, I collaborated with Rabi on molecular and neutron beams. In 1943-45 I worked at Los Alamos experimental division. In 1947 I was appointed professor of Experimental Physics at Harvard University. In 1989 I will get the Nobel Prize for my work on atomic clocks. Robb: I suppose you share the views by Rabi on Oppenheimer. Ramsay: Absolutely. Robb: So, let’s wait for Rabi. 67 Garrison: In 1951 you made a magnificent experiment with Purcell. Can you explain what was it about ? Ramsay: We set for the first time an upper limit for the electric dipole moment of the neutron. Garrison: How can elementary particles have a non-vanishing electric dipole moment ? Ramsay: Due to loop corrections, or to the quark substructure in the case of neutrons. (Exit Ramsay, enter Rabi) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Rabi: I am Isaac Rabi, born in 1898 in Rymanow, Poland, then in the AustroHungarian Empire. My family spoke Yiddish. To escape antisemitism, my family moved to Brooklyn in 1907 and I studied at Cornell electrical engineering. I worked then with Otto Stern in Hamburg on molecular beams. In 1929 I was appointed professor of experimental physics at Columbia. I discovered the nuclear magnetic resonance in 1937 and was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1944. I helped to the foundation of BNL and CERN. I was chairman of the AEC in 1950-54, following Oppie. Robb: Give your opinion on Dr.Oppenheimer. Rabi: He is loyal and by no means a security risk. Robb: Have you spoken with our present chairman Lewis Strauss ? Rabi: Yes, I have never hidden to him that I found this procedure unfortunate. Oppie is a simple consultant. If you dont want his opinion, dont ask him. Period. Why should you go to all these hearings ? Oppie has a positive record. He got for us the bomb. What more do you want, mermaids ? The end of this road will be humiliating for him. This is a pretty bad show. Garrison: You said you helped the foundation of BNL. Was there any important physics done there ? Rabi: Yes, the discovery of the two neutrino especies by Schwartz, Steinberger and Ledermann in 1961. Garrison: What about CERN ? Rabi: The discovery of neutral currents in 1973, of the W and Z bosons in 1983-84 and the Higgs boson in 2012. 68 (Exit Rabi, enter Bradbury) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Bradbury: I am Norris Bradbury, born in 1909 in Santa Barbara. I graduated in CALTECH and did a PhD in experimental physics at Berkeley. In 1943 I went to Los Alamos to work in the experimental division, in particular in the test of the ‘gadget’. In the Trinity Test, I was responsible for its assembly. Since 1945 I am director of Los Alamos, replacing Dr. Oppenheimer. Robb: I suppose you are in favor of clearing him. Bradbury: Certainly, Los Alamos would not exist without him. Garrison: Can you explain to us what the ‘gadget’ means ? Bradbury: It’s the plutonium bomb. It is formed by a sphere of subcritical plutonium shells, to avoid predetonation, surrounded by high explosives. On detonation of these, the shells are projected inwards by shock waves to obtain a critical mass. The idea came from Seth Neddermeyer. The explosive setup was worked out by George Kristiakowski, and Kenneth Bainbridge was responsible of the Trinity test. Garrison: Do you know what ‘Los Alamos’ means ? Bradbury: No idea. Garrison: Volver´an a florecer las verdes alamedas por donde pasa el hombre libre. Week 2 - day 4 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel, Whitman) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Whitman: I am Walter Whitman, born in 1985 in Winthop (Mass). I graduated in chemistry at MIT in 1917, and become in 1917 professor and head of the chemical engineering Dpt. at MIT. During the war I worked on aircraft fuel and jet propulsion. Then I became consultant of the US defense Dpt. Robb: What are your views on Dr. Oppenheimer ? Whitman: A great scientist. Garrison: Do you know George Kristiakowski ? Whitman: Of course, he is professor of physical chemistry at Harvard. He comes from Kiev, where he fought against the communists as member of the 69 White Army. Garrison: Was he employed by Oppenheimer ? Whitman: Yes, he played a major role in the design of the ‘gadget’. Garrison: So a communist like Oppie employed an anti-communist ? Whitman: And there were excellent relations between them. Garrison: I think Kristiskowski made some evaluation of the US Air Force under Kennedy’s administration. Whitman: That’s correct, he concluded that the display of the Strategic Air Command was crazy. Garrison: Who was in charge of this Command ? Whitman: Curtis LeMay (Exit Whitman, enter Dubridge) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Dubridge: I am Lee Dubridge, born in 1910 in Terre Haute, Indiana. In 1924 I obtained my degree in physics at Winsconsin University, Madison. I moved to CALTECH in 1925 and became its president in 1946. I have been scientific advisor of president Truman. Robb: Your opinion on Dr. Oppenheimer ? Dubridge: I know him since he came to CALTECH to teach quantum mechanics in early 30’s. He is an excellent physicist. Robb: Would you clear him ? Dubridge: Yes. Robb: It doesn’t hurt you that he is a communist ? Dubridge: I have enough with Pauling, I dont want any more problems with another communist. Garrison: What kind of problems do you have with Pauling ? Dubridge: Pauling is always fighting for unpopular causes, now you call them ‘civil rights’, and has a stupid lawyer that enjoys defending those left wing dangerous ideals. I had to fight hard to keep Pauling in the faculty against the trustees of the governing board who tried to dump him away. Garrison: Did it help that he got the Nobel Prize for chemistry this year ? Dubridge: Yes, but they became more furious because they had already withdrawn his passport and they had to give him back. Garrison: If he was a communist, why did he turn off the proposal to work at Los Alamos as head of the chemistry division ? 70 Dubridge: Because he was a communist against atomic bombs, not in favor of them like Oppenheimer. Garrison: What’s going on now with Pauling ? Dubridge: This guy can’t stay quiet and will bring more problems. He is going to sign a ridiculous manifesto against nuclear bombs with ten other stupid communists. Garrison: Who are these stupid communists ? Dubridge: Born, Bridgman, Einstein, Infeld, Joliot-Curie, Muller, Powell, Rotblat, Russell and Yukawa. Garrison: Are they all Nobel laureates ? Dubridge: Except Infeld. Garrison: It seems nothing will save Pauling this time. Dubridge: Only that he will get the Nobel Prize for peace. (Exit Dubridge, enter Bush) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Bush: I am Vannebar Bush, born in 1890 in Everett (Mass). In 1919 I joined the Dpt. of electrical engineering of MIT. I became president of MIT and dean of the school of engineering in 1932, then main science advisor in Roosevelt and Truman administrations from 1938. After the war I was appointed member of the board of ATT. Robb: Your opinion on Dr.Oppenheimer ? Bush: He is a genius. After the success of Trinity on july 16th 1945, I took off my hat in tribute to him. Robb: But he is a communist ! Bush: I am going to write a letter to the New York Times to claim that the opponents to Dr.Oppenheimer are the most ridiculous and miserable beings on earth. Garrison: Whom are you talking about ? Bush: This nazi musician and this nazi jew. End of week 2 71 Week 3 - day 1 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel, Bacher) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Bacher: I am Robert Bacher, born in 1905 in Loudonville (Ohio). I graduated in Michigan University in experimental physics and then went to Cornell. In 1942 I was appointed head of the experimental division of Los Alamos and developed the mechanical design for both the uranium and the plutonium bomb. I was also in charge of the experimental tests. In 1949 I became professor at CALTECH. Robb: Your opinion about Dr.Oppenheimer ? Bacher: An excellent physicist and an excellent manager of Los Alamos project. He is one of the few theoreticians that really understand physics. Robb: I suppose you would clear him ? Bacher: Yes, but my advice to him would be to abandon this physics for killing and try something else. Garrison: I think you did the final assembly for the Trinity test at Alamogordo. Bacher: Yes, I was the only person to keep his nerves and found a way to assemble the various plutonium pieces that had expanded due to heat released by the natural radioactivity of plutonium. This is real experimental work. Garrison: Is it fair to say that you really worked out the bomb ? Bacher: Yes, the real work is done by experimentalists, but theoreticians get the credit. (Exit Bacher, enter Von Neumann) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Von Neumann: My name is John Von Neumann, but I was born Janos Lujos in 1903, Budapest, in a jewish family. I studied mathematics and made significant contributions to quantum mechanics in G¨ottingen and Berlin in the years 1926-30. In 1933, I was appointed by the Institude of Advanced Studies in Princeton , together with Albert Einstein and Kurt Godel. In 1950, I invented a computer for thermonuclear calculations called ENIAC. Robb: Would you clear Dr.Oppenheimer ? Von Neumann: Yes. 72 Robb: Why ? Von Neumann: I dont agree with him on the matter of the H-bomb. I have supported this project since 1949. For some people it takes two months, for others two years to reach the correct decision. For Oppie it might take longer, but he will finally join us. Garrison: What is the meaning of ENIAC ? Von Neumann: Electrical And Numerical Integrator and Computer. Garrison: Some people call it MANIAC. Von Neumann: This is a joke by my friend Gamow: Metropolis And Neumann Invent Awful Contraption. Week 3 - day 2 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel, Alvarez) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Alvarez: My name is Luis Alvarez, born in 1911 in San Francisco. I am professor of experimental physics at Berkeley since 1940. In 1940-43, I worked on radar development at MIT and in 1943-44 in the metallurgy lab at Chicago. In 1945 I joined the atomic bomb project at Los Alamos. Since 1946, I work on linear accelerators. Robb: Would you clear Dr.Oppenheimer ? Alvarez: I support the point of view of Teller concerning the H-bomb development. Dr.Oppenheimer stupidly opposed this program and should be excluded from AEC activities. I dont claim he is not a patriot but his mind is too confused to play any important role in these important matters. Garrison: I think you participated in the Hiroshima attack, is that correct ? Alvarez: Yes, I was in a plane following Enola Gay. Garrison: Just for the pleasure to see how 50 000 people can be killed in a few seconds ? Alvarez: No, I was in charge of measuring the energy yield of the explosion. Garrison: And what was this yield ? Alvarez: It was a U-235 bomb of 15 ktons called ‘Little Boy’. The Los Alamos and Nagasaki bombs contained plutonium. Garrison: So 3000 persons per kton, not bad. (Exit Alvarez, enter Pitzer) 73 Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Pitzer: My name is Kenneth Pitzer, born in 1914. I graduated at CALTECH in chemistry in 1935. I was appointed by the chemistry Dpt. of Berkeley in 1937 and later became professor. In 1949-51, I was director of research of the AEC. Robb: What do you think of Dr.Oppenheimer ? Pitzer: My views on the thermonuclear program were in complete opposition to him. Robb: Would you clear him ? Pitzer: Never. Garrison: What do you think of the loyalty oath applied at Berkeley in 194151 ? Pitzer: That was a good thing. People with obedience to a foreign country cannot be appointed by american universities. Garrison: So you agree with the exclusion of the 31 faculty members at Berkeley University ? Pitzer: Of course ! Garrison: Do you know Wolfgang Panofsky or Jack Steinberger ? Pitzer: No. Week 3 - day 3 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel, Teller) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Teller: My name is Edward Teller, born in Budapest in 1908 inside a jewish family. I studied theoretical physics in Germany with Heisenberg at Leipzig. When Hitler took power in 1933, I emigrated to the US and became professor in G.Washington University. At Los Alamos I worked on the Super and in 1945 I joined Fermi at Chicago University. I am the father of the H-bomb, that I invented in 1950. Robb: What is your opinion on Dr.Oppenheimer management of Los Alamos project ? Teller: A disaster. He appointed Bethe as director of the theory division instead of me. Robb: You were better than Bethe ? Teller: Of course, Bethe was only interested in the uranium bomb, a child’s 74 game. I was a visionary only interested in the Super. Robb: What was the attitude of Oppenheimer on the Super ? Teller: He sabotaged all my efforts to produce the Super. He convinced Bethe to put my project aside. In total coherence with what I said before, I could not work on the Super without Bethe’s help. Robb: Would you give clearance to Dr.Oppenheimer ? Teller: Oppenheimer gave a great deal of bad advice on the Super, and in the future his advice should not be considered. Therefore his clearance should be lifted. I would like to see the vital interests of my country in hands that I understand better and therefore trust more. (Exit Teller, Dr. Bethe is recalled at the defendant’s request) Garrison: What is your opinion on Teller at Los Alamos? Bethe: He waisted the efforts of the theory division on an impossible device. Garrison: What was the device and why was it impossible ? Bethe: It was a deuterium fusion bomb created by a primary nuclear explosion with uranium. All his calculations were wrong because when deuterium heats up, the energy is radiated and absorbed by matter via inverse Compton scattering. It cant work even if you add a lot of tritium. Garrison: Did Teller produce anything useful at Los Alamos ? Bethe: He did not produce a single correct result. For example, in 1945 he wanted to convince us that the explosion of the uranium bomb would ignite the whole atmosphere. I found that all his nitrogen cross-sections were wrong. Garrison: He claims to be the father of the H-bomb, true ? Bethe: Not at all. He stole the design from Stanislas Ulam in 1951. As a joke I said that Ulam was the father of the bomb and Teller the mother because he bore the child. Garrison: What is your opinion on the H-bomb test program? Bethe: On 5 august 1951, the ‘George’ device exploded with a yield of 225 ktons in the Eniwetok atoll, Marshall Islands. On 1st november the ‘Mike’ devise was exploded with a yields of 10.4 Mtons, 40 times more that ‘George’. Both used liquid deuterium and a complicated cryogenic installation, and are therefore of no military use. Garrison: If there is no military use, what for ? Bethe: Well, they found lithium deuterate, a solid, and produced a disaster. Garrison: What kind of disaster ? 75 Bethe: They tested a month ago the ‘Bravo’ device in the Bikini atoll. The result was an unprecedented radiologic catastrophe. The yield, 15 Mtons, exceeded by a factor 3 the expectations. The radioactive waste, pushed by contrary winds, contaminated all islands in a radius of 100 km, and affected the population of those islands, the same as the sailors and scientists that were in control of the explosion. Garrison: What caused the error ? Bethe: They did not realize that Li-6 can be regenerated by neutron collisions on Li-7, and lithium cross-sections are much larger than deuterium ones in fusion reactions. Garrison: What is your conclusion on the H-bomb ? Bethe: It’s madness. Garrison: Do they have any strategic value ? Bethe: They only serve to create terror. Week 3 - day 4 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel, Wilson) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Wilson: My name is general Roscoe Wilson, born in 1905 in Contralia, Pennsylvania. In 1928 I graduated at West Point. During WW II I was chief of development engineering at USAF. In 1944 I was based in Okinawa under the command of Curtis LeMay to erase Japon from the map by air bombings. Robb: Would you clear Dr.Oppenheimer ? Wilson: No. Robb: Why ? Wilson: He is not fully capable of objectivity in war matters. In war, we have an enemy to destroy by any means. Garrison: General, how many enemies did you kill in 1944-45 ? Wilson: Our B-29 Superfortress, using napalm and incendiary bombs, killed 500 000 japonese and destroyed 64 cities. Garrison: What happened to Tokyo ? Wilson: It was bombed on 9-10 march 1945 causing some 100 000 casualties. Garrison: Was it necessary to use any means ? Wilson: Not only necessary, it was even insufficient. We needed to drop in addition two atomic bombs, that killed 100 000 more people in Hiroshima 76 and Nagasaki. Only then Japan surrendered Garrison: And what would have been the result if you drop just one atomic bomb and spare all the other cities ? Wilson: It is up to the President of the United States to take this decision. Garrison: General, I believe you inspected the sites of the atomic targets after the war. Wilson: Indeed. Garrison: And what did you feel ? Wilson: We did a great job. (Exit Wilson, enter Borden) Robb: Give your name, profession and past activities. Borden: I am William Borden, american attorney. I was born in 1921 and graduated at Yale Law School. In 1942 I enlisted the USAF. After the war I entered the Justice Dpt. in Washington DC. I joined later AEC where I became the executive director until 1953. Robb: What is your opinion on Dr. Oppenheimer ? Borden: Between 1929 and 1942, more probably than not, Dr. Oppenheimer was a hardened communist. More probably than not he has been a soviet spy. More probably than not he has influenced US military policy, atomic energy policies and diplomacy under soviet directives. Robb: What do you propose then ? Borden: To place a blank wall between Dr. Oppenheimer and all areas of our government operation. Garrison: Where did you obtain the information that Dr. Oppenheimer is a spy ? Borden: I cant tell you, its secret. Garrison: Secret means FBI files and you must have opened them illegally. Therefore the only spy in this room is you and not Dr. Oppenheimer. Borden: Prove it if you can. Garrison: If Dr. Oppenheimer is a soviet spy, you should request his arrest, not to put a ridiculous blank wall. Borden: This we did with the Rosembergs, but we are too cowards to do it with Oppenheimer. Week 3 - day 5 77 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel) Robb: I call Dr. Lawrence. Robb: (after a few minutes) I just learn that he cannot attend these hearings due to an attack of colitis. Garrison: Better for him. History will not remember him as a crapula like Alvarez or Teller. Robb: Since the opinion of Dr. Lawrence in this matter is well known, let me introduce him anyway. Ernest Lawrence was born in 1901 in Canton, South Dakota. In 1928 he was appointed professor at Berkeley and invented the cyclotron in 1931. He built the Radiation Lab and became its director. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1939. Garrison: What opinion are you talking about ? Robb: Lawrence and Alvarez share the same position concerning the H-bomb. They also hate Oppenheimer because he is a communist. Garrison: Then why did Professor Lawrence appoint Oppenheimer for the physics faculty at Berkeley, and also his communist brother Franck at the Radiation Lab ? Robb: That was before the H-bomb project. Garrison: Professor Lawrence admired professor Oppenheimer and appointed him as director of Los Alamos. It was his merit and note the merit of the stupid general Groves to do that. But he was furious when Oppenheimer left Berkeley for Princeton. Robb: Professor Lawrence hates the Russians and is convinced that the US needs a superiority in nuclear power. Garrison: Then why will he go to Geneva in 1958 to negotiate with the Russians the ban of nuclear weapon tests ? Robb: I think he will not succeed. Garrison: Indeed he will die before in Palo Alto. Robb: What do you mean by Palo Alto ? Garrison: Perhaps A Linear electrOn AcceLeraTOr. End of week 3 78 Week 4 - day 1 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel) Robb: I want to go back to the Chevalier incident. Which story was fabrication and which was truth ? Oppenheimer: On the accusations against me by Teller, I have already justified myself sufficiently. Now it is to Lewis Strauss, such devoted man to our country, that I will respond. He claims Oppenheimer is guilty to mislead the opinion with his communist ideas, that he does not honor his country, that he substitutes a version of his encounter with Chevalier by another one. Let’s examine these accusations one after the other. I am accused of misleading the opinion, but I tell you it’s Lewis Strauss that misleads the opinion, when he accuses unduly and trivially all kind of persons and claims to be interested in things he never cared for. Lewis Strauss, do you want to tell me that I dont honor my country, that I substitute one version by another ? Do you want to tell me that I dont believe in any of these versions. That is what I believe, that there is no version at all. No truth. And you, what version do you believe in ? I believe, members of the panel, that Lewis Strauss and Teller are hypocrite men and they have started this process just to humiliate me. They have constructed an enigma to prove that I was a communist. They said: ‘Let us see if this wise man, Oppenheimer, will enter into contradictions and we will catch him, with all his followers’. But their accusation is contradictory: ‘Oppenheimer has many versions of the Chevalier incident, but at the same time he has none’. It’s simply a joke. Week 4 - day 2 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel) Robb: Doctor, do you think now that perhaps you went beyond the scope of you functions as a scientist in undertaking to counsel in matters of military strategy and tactics ? Oppenheimer: Probably, members of the panel, you should condemn me. If I escaped, all my followers will behave like me and become as communist as me. If you clear me, I will acknowledge that, but I will rather follow my own ideas than yours, and as long as I live, I will keep my political ideas. 79 You would tell me: ‘You, excellent and wealthy citizen of this great and powerful country, why you dont look for its reputation and honor?’ But If you condemn me, you will condemn yourselves at the same time, and your country with you. Therefore I dont defend myself for love of myself, but for love of my country. You know as well as me that my prosecutors who cumulate against me so many charges, have not produced a single witness that proved that I betrayed my country. Week 4 - day 4 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel) Robb: Doctor, what kind of relations did you maintain with Linus Pauling ? Oppenheimer: I met him at CALTECH around 1930 and we became good friends. Robb: Did you write love letters to him ? Oppenheimer: yes. Robb: Did you have a homosexual relation with a student at Berkeley before you met Jean Tatlock in 1936 ? Oppenheimer: yes. Robb: Are you homosexual ? Oppenheimer: maybe. Garrison: Have you read the following authors: Plato, Herodotus, Xenophon, Virgil, Ovid, Horace, Petronius, Verlaine, Rimbaud, Baudelaire, Proust, Gide, Shakespeare, Marlowe, Byron, Wilde, Auden, Lorca, Cernuda, Goethe, Thomas and Klaus Mann, Wittgenstein, Henry James, Walt Whitman, Paul Bowles, Gogol ? Oppenheimer: Yes, I read them all. Garrison: Do you suffer migraine crisis or depressions ? 80 Week 4 - day 4: final day, 6 may 1954 (Enter Robb, Oppenheimer, Garrison, panel) Garrison: The legal framework for charges raised by general Nichols has to be evaluated. There are two documents, the AEC Act of 1946 and executive order 10410. The first speaks of dangers to the ‘common defense and security’ and the second of ‘interests of the national security’. The basic question is whether, in the handling of restricted data, Dr.Oppenheimer is to be trusted. That is, it seems, what confronts this board. In deciding this issue, the relevant guidelines speak of ‘character, associations and loyalty’. If a man is loyal and loves his country in his heart, he would not be willing to do anything to injure its security and then associations and character become unimportant. In judging the man himself, the basic question is that since more than a decade Dr. Oppenheimer has shared secrets of the atomic energy program and held them inviolable. Oppenheimer has not failed out trust, that is in my judgement the most persuasive evidence that you possibly have. What is behind all this case ? Oppenheimer’s opposition to the Hbomb in 1949 and left-wing associations before 1942 ? The first is difference of opinion and the second was known to american authorities and the AEC itself when he was cleared in 1947. The Chevalier incident must be judged in perspective. At that time Russia was our ally. You must beware above all of judging by today’s standards things that happened in a different time and era. We have seen in this trial many brilliant physicists who said ‘I know that man, I worked with him and I trusted him’. This is the very reason we confide in the character and loyalty of this man. Now you asked the question whether if he continues to have access to restricted data he may injure the USA and make improper use of that. There is more than one man in trial in this room. The government of the USA is also on trial. America must not devore his children, Mr.Chairman. We must not devore the best and more gifted among us in some mechanical application of security procedures, I am confident, members of the panel, that you will answer to the question whether he is fit to be trusted with restricted data with the affirmative. By doing so, you will save the interests of the USA. Thank you very much. Oppenheimer: Members of the panel, there is only one certain thing: there is no harm possible for a good man, neither before nor after death, and that fortune will not be encountered in my destiny. I dont want any harm to my 81 prosecutors, but by accusing me, they wanted to harm me, and in this respect they should be blamed. I have something to tell you in addition of that: my ideal will prevail in the future. My prosecutors will be considered incapable, cruel tyrants, and my followers illustrated and clever liberals. That makes the difference. In our sleep, pain which we cannot forget falls drop by drop upon the heart until, in our despair, against our will, wisdom comes to us through the awful grace of God. Now it is time for me to leave and for you to live. End of the trial Addendum: The Grey Panel members reconvened on may 17, 1954. Gray and Morgan voted not to reinstate Oppenheimer’s clearance. Evans dissented. The panel members wrote up their findings to general Kenneth Nichols, AEC general manager. 82 . From the farms From the cities From every land Came the Abe Lincoln Brigade With a dream in their hearts With a gun in their hands The Abe Lincoln Brigade No pasaran, no pasaran So sang the Abe Lincoln Brigade Across the years and the oceans We still sing the song Of the Abe Lincoln Brigade Cries from the cities Shots from the hills The Abe Lincoln Brigade No pasaran, no pasaran So sang the Abe Lincoln Brigade All the teachers, the artists The workers who died Of the Abe Lincoln Brigade Their stories still thrill me We work side by side The Abe Lincoln Brigade No pasaran, no pasaran So sang the Abe Lincoln Brigade 83 So raise glasses and voices Give them a toast For the Abe Lincoln Brigade And those who died Are those that live most The Abe Lincoln Brigade No pasaran, no pasaran So sang the Abe Lincoln Brigade 84 VIII. Witch hunting around 1950 DANFORTH: Mr Proctor, have you seen the Devil in your life ? Did you see the Devil ? PROCTOR: I did. DANFORTH: And when he come to you, what were his demand ? Did he bid you to do his work upon the earth ? PROCTOR: He did. DANFORTH: And you bound yourself to his service ? PROCTOR: I did. Arthur Miller, The Crucible La conmemoraci´on del centenario del f´ısico norteamericano J.Robert Oppenheimer, nacido en Nueva York el 22 de abril de 1904, ha coincidido pr´acticamente con la desaparici´on de los f´ısicos Edward Teller, fallecido en septiembre de 2003, y Hans Bethe, fallecido en marzo de 2005, as´ı como la del dramaturgo Arthur Miller, ocurrida en febrero de 2005. Las biograf´ıas de todas estas personalidades se entrecruzan en un agitado periodo de la historia de los Estados Unidos que se designa habitualmente como ‘caza de brujas del senador McCarthy’. No resulta f´acil desde la perspectiva actual entender las razones que permitieron a este oscuro senador por Wisconsin propulsarse hasta las cimas del poder, desde donde logr´o destrozar la carrera de numerosos compatriotas acusados de traici´on a la patria. Todo empez´o con unas acusaciones malintencionadas lanzadas en 1947 por el autodenominado ‘Comit´e de Actividades Antinorteamericanas’ contra una serie de artistas de Hollywood cuyas simpat´ıas izquierdistas eran bien conocidas. Algunos se enfrentaron valientemente a sus acusadores, pero otros, como los directores de cine Edward Dmytryk o Elia Kazan, decidieron renegar de su pasado, convirti´endose a su vez en acusadores de antiguos camaradas. Este juego de acusados convertidos en acusadores para limpiar su pasado desemboc´o muy pronto en una copiosa lista negra de personas proscritas de la industria del 85 cine, en la que encontramos a personajes tan conocidos como los directores de cine Joseph Losey, Orson Welles y Chalie Chaplin, los escritores Arthur Miller y Dashiel Hammett, as´ı como los m´ usicos Leonard Bernstein y Pete Seeger. Es en este momento, febrero de 1950, cuando entra en escena el senador Joseph McCarthy, denunciando la infiltraci´on de comunistas en el Departamento de Estado. De esta forma, lo que no era m´as que un mezquino ajuste de cuentas entre intelectuales y artistas de Hollywood, se convierte muy pronto en una caza implacable a nivel nacional para desenmascarar los supuestos agentes del comunismo. La complicaci´on de la guerra de Corea y el descubrimiento de que los sovi´eticos tambi´en pose´ıan los secretos del arma at´omica no ayudaron por supuesto a serenar los ´animos. Como siempre, nada mejor que una obra de teatro para recrear el ambiente de histeria colectiva que se apoder´o de la sociedad norteamericana. Un ambiente que Arthur Miller ha logrado plasmar magistralmente tras la s´ordida historia de los amores contrariados de Abigail Williams por John Proctor, inspir´andose en los acontecimientos ocurridos durante el siglo XVII en la peque˜ na localidad del estado de Massachusetts llamada Salem. Desde su puesto de Presidente del Comit´e de Operaciones del Senado, McCarthy se dedic´o a depurar las administraciones del Estado bajo la mirada benevolente de los Republicanos y con la ayuda inestimable de otro personaje siniestro, el director del FBI Edgar Hoover. Los problemas aparecieron para McCarthy y sus ayudantes, los abogados Roy Cohn y David Shine, cuando decidieron atacar al ej´ercito. El presidente Eisenhower, que se hab´ıa beneficiado para su elecci´on en 1952 de la sucia campa˜ na desatada por McCarthy contra destacadas personalidades del Partido Dem´ocrata, perdi´o la paciencia ante el giro que tomaban los acontecimientos y decidi´o prescindir de su molesto compa˜ nero de viaje. McCarthy, Cohn y Shine se vieron atacados con la misma vileza que hab´ıan usado contra sus adversarios, y lo cierto es que los tres acabar´ıan muy mal. McCarthy perdi´o su poder en el Senado y falleci´o alcoh´olico poco despu´es, Shine se estrell´o en su avioneta particular, y en cuanto al final lamentable de de Roy Cohn, servir´ıa al menos de inspiraci´on para otra obra de teatro genial, Angels in America, donde Tony Kushner recrea con lucidez y fantas´ıa una sociedad norteamericana de fin de milenio acosada entre el s´ındrome de inmunodeficiencia y el ultraconservador Ronald Reagan. Al mismo tiempo que se produc´ıan estos acontecimientos, la comunidad cient´ıfica se vi´o sacudida por una violenta pol´emica entre los partidarios de llegar a un acuerdo con la Uni´on Sovi´etica sobre desarme nuclear y los 86 que preconizaban una l´ınea dura que implicaba en particular el desarrollo de armas todav´ıa m´as potentes que las que hab´ıan arrasado las ciudades japonesas de Hiroshima y Nagasaki. Se trataba de las bombas basadas en la fusi´on de deuterio, conocidas popularmente como ‘bombas H’. Al frente de los primeros se encontraba Oppenheimer, el que fuera durante la guerra director del laboratorio de Los Alamos y como tal, m´aximo responsable del progrma que hab´ıa permitido la fabricaci´on de las primeras bombas nucleares. Su comportamiento ante los bombardeos de las ciudades japonesas hab´ıa sido cuando menos ambiguo, pero los efectos devastadores de las mismas hab´ıan acabado por crearle problemas de conciencia, y se hab´ıa convertido tras la guerra en un destacado militante de la causa pacifista. Justo lo contrario le hab´ıa ocurrido a Edward Teller, jud´ıo originario de Budapest, traumatizado por el holocausto nazi y reconvertido tras la guerra en implacable militante de la causa anticomunista. Desde un punto de vista puramente t´ecnico, el problema de la construcci´on de una bomba de fusi´on carec´ıa de inter´es cient´ıfico por una raz´on muy simple: era totalmente irrealizable con los medios de que dispon´ıan los f´ısicos antes de 1950. Fue al parecer Fermi el primero en avanzar la idea de una bomba de fusi´on, utilizando el plasma de deuterio a alta temperatura producido tras la explosi´on de una bomba de fisi´on convencional. La idea fue recogida por Teller, que se margin´o del proyecto principal de Los Alamos, la bomba de fisi´on, para dedicarse en exclusiva a lograr un dise˜ no viable para una la bomba de fusi´on. Pero sus enrevesados c´alculos se vieron arruinados por una simple observaci´on del que era sin duda el mejor experto mundial en reacciones nucleares a alta temperatura, Hans Bethe. Al calentarse el deuterio, se produce radiaci´on que interacciona con la materia por efecto Compton inverso. El plasma se enfr´ıa entonces a un ritmo superior al de las reacciones de fusi´on, incluso si el deuterio se halla enriquecido con tritio. Teller no hab´ıa incluido este efecto y sus c´alculos ya no pudieron recuperarse. Adem´as de estas dificultades de concepto, los complicados c´alculos a efectuar parec´ıan impracticables, incluso apoy´andose en los ordenadores que se ten´ıan por entonces, todav´ıa en una fase de desarrollo muy primitiva. la situaci´on cambi´o sin embargo dr´asticamente hacia 1950 cuando John Von Neuman inici´o la construcci´on de un ordenador realmente potente a partir de v´alvulas de vac´ıo, en realidad una versi´on mejorada de una m´aquina ya existente llamada ENIAC, y que George Gamow rebautiz´o maliciosamente como MANIAC. Este importante avance tecnol´ogico se completaba adem´as con un nuevo m´etodo revolucionario para resolver complicados problemas de 87 difusi´on. Este m´etodo, inventado por el matem´atico de origen polaco Stanislaw Ulam en 1946, se basaba en el uso ingenioso de los n´ umeros aleatorios y recibi´o el nombre de ‘m´etodo de Monte Carlo’. Su primera aplicaci´on pr´actica fue el estudio de una explosi´on termonuclear. De esta forma Teller y Ulam lograron a principios de 1951 el primer dise˜ no operativo de una bomba de fusi´on. El principio b´asico de la misma era lograr la implosi´on de una carga de deuterio gracias a la presi´on de la radiaci´on emitida tras la explosi´on de una bomba de plutonio. La elecci´on de Einsenhower a la presidencia de los Estados Unidos en 1952 supuso un cambio en favor de los partidarios de la l´ınea dura en pol´ıtica internacional, aunque dicho cambio ya se hab´ıa iniciado al final de la presidencia de Truman. La nueva administraci´on decidi´o prescindir de los servicios de Oppenheimer, que se hab´ıa convertido en un oponente molesto a la pol´ıtica de confrontaci´on desde su influyente puesto de presidente del comit´e asesor de la AEC (Atomic Energy Commission). En agosto de 1952 ya hab´ıa sido apartado de este puesto, pero las nuevas autoridades decidieron dar un paso m´as, neg´andole todo acceso a los secretos oficiales en materia de armamento nuclear. Oppenheimer hab´ıa sido durante los a˜ nos 30 un destacado activista de las causas progresistas, y entre sus m´as pr´oximos allegados hab´ıa varios miembros del partido comunista, aunque ´el mismo nunca llegara a militar. No result´o por tanto dif´ıcil a la nueva administraci´on escarbar en el pasado del sabio y encontrar suficientes motivos como para declararlo peligroso para la seguridad nacional. Oppenheimer decidi´o defenderse y reclam´o una audici´on para probar su lealtad. La causa, que se har´ıa c´elebre con el t´ıtulo de In the matter of J.R.Oppenheimer, se celebr´o durante el mes de abril de 1954. Los m´as prestigiosos f´ısicos, con I.Rabi y H.Bethe a la cabeza, arroparon al sabio ca´ıdo en desgracia. Solo se atrevi´o a declarar en su contra E.Teller, algo que le costar´ıa muy caro al convertirlo en un apestado para el resto de la comunidad cient´ıfica. Pero el destino del acusado estaba sellado para las autoridades, que no dudaron en acudir a las m´as sucias maniobras para cuestionar su integridad, cosa que lograron tras resucitar un oscuro asunto de espionaje en el que Oppenheimer se hab´ıa dejado tontamente embaucar durante su ´epoca de director de Los Alamos. A decir verdad, el castigo infligido, la retirada del permiso de acceso a secretos nucleares, parece bien poca cosa a la vista de la persecuci´on a la que otros fueron sometidos. Sin ir m´as lejos, Frank Oppenheimer, hermano menor de Robert, fue expulsado por rojo de la Universidad de Minnesota y acab´o criando ganado en un apartado rancho del estado de Colorado. 88 Sobre la loca carrera en que se embarcaron los Estados Unidos haciendo estallar artefactos de potencia cada vez m´as impresionante, existe una abundante documentaci´on. El 5 de agosto de 1951 se hizo estallar en el atol´on de Eniwetok de las Islas Marshall un artefacto llamado ‘George’ con una potencia de 225 kilotones, validando el concepto de la bomba termonuclear. Al a˜ no siguiente, el 1 de noviembre de 1952, el atol´on de Eniwetok fue igualmente el escenario de la explosi´on de una bomba basada en el dise˜ no de UlamTeller. El artefacto, llamado ‘Mike’, que estall´o con una potencia de 10.4 megatones, conten´ıa deuterio l´ıquido en el interior de una complicada instalaci´on criog´enica, y por tanto no era adecuado para uso militar. La soluci´on consisti´o en el empleo de litio deuterado, s´olido a temperatura ambiente, y el ensayo se produjo el 1 de marzo de 1954 en el atol´on de Bikini. Los dise˜ nadores del artefacto, llamado ‘Bravo’, cometieron un error que transform´o este ensayo en un desastre radiol´ogico sin precedentes. La potencia de la explosi´on fue de 15 megatones, tres veces superior a la prevista. La enorme bola de fuego creada por la explosi´on vaporiz´o una fracci´on considerable del atol´on, creando un espectacular cr´ater de 1 km de radio y 75 metros de profundidad. La onda de choque vertical propuls´o la materia arrancada hacia la estratosfera y al cabo de 3 minutos ya hab´ıa alcanzado los 30 km de altura. Empujada por vientos desfavorables, la basura radiactiva se dispers´o sobre cientos de kil´ometros, irrandiando mortalmente las poblaciones de las islas vecinas, no sin antes abatirse sobre los cient´ıficos y militares que observaban at´onitos desde unos barcos situados a 50 km del lugar de la explosi´on. La ya de por s´ı abundante bibliograf´ıa sobre Oppenheimer se ha visto incrementada con la aparici´on de muevos trabajos escritos para celebrar el centenario de su nacimiento. Es poco probable que la serie se detenga ya que existen aspectos de la vida del sabio que nadie parece capaz de explicar, y no es el menor de ellos que un intelectual alejado de toda realidad pr´actica se convirtiera en director de un proyecto tan complejo como el de Los Alamos, con cientos de f´ısicos, ingenieros y t´ecnicos a su cargo, y lograra sacarlo adelante con una maestr´ıa que nadie hubiera sospechado. Pero las inquietudes intelectuales de Oppenheimer iban m´as all´a de la f´ısica y es bien conocida su afici´on por la l´ırica hindu´ısta, cuyos textos era al parecer capaz de leer en s´anscrito original. Entre ellos destaca el Mahabharata, relato ´epico de las luchas legendarias que enfrentaron a Kuravas y Pandavas para hacerse con el control de la India en tiempos ancestrales. Dentro del propio Mahabharata se encuentra el c´elebre poema conocido como Bhagavad-Gita (Canto del Se˜ nor), escrito por el denominado Vyasa en una 89 ´epoca indeterminada entre 400 y 200 DC. En el canto XI del Gita, que trata de la ‘visi´on c´osmica del universo’, la naturaleza divina se compara a la luz deslumbrante de mil soles surgidos s´ ubitamente en el cielo (XI:12), pero esta naturaleza divina es a la vez fuente de riqueza y causa de destrucci´on. Como revela el dios Krishna al dirigirse a Arjuna, pr´ıncipe de los Pandavas (X:23),‘entre los terribles poderes, soy el dios de la destrucci´on, y entre los sensuales, el dios de la riqueza, entre los esp´ıritus radiantes soy el fuego, y entre las m´as altas cumbres, soy la monta˜ na divina.’ No es de extra˜ nar que estas palabras de Krishna pasaran por la mente de Oppenheimer al observar la luz cegadora del primer hongo at´omico en el desierto de Alamogordo, el 16 de julio de 1945. Numerosos relatos del suceso recogen la an´ecdota, posiblemente ap´ocrifa, de que sus primeras palabras tras observar el fen´omeno fueron ‘me he convertido en muerte, el destructor de mundos’. Sin embargo, a˜ nos m´as tarde y entrevistado sobre sus obras literarias de cabecera, Oppenheimer no cita curiosamente el Gita en primer lugar, sino otra obra po´etica mucho m´as moderna, ‘Las flores del mal’ de Charles Baudelaire, poeta maldito donde los haya. Esta obra maestra de la literatura fue escrita en 1857, pero no ser´ıa publicada en su integridad hasta mucho despu´es, en 1949. La obra fue en efecto acusada de pornograf´ıa y condenada por los tribunales por indecencia y ataque a la moral. Para terminar este art´ıculo, me gustar´ıa transcribir el bell´ısimo poema de ‘Las flores de mal’ titulado ‘Armon´ıa del atardecer’. Voici venir les temps o` u vibrant sur sa tige Chaque fleur s’´evapore ainsi qu’un encensoir; Les sons et les parfums tournent dans l’air du soir; Valse m´elancolique et langoureux vertige! Chaque fleur s’´evapore ainsi qu’un encensoir; Le violon fr´emit comme un cœur qu’on afflige; Valse m´elancolique et langoureux vertige! Le ciel est triste et beau comme un grand reposoir; Le violon fr´emit comme un cœur qu’on afflige; Un coeur tendre qui hait le n´eant vaste et noir ! Le ciel est triste et beau comme un grand reposoir; Le soleil s’est noy´e dans son sang qui se fige. 90 Un coeur tendre qui hait le n´eant vaste et noir, Du pass´e lumineux recueille tout vestige ! Le soleil s’est noy´e dans son sang qui se fige... Ton souvenir en moi luit comme un ostensoir ! 91 . 92 IX. Pacific wars El relato que voy a hacer es estrictamente amoral, inmoral si se quiere. Voy a describir c´omo mat´e a cien mil personas desde un punto de vista puramente t´ecnico. Soy eso, un t´ecnico de la muerte, igual que un fontanero lo es de grifos y ca˜ ner´ıas, y mi relato ser´a t´ecnico, sin el menor asomo de sentimiento alguno, odio, rencor, compasi´on ni piedad. Son palabras que no aparecer´an en este relato. Podr´ıa escudarme en el contexto de mi empresa, una guerra cruel, la m´as cruel que en el mundo ha sido, unas ´ordenes que no pod´ıa dejar de cumplir, la ignorancia de mi capacidad destructiva y de los efectos del ingenio nunca antes utilizado que yac´ıa en el dep´osito de municiones de mi trimotor, el fanatismo en fin y el desprecio inhumano con el cual mis enmigos hab´ıan combatido al ej´ercito del cual yo era un simple piloto de bombardero. No voy a hacerlo. Stalin dijo que matar a un hombre es un crimen, pero matar a millones es una estad´ıstica. Mi acto de matar a cien mil fue tan criminal como el de matar a uno solo. La diferencia es que mi acci´on pas´o a los manuales de historia en vez de quedarse en las p´aginas de sucesos de alg´ un rotativo. Yo mat´e igual que murieron mis camaradas de combate menos afortunados, que reposan en el fondo del mar o en alguna tumba de ocasi´on en una jungla remota, o han vuelto a sus casas malheridos o con el cuerpo mutilado y traumatizados para el resto de sus vidas con sus sue˜ nos habitados para siempre por horrendas pesadillas. Ellos fueron a este infierno en la flor de sus vidas, sin haber tenido tiempo para amar, y se les exigi´o matar y morir por una causa que la mayor´ıa desconoc´ıa. ¿ Por qu´e volaba sobre el Pac´ıfico a cuatro mil metros de altura en un superbombardero B-29 de las fuerzas a´ereas de los Estados Unidos de Am´erica, con una tripulaci´on especial de ingenieros que cuidaban atentamente de una esfera de un metro de di´ametro y varias toneladas de peso con 15 kilos de uranio enriquecido en su centro, el is´otopo m´as escaso de dicho raro metal, y con una perforaci´on que permit´ıa disparar un proyectil desde el exterior al centro de forma a alcanzar la masa cr´ıtica y provocar una reacci´on en cadena ? No voy a hablar de ello ya que numerosos documentos han explicado las razones por las cuales 93 se lleg´o hasta aqu´ı, los antecedentes tanto cient´ıficos como militares que condujeron a los hechos que son objeto de mi relato. Yo solo dir´e lo que vi. Mi vuelo solitario de varios miles de kil´ometros me conduc´ıa desde una isla solitaria en medio del Pac´ıfico, desde la cual cientos de escuadrillas de B-29 hab´ıan ya arrasado el Jap´on y lo hab´ıan reducido a un mont´on de ruinas adem´as de matar a medio mill´on de habitantes, mujeres, ancianos y ni˜ nos en su mayor´ıa, hasta alguna ciudad del Jap´on cuyo nombre, aunque parezca sorprendente, yo mismo desconoc´ıa. En este punto del relato, el lector puede preguntarse por el sentido de mi acci´on. ¿ Qu´e sentido ten´ıa a˜ nadir algunos muertos m´as a los numerosos habidos ya ? Es muy importante responder a esta pregunta. Si no logro explicarlo, no solo mi relato sino la acci´on misma que he empredido carecer´ıa de significado. En la guerra, lo que importa no es el n´ umero de muertos, sino la forma en que se mata. Hitler mat´o a veinte millones de rusos sin alcanzar resultado alguno. Yo voy a matar solo a cien mil, incluso menos, tal vez solo veinte mil seg´ un algunos, ellos sabr´an por qu´e quieren minimizar tanto mi balance final, pero lo voy a hacer de forma a hacer germinar el horror en las mentes de forma tal que nadie lo va a olvidar y se rinda a partir de ahora al solo pronunciar de la naturaleza de la bomba que yace en el fondo del dep´osito de municiones de mi trimotor. Hitler tard´o cuatro a˜ nos en alcanzar su cupo de muertos y yo solo unos milisegundos. Lo que importa, y lo manuales de estrateg´ıa militar lo van a recoger a partir de ahora, no es el cu´anto sino el c´omo. Si me hubieran dando tanto tiempo como a Hitler, me habr´ıa cargado a toda la humanidad. Tras mi acci´on, el Jap´on se rindi´o en cuesti´on de d´ıas. Su ej´ercito, formado todav´ıa por varios millones de soldados en armas, no le sirvi´o de nada frente a tan terrible enemigo. Al avistar la costa japonesa, solicit´e los partes meteorol´ogicos de las ciudades que llevaba en mi lista de objetivos, por orden de prioridad. Tras estudio detenido de mi encuesta, decid´ı dirigir mi avi´on hacia Hiroshima, una desconocida ciudad que nunca habr´ıa pasado a la historia sin la acci´on que estoy relatando. Primero me adentr´e en tierra firme, sobrepasando en varios kil´ometro el objetivo y luego escor´e mi planeador para realizar un giro de 180 grados de forma a poder atacarlo desde el norte y poder de esta forma escapar a mi base de partida hacia el sur, con mis reservas de combustible al l´ımite. Al cabo de unos minutos divis´e la ciudad japonesa, que identifiqu´e f´acilmente por el brillo arg´entico de los brazos del r´ıo Ota, bajo el amanecer del sol de agosto. El cielo se hallaba totalmente despejado de nubes, barridas por los monzones de verano. Estos criterios absurdos, plena visibilidad y un objetivo hasta ahora intacto, hab´ıan determinado la elecci´on del obje94 tivo. Cualquier caza enemigo surgido en este instante por la cola de mi nave, habr´ıa acabado con los grandiosos planes de mi misi´on. Pero yo sab´ıa que eso no iba a ocurrir. Jap´on ya no ten´ıa aviones en estado de volar y los pocos restantes los hab´ıa transformado en bombas humanas para estrellarlos contra las cubiertas de los portaviones de nuestra flota. Un acto tan desesperado como in´ util. He le´ıdo despu´es que son´o una alarma en la ciudad que acababa de despertarse y no cre´ıa ser objeto de ning´ un ataque, ni lo hab´ıa sido de hecho hasta ahora. No hab´ıa ninguna base militar ni terrestre, ni mar´ıtima. El objetivo era una cifra, una suma, una estad´ıstica. Era lo que quer´ıa decir Stalin: yo no mato, solo hago cuentas. Era una nueva forma de guerra, lo repito hasta la saciedad ¿ es que es tan dif´ıcil entenderlo ? Yo no mat´e a nadie, solo hice una suma. Llev´abamos meses entrenando esta maniobra. El m´as m´ınimo fallo pod´ıa abortarla. Calcul´e la distancia al centro de la ciudad y a dos kil´ometros de distancia orden´e armar la bomba, introduciendo el iniciador de berilio que iba a producir el primer neutr´on. Al llegar exactamente a 1 kil´ometro de distancia, orden´e abrir las compuertas del dep´osito de municiones, y la bomba se hundi´o lentamente sobre la urbe. Nada especial estaba pasando, todo seg´ un lo previsto. Encend´ı el cron´ometro: 1,2,3 ... segundos. Mand´e encender motores al m´aximos de revoluciones, alcanzando los 400 km/h y luego dej´e caer la nave en picado sobre la superficie marina. Mis ´ordenes eran estrictas: todos los miembros de la tripulaci´on deb´ıan de dar la espalda al objetivo y ponerse lentes refractivas como las que usan los alpinistas para protegerse de la luz reflejada en la nieve. La luz cegadora de la explosi´on puede herir el ´organo visual como cuando se mira el sol de frente. Era in´ util intentar tomar fotos del suceso ya que la luz habr´ıa saturado las pel´ıculas de nitrato de plata. Mir´e el cron´ometro: 16,17,18... segundos. Yo sab´ıa que la bomba tardar´ıa 30 segundos en explotar. Es el tiempo que la gravedad exige a todo objeto pesado, independientemente de su peso, para alcanzar la altura de explosi´on, 300 metros. Esa era la altura sobre la superficie terrestre que los t´ecnicos hab´ıan calculado como ideal para alcanzar una estad´ıstica ´optima. Tambi´en hab´ıan dicho que deb´ıa de ser una zona plana y sin irregularidades que pudieran amortiguar la onda de choque de la explosi´on, hechos que hab´ıan agravado la suerte de la ciudad elegida. El cron´ometro marc´o: 28,29... segundos. El avi´on se hallaba entonces a unos 15 kil´ometros del objetivo, distancia suficiente para no sufrir da˜ no alguno. Los t´ecnicos me hab´ıan recomendado una distancia de seguridad de al menos 5 kil´ometros, seg´ un observaciones obtenidas durande el ensayo de Alamogordo, dos meses antes. Orden´e restablecer el vuelo horizontal y aproar a la base. 95 La luz cegadora se hizo visible y dur´o unos segundos. No pas´o nada m´as. Es como un tsunami: algo terrible va a ocurrir, pero solo se observa como el mar se retira anormalmente de la playa, como si fuera una marea rebelde que ha equivocado su cronolog´ıa. El apocalispsis se hizo esperar algunos minutos. Un trueno ensordecedor como el de una tormenta violenta que hace vibrar los cristales de las ventanas se dej´o o´ır a los dos minutos y el avi´on empez´o a zarandearse peligrosamente, hasta alcanzar finalmente la posici´on de equilibrio. Pero treinta segundos despu´es fue alcanzado de nuevo por una segunda onda de choque, reflejada sobre la superficie marina y por tanto retrasado respecto a la primera. Finalmente se levant´o un viento suave del norte que nos empuj´o a nuestra base de partida. Est´abamos ya a unos 50 kil´ometros del objetivo y con la c´amara de a bordo hicimos la u ´ nica foto del bombardeo, la u ´ nica que han podido recoger los manuales de historia del conflicto que iba a finalizar en pocos d´ıas, tras causar la pavorosa cifra de 60 millones de muertos. Vimos una columna oscura elevarse sobre las nubes hasta alcanzar la estratosfera y luego derramarsese horizontalmente al alcanzar la capa de inversi´on t´ermica. Al observar este mismo fen´omeno tras la prueba de Alamogordo, se hab´ıa acu˜ nado el t´ermino de hongo at´omico que estaba destinado a alcanzar un ´exito impredecible. Por supuesto no vimos la bola de fuego primaria que se abati´o sobre Hiroshima, arrasando todo, seres humanos y edificios, hasta una distancia de un kil´ometro del epicentro de la explosi´on. La columna vertical era una onda de choque que transportaba en forma de ceniza esos mismos humanos y edificios y los propulsaba a gran velocidad hacia el cielo. La columna permaneci´o est´atica varias horas antes de disolverse. Como lector de los cl´asicos, la visi´on del hongo at´omico me record´o la carta de Plinio el Joven a T´acito donde describe la erupci´on del Vesubio que destruy´o las ciudades de Pompeya y Herculano causando tantas v´ıctimas como yo pero de forma natural. Plinio compar´o el fen´omeno a un pino parasol, en alusi´on a este ´arbol que abunda en las orillas del Meditrr´aneo y particularmente en Campania. Mi misi´on ha acabado. Pero no soy un asesino fr´ıo y desconsiderado. A mi peque˜ no pueblo de Alabama donde regento una tienda de ultramarinos que compr´e con la indemnizaci´on que me asign´o el ej´ercito al desmililitarizarme, han llegado fotos de Hirishima tomadas tras el bombardeo. Todos los edificios han desaparecido del centro de la ciudad salvo la c´ upula de un edificio en ruinas, ignoro por qu´e raz´on. Luego se ven las sombras de los cuerpos de sus habitantes justo antes de evaporarse al alcanzar la temperatura un mill´on de grados. Luego se ven cuerpos con horribles quemaduras, las de aquellos que no tuvieron la suerte de evaporarse y van a 96 morir tras horribles sufrimientos. Luego se ven los enfermos de los hospitales, aparentemente indemnes pero v´ıctimas de intensas y letales radiaciones, destinados a morir en los pr´oximos cincuenta a˜ nos tras desarrollar toda clase de sarcomas, infecciones, tumores, leucemias y c´anceres. Las discrepancias estad´ısticas se deben a que algunos incluyen estas v´ıctimas en el c´omputo, y otros no. En realidad, no soy alguien importante ni me considero como tal. Me hubiera gustado ser un hombre de bien y el destino hizo de mi un criminal. Es lo que le ocurre a mucha gente. La traves´ıa del estrecho de Panam´a desde Coiba, en un envite arriesgado hacia lo desconocido, dur´o 18 d´ıas. Con diez canoas a cuestas, ciento noventa soldados armados de lanzas, espadas, arcabuces y ballestas, inician el 6 de septiembre la gloriosa marcha que va a requerir inmensos sacrificios y fuerza de voluntad. Llanuras pantanosas, junglas intrincadas a cruzar a golpe de machete, calor sofocante, fiebres. Luego la cordillera, sin protecci´on contra el sol ecuatorial. Desde la cumbre se contemplan los dos oc´eanos, el Atl´antico y el otro inmenso y remansado, todav´ıa desconocido y an´onimo. El padre Andr´es de Vara entona el Te Deum Laudeamus y Vasco N´ un ˜ ez de Balboa se avanza y pronuncia un discurso ante su tropa. Con solemnidad hace ondear la bandera de Castilla a los cuatro vientos y toma posesi´on de todo el inmenso espacio que se avista, en tierra y en mar. Luego llama a su escribano para hacer acta del evento: En este d´ıa del Se˜ nor Todopoderoso de 25 de septiembre de 1513, en que vivan los altos y gloriosos monarcas Don Fernando y Do˜ na Juana de Castilla, aprehendo en su nombre la posesi´on real, corporal y permanente del mar y tierra que circunda hasta donde la vista alcance, ahora y en todo tiempo que el mundo dure hasta el universal juicio de los mortales... Cuando toda su tropa hubo bajado la cordillera y alcanzado el nivel del mar, se adentr´o en sus aguas v´ırgenes y con gesto ceremonial extendi´o sus brazos armados del hierro y la oriflama y se exclam´o: te nombro Mar Pac´ıfico para recuerdo de aquestas y futuras generaciones. Todo lo que ocurri´o en esta batalla es desmesurado. Nunca tantos barcos se enfrentaron en combate naval alguno en ning´ un mar del globo terrestre, y nunca el resultado de una confrontaci´on naval fue tan raqu´ıtico como in´ util. Nunca se enfrentaron jefes tan poco aptos a dirigir operaciones: el paranoico MacArthur y el cabeza loca Halsey contra el suicida Kurita. Si la batalla 97 hubiera tenido realmente lugar, pod´ıan haber muerto miles de soldados y marinos y se hubieran hundido decenas de buques. Nada de eso pas´o. Todas las decisiones que se tomaron en ambos bandos fueron equivocadas. Estamos en octubre de 1944 en el mar de las Filipinas y los americanos quieren desembarcar nada menos que 200 000 soldados en el golfo de Leyte, entre las islas de Samar y Mindanao. Esta ofensiva, que parti´o de las islas Salom´on a finales de 1942, era absurda, pero cost´o decenas de miles de bajas al ej´ercito americano tras horribles combates en la jugla o desembarcos en remotos atolones sin inter´es estrat´egico alguno pero que los japoneses defend´ıan a su vez con una ferocidad insospechada rayando en lo suicida. La operaci´on que iba a decidir el desenlace de la guerra ten´ıa lugar en este momento a miles de kil´ometros de distancia e iba a asestar un golpe decisivo en el coraz´on del enemigo: los desembarcos en Iwo Jima y Okinawa. El desembarco en Leyte era un mero divertimento para que MacArthur cumpliera su est´ upida promesa de volver, promesa que realiz´o mientras hu´ıa de Bat´an en una torpedera como un perro rabioso con el rabo entre las piernas, tras ser aculado a dicha isla por el empuje del avance japon´es que hab´ıa sido incapaz de frenar. Las Filipinas carecen en este momente del m´as m´ınimo inter´es estrat´egico, pero al empecinamiento de MacArthur por apoderarse de ellas, responden los japoneses con otra operaci´on todav´ıa m´as absurda: lanzar los restos de su flota contra las playas de desembarco enemigas. Dada la superioridad que en estos momentos ten´ıa la flota americana, la operaci´on era un suicidio. Pero tal vez por eso se plane´o. Si ese era su prop´osito, result´o tan fracasada como si no lo fue. Todo el mundo ha o´ıdo hablar de los atques kamikaces de los pilotos japoneses contra las cubiertas de los portaviones americanos. Pocos saben que los japoneses utilizaron igualmente sus barcos en operaciones suicidas. El plan japon´es consist´ıa en avanzar en tres escuadras convergentes sobre el golfo de Leyte, por el norte, sur y oeste, con la esperanza de que alguna de ellas alcanzar´ıa su objetivo. En los planes de operaciones navales japoneses, existe siempre un cebo y un martillo. El cebo es un objetivo apetitoso cuya misi´on es atraer la atenci´on del enemigo y distraer su ataque, desvelando al mismo tiempo su posici´on. Entonces el martillo act´ ua, bajo la forma de una fuerza de portaviones de ataque, golpeando y destruyendo al enemigo. Esta t´actica, que hab´ıa fracaso siempre por las razones que indicaremos m´as delante, fue tambi´en empleada en el combate de Leyte, pero con la notable diferencia de que el cebo eran justamente los portaviones de ataque, y el martillo una flota de grandes acorazados. La raz´on era simple, los japoneses ya no ten´ıan pilotos para sus aviones embarcados. El planteamiento japon´es era absurdo, 98 y curiosamente estuvo a punto de tener ´exito. Los americanos tambi´en han dividido su flota en tres escuadras: la fuerza de apoyo al desembarco, con portaviones ligeros y destructores de escolta, la fuerza preventiva que bloquea el estrecho de Surigao impidiendo cualquier aproximaci´on japonesa por el sur, formada por viejos acorazados, y la fuerza de ataque con grandes portaviones y acorazados de combate, lista para atacar cualquier flota enemiga que quiera hacerse presente en el lugar del desembarco. Los hechos ocurrieron de la siguiente forma: las flotas de Kurita, por el este y Nishimura, por el sur, fueron r´apidamente avistadas por los aviones de reconocimiento americanos, pero no as´ı el cebo, la flota de Ozawa, que se acercaba por el norte. Nishimura y Shima, que se hab´ıa desgajado de Kurita, penetraron por el estrecho de Surigao y fueron un blanco f´acil para los acorazados de Olendorf. El combate tuvo lugar de noche y los buques japoneses carec´ıan de radar. No qued´o nada de la flota japonesa. Mientras, Halsey lanzaba sus enjambres de aviones sobre los acorazados de Kurita, entre los cualos estaban el Y amato y el Musashi, los mayores acorazados del mundo, que desplazaban 60 000 toneladas de acero, casi el doble que los acorazados americanos m´as modernos. Kurita decidi´o retroceder, a pesar de que sus desperfectos eran leves. Halsey crey´o que Kurita estaba ya fuera de combate y se lanz´o al norte en busca de los portaviones de Ozawa. Era un error garrafal, uno de los mayores de la historia naval. Kurita vir´o de nuevo y cruz´o el estrecho de San Bernardino, que Halsey acabada de dejar atr´as sin dejar un solo destructor para vigilarlo, luego vir´o al sur y cay´o sobre la fuerza de desembarco americana que no sospechaba nada de lo que estaba ocurriendo. Este es el comienzo de la batalla de Leyte. Antes hagamos algunas concesiones a la estrategia y a la estad´ıstica. Se ha intentado explicar la acci´on de Halsey por comparaci´on con la de Spruance en la batalla de las Marianas. All´ı Spruance decidi´o permanecer junto a su flota de desmbarco, con el doble inconveniente de dejarse atacar por la aeronaval japonesa e inhabilitarse a su vez para un ataque decisivo contra la flota enemiga. Esto pueda tal vez explicar por qu´e Halsey decidi´o desproteger las cabezas de playa de Leyte y marcharse a toda velocidad, pero no por qu´e dej´o de vigilar a Kurita, para lo cual le hubieran bastado algunas unidades de su flota bloqueando el estrecho de San Bernardino. Su fuerza era tan superior a la de Ozawa, que pod´ıa permitirse ese lujo. Las composiciones de las distintas flotas eran las siguiguientes: Ozawa contaba con 4 portaviones, 2 acorazados, 2 cruceros y 9 destructores, Kurita contaba con 4 acorazados, 8 cruceros y 11 destructores, Nishimura con 2 acorazados, 1 crucero y 4 destructores, a los cuales 99 hay que sumar la fuerza de Shima de 3 cruceros y 4 destructores. En lo que concierne a la flota americana, la Task Force 38 de Halsey dispon´ıa de 17 portaviones de ataque con 1200 aviones embarcados, 6 acorazados r´apidos, 17 cruceros y 64 destructores. La fuerza de desembarco de Kinkaid ten´ıa 18 portaviones de escolta con 500 aviones a bordo, con sus buques ligeros de escolta, y finalmente la fuerza sur de Olendorf contaba con 6 acorazados lentos, 8 cruceros y 28 destructores. A las 6:00 del 24 de octubre de 1944, el Y amato romp´ıa el fuego con sus seis formidables piezas proeles de 456 mm y alzas de 31 000 metros contra 6 portaviones ligeros de la agrupaci´on TG-3 al mando de Sprague. Pudo ocurrir una masacre, ya que el Y amato pod´ıa hundir cualquiera de esos buques en unos minutos. Cuando Sprague se di´o cuenta de lo que ocurr´ıa, una vez pasada la sorpresa inicial, organiz´o una estrategia de defensa extremadamente osada: hizo despegar todos los aviones que pudo, a´ un sin repostar, para simular ataques a los buques enemigos. En cada picada o vuelo rasante, los buques japoneses deb´ıan de maniobrar para esquivar los ataques, ignorantes de que el avi´on estaba desarmado. En segundo lugar, Sprague orden´o abrigar sus portaviones bajo una espesa capa de humo y alejarse r´apidamente del lugar. Finalmente, y esto es lo m´as controvertido, sacrific´o a sus destructores lanz´andolos a la desesperada contra el enemigo para distraer su fuego mortal de los portaviones. Sprague lanz´o un SOS que fue captado por Nimitz, jefe supremo de la flota del Pac´ıfico, en su base de Hawai. Este orden´o inmediatamente a Hasey y Olendorf converger hacia los buques atacados. Halsey, a punto de alcanzar a Ozawa, que ya hab´ıa dado media vuelta, tuvo que volver al sur con tanta rapidez como hab´ıa progresado hacia el norte. Pero cuando lleg´o, Kurita ya hab´ıa hecho marcha atr´as y se hab´ıa escapado por el estrecho de San Bernardino. La estrategia de Kurita es inexplicable, como la mayor´ıa de las cosas que pasaron en esta batalla. Se ha dicho que confundi´o los portaviones de Sprague con los de Halsey y que, temeroso de afrontar los acorazados de ´este, decidi´o romper el combate. Pero no es as´ı como se comporta un samurai. Si Kurita hubiera seguido el combate, hubiera aniquilado a Sprague y luego habr´ıa sido aniquilado por Halsey. ¡ Que bello final para su flota ! En realidad, tuvo que sacrificar su flota pocos meses despu´es lanzando el Y amato contra la flota enemiga, sin combustible para volver. Los aviones americanos lo torpedearon a medio camino. En Leyte, Kurita pudo ser un h´eroe tr´agico y cometi´o un error c´omico. Halsey pudo aniquilar toda la flota japonesa y no hundi´o un solo barco. Todo fue desmesurado en esta batalla. 100 Desde tiempos inmemoriales, se di´o como origen inequ´ıvoco de Magallanes la villa portuguesa de Sabrosa. En acta oficial de 1798, sus escribanos y cuatro testigos confirmaron la genealog´ıa del navegante ligada a esta villa. La existencia de una casa con el blas´on de la familia Magalh˜aes con las armas picadas y arrasadas, traduciendo un castigo que en tiempo de Manoel I era corriente aplicar sobre quien practicase actos considerados de traici´on a la patria, entendi´endose como tales el ponerse al servicio de la corona de Espa˜ na, corroboraba la misma t´esis. Sin embargo, hace ya muchas d´ecadas, comenz´o a ponerse en duda la veracidad de estos documentos y reliquias. Los documentos emplean la expresi´on ‘Su Majestad’ para referirse a Manoel I, cuando el tratamiento utilizado en la ´epoca era el de ‘Alteza’. Estas dudas permitieron otras hip´otesis sobre el origen de Magallanes. Importa tener presente que las cuestiones divergentes sobre el origen de Magallanes se generaron mucho despu´es de su muerte, cuando se percibi´o que hab´ıa una notable fortuna a reivindivar de la Corona de Espa˜ na, por serle debidos al navegante una parte notable de los territorios descubiertos. No se sabe de d´onde era Magallanes, salvo que era portugu´es. No se sabe por qu´e se puso al servicio de la Corona de Castilla, como no se sabe tampoco en el caso de Col´on, y no se sabe por qu´e inici´o su viaje, que ten´ıa los mismos objetivos que el de Col´on, unos 30 a˜ nos antes, es decir llegar a las Indias viajando al oeste. Col´on fue el primer navegante que cruz´o el Atl´antico y volvi´o para contarlo. Magallanes fue el primer navegante que cruz´o el Pac´ıfico, pero no volvi´o para contarlo. Su traves´ıa de tres meses fue infinitamente m´as ag´onica que la de Col´on que solo dur´o un mes. Fue una gran proeza de la humanidad. Dejemos que hable Antonio Pigafetta, cronista oficial del viaje: la galleta que com´ıamos ya no era m´as pan sino polvo lleno de gusanos que hab´ıan devorado toda su sustancia. Adem´as ten´ıa un olor f´etido insoportable porque estaba impregnada de orina de ratas. El agua que beb´ıamos era p´ utrida y hedionda. Para no morir de hambre, nos hemos visto obligados a comer trozos de cuero que cubr´ıan el m´astil mayor a fin de que las cuerdas no se estropeen contra la madera... Muy a menudo, est´abamos reducidos a alimentarnos de serr´ın y las ratas repugnantes se hab´ıan vuelto un alimento tan buscado que se pagaba hasta medio ducado por cada una de ellas... Nuestra mayor desgracia lleg´o cuando nos vimos atacados por una especie de enfermedad que nos inflaba las mand´ıbulas hasta que nuestros dientes quedaban escondidos... La batalla que voy a contar nunca tuvo lugar. Naturalmente, no hablo en 101 sentido estricto, ya que hubo dos flotas una frente a otra, una gran pelea de aviones y poco m´as. Pero su efecto fue nulo, no se hundi´o ni un solo barco y los almirantes, recelosos cada uno de la superioridad del otro, decidieron no darse por aludidos y alejarse prudentemente del campo de batalla. Como en Jutlandia. All´ı 40 acorazados ingleses se enfrentaron a otros 30 alemanes sin ning´ un resultado tangible: tres o cuatro barcos hundidos. Los historiadores han reducido esta batalla entre las dos mayores flotas de acorazados jam´as enfrentadas a una mera estad´ıstica: 40 contra 30 y 4 hundidos, como en un juego infantil. No me queda m´as remedio que contar esta batalla en forma de estad´ısticas. La ofensiva americana comenz´o el 19 de noviembre de 1943 en Makin y acab´o el 3 de marzo de 1944 en Tarawa. Me imagino que el lector desconoce donde est´an estas islas. Es normal, solo las conocen los historiadores de la Guerra del Pac´ıfico. Makin es un atol´on de las Islas Gilbert, situada sobre el ecuador a unos 40 grados al sur de Midway. Tarawa es un atol´on de las Marianas, a unos 20 grados de latitud Norte, como Hawai, y 30 grados de longitud al oeste de las Gilbert. El lector se preguntar´a qu´e inter´es militar tienen esas islas, pero para saberlo hay que dar m´as n´ umeros. Desde el ataque a Pearl Harbour dos a˜ nos antes, los astilleros estadounidenses hab´ıan construido 16 portaviones pesados, 35 ligeros, 6 acorazados, 18 cruceros y 234 destructores, por ninguno los japoneses. Esto significaba que la superioridad de la flota americana era aplastante, lo cual no era necesariamente una garant´ıa de ´exito como bien sab´ıan el rey Dar´ıo contra Atenas, Felipe II contra los elementos, o el Zar Nicol´as II contra los mismos japoneses. Es m´as, los japoneses estuvieron a punto de ganar la batalla. Pero hay m´as estad´ısticas que contar: las Islas Gilbert distan de las Marianas tanto como ´estas del Jap´on, 2400 km, y este es el dato esencial, ´este es justamente el radio de acci´on de los fortalezas volantes B-29, que los americanos est´an construyendo a miles y que van a arrasar el Jap´on desde los islotes de las Marianas reconvertidos en pistas de aterrizaje: Saip´an, Tini´an, Guam y Eniwetok. As´ı pues, les bast´o a los americanos conquistar tres islotes: Tarawa, Tinian e Iwo Jima, para ganar la guerra. La ofensiva de MacArthur desde las Salom´on a las Filipinas no sirvi´o de nada, adem´as de ser extremadamente costosa y mort´ıfera. La ca´ıda del Imperio Nip´on se parece a la de los Imperios Inca y Azteca, ganados por algunos cientos de soldados decididos y capaces de movimientos r´apidos a caballo o en carro, que atacan por sorpresa al coraz´on del enemigo. Los ej´ercitos inca y azteca ten´ıan miles de guerreros en sus fronteras pero eran incapaces de mobilizarlos r´apidamente en el lugar atacado ya que no ten´ıan caballos ni conoc´ıan la rueda. El arma crucial en la Guerra del 102 Pac´ıfico era el portaviones, ya que los aviones normales no pueden franquear las distancias de mil kil´ometros entre un archipi´elago y otro. En Normand´ıa desembarcaron 100 000 soldados apoyados por 50 acorazados y cruceros, fue un desembarco cl´asico. En las Marianas solo desmbarcaron 10 000 soldados, pero apoyados por 50 portaviones, esta es la novedad. Entramos ahora de lleno en el combate abortado en el mar de las Marianas. Toyota mandaba la flota japonesa, tras la muerte en combate de Yamamoto. Ten´ıa dos escuadras, la de Ozawa y la de Yoshima, la primera con 3 portaviones grandes y la segunda con 6 ligeros, 9 en total. Ozawa contaba adem´as con los grandes acorazados Y amato, Mushashi y Nagato, adem´as de los cruceros de batalla Haruna y Kongo, 8 cruceros pesados, 2 ligeros y 36 destructores. Los americanos ten´ıan igualmente dos flotas, la Task Force 58 al mando de Spruance, y la de apoyo al desembarco, al mando de Olendorf. Spruance ya hab´ıa mandado la flota de ataque en Midway y pecaba de temeroso, mientras que Halsey, que alternaba el mando con Spruance, pecaba de atrevido. Spruance dispon´ıa de 15 portaviones de ataque, 7 acorazados, 20 cruceros y 67 destrctores. Sobre el papel, su superioridad sobre los japoneses era evidente. La flota de apoyo la compon´ıan 7 viejos acorazados, algunos de ellos rescatados de Pearl Harbour, 6 cruceros pesados, 5 ligeros y 16 destructores. La misi´on de esta flota era apoyar el desembarco en Saip´an que comenz´o el 15 de junio de 1944, y que era por tanto casi simult´aneo con el de Normand´ıa. Spruance deb´ıa de cumplir tres misiones a la vez: proteger las playas del desembarco de un contrataque desde los portaviones japoneses, defender su propia flota de dicho ataque, y atacar a los portaviones japoneses. Tantas misiones estuvieron a punto de resultar fatales. El 19 de junio, y ante la desesperaci´on de Spruance, el enemigo segu´ıa invisible, pero los japoneses acababan de lanzar contra ´el cuatro oleadas sucesivas de 430 aviones. Esto demuestra que los japoneses ten´ıan todav´ıa una superioridad estrat´egica. En otros tiempos, habr´ıan hundido toda la flota de Spruance sin sufrir bajas. Si esto no ocurri´o fue porque el Alto Mando Japon´es cometi´o un error decisivo antes de la guerra: no cre´o una escuela de formaci´on masiva de pilotos de aeronaval. La mayor´ıa de los 430 aviones lanzados por Ozawa estaban pilotados por j´ovenes noveles que nunca antes hab´ıan entrado en combate. Era un suicidio frente a los muy entrenados pilotos americanos. La batalla a´erea que tuvo lugar se conoce como ‘gran caza de patos de las Marianas’. Tras lanzar sus aviones y sabiendo que nunca los podr´ıa recoger, Ozawa puso rumbo al Norte a m´axima velocidad y desapareci´o del campo de batalla, ante la desesperaci´on de Spruance que, entendiendo por fin lo que ocurr´ıa, se lanz´o 103 infructuosamente en su persecuci´on. El 19 de junio a las 8:30, Ozawa lanz´o su primera oleada, la segunda a las 9:00, la tercera a las 10:00 y la cuarta y u ´ ltima a las 11:00. Estaba a tan solo unos 200 km de la flota enemiga, aunque incre´ıblemente no hab´ıa sido detectado. A las 10:00, los radares de las TF-58 detectaron los aviones de la primera oleada y Spruance puso en vuelo a todos sus cazas. Estos eran m´as r´apidos que los japoneses, equipados con bombas y torpedos, y que debido a sus d´ebiles corazas se convert´ıan adem´as en blancos altamente inflamables. Todos los aviones japoneses fueron abatidos, tuvieron que amerizar, o aterrizaron en alg´ un islote de las Marianas, todav´ıa en poder de los japoneses. Jap´on ten´ıa su flota de portaviones intacta, pero sin aviones para despegar de ellos. La situaci´on a la que hab´ıa llegado el Alto Mando Japon´es era casi c´omica, como la de Hitler ante Mosc´ u en diciembre de 1941, con sus diviones Panzer casi intactas pero inmovilizados en la nieve: se les hab´ıa congelado la gasolina a 40 grados bajo cero. Los hechos fueron los siguientes: la flota rusa al mando del almirante Rozhestvensky parti´o de su base de Kronstadt, cerca de San Petesburgo, y despu´es de recorrer medio mundo, se enfrent´o a la flota japonesa del Almirante Togo en el estrecho de Tsu-Shima, entre Jap´on y Corea. Tras un breve combate, la mayor´ıa de los buques rusos fueron hundidos, sin sufrir los japoneses baja alguna. La batalla en si no presenta demasiado inter´es salvo para los expertos en combates anfibios y es innecesario enumerar las listas de barcos con sus tonelajos y calibres de las piezas de tiro. A posteriori, todos los historiadores explicaron por qu´e los hechos ocurrieron de la forma en que ocurrieron, aunque si se les hubiera cuestionado antes del combate muchos hubieran afirmado lo contrario. Lo cierto es que nadie esperaba una victoria japonesa, un pa´ıs tercermundista habitado por gente de piel amarilla como China, y destinado por tanto a someterse a una potencia europea como Rusia. Lo interesante es entender por qu´e se lleg´o a esta batalla, y qu´e ocurri´o despu´es, as´ı como buscar ejemplos hist´oricos semejantes. Hacia el a˜ no 400 antes de Cristo, Tucidides cuenta algo parecido, la expedici´on de la flota ateniense contra la ciudad de Siracusa, que acab´o en similar desastre total. Hay que advertir que ni Tucidides ni su maestro Herodoto son historiadores en el sentido actual. Est´an a medio camino entre un corresponsal de guerra y un novelista. Trabajan sin archivos ni documentos y cuando faltan detalles, se los inventan. Herodoto cont´o multitud de viajes a parajes remotos que nunca realiz´o y Tucidides puso en boca de estrategas y generales discursos que ´el 104 mismo redact´o. Los primeros historiadores en sentido moderno fueron los romanos: Polibio, Tito Livio, Suetonio, Plutarco y T´acito. Pero all´ı donde se necesita imaginaci´on, es decir explicar antecedentes y consecuencias, Tucidides acierta m´as que los latinos. La expedici´on a Sicilia, es un episodio m´as de la Guerra del Peloponeso que enfrent´o a Esparta y Atenas, entre 430 y 400 antes de Cristo, aproximadamente. Si la guerra se decidi´o en lugares lejanos como Sicilia, fue por razones absurdas, que tanto abundan en las guerras. No se sabe por qu´e empez´o esta guerra, pero se sabe su final, la derrota de Atenas y el agotamiento de su Siglo de Oro. Todo ello por una expedici´on absurda, mal preparada, mal llevada y mal acabada. Atenas era la mayor potencia mar´ıtima de la ´epoca y cometi´o todos los errores posibles para conseguir ventajas inciertas en un lugar lejano. As´ı han ca´ıdo todos los imperios. La batalla de Tsu-shima era la respuesta rusa a la captura por sorpresa efectuada por tropas japonesaa de la base naval rusa de Port Arthur en el sur de Manchuria. Marca el final del imperio zarista, herido de muerte tras la revoluci´on de 1905 que sigue a la derrota militar, aunque su muerte formal no ocurre hasta 1917. Pero lo m´as importante de esta batalla es que marca el comienzo del militarismo japon´es que acabar´ıa 40 a˜ nos despu´es con la hecatombe de Hiroshima. Hiroshima no se entiende sin Tsu-Shima. Las estad´ısticas de la batalla de Tsu-Shima son las siguientes: los japoneses dispon´ıan de 89 buques, de los cuales 4 eran grandes acorazados, y los rusos 28, de los cuales 8 eran acorazados. Jap´on tuvo 117 muertos, por 4380 y 21 barcos hundidos los rusos. Estrat´egicamente, la batalla se pareci´o m´as a la de Trafalgar, que ocurri´o 100 a˜ nos antes, que a las batalles de portaviones de la Segunda Guerra Mundial, 40 a˜ nos despu´es. Hubo sin embargo una novedad, se demostr´o la importancia de los buques acorazados r´apidos, 20 nudos en esa ´epoca, armados con gruesos calibres de 305 mm. Los ingleses lo entendieron y se lanzaron a una loca carrera por construir tales buques, siendo el HMS Dreadnought el primero de la serie y el que ha dado el nombre a este tipo de nav´ıos. Alemania se sinti´o agredida por esta pol´ıtica naval que la relegaba a una mera potencia continental sin colonias que explotar. El Imperio Ingl´es tocaba a su fin y Alemania reclamaba su derecho a erigirse en poder hegem´onico, para lo cual construy´o una flota casi tan potente como la brit´anica. Ese fue el origen real de la Primera Guerra Mundial y no el asesinato de un pr´ıncipe desconocido en un remoto lugar de Europa. Despu´es de 30 a˜ nos de guerras entre ingleses y alemanes, los Estados Unidos surgir´ıan del conflicto como la gran potencia hegem´onica. 105 Conduc´ı mi bombardero en picado hasta el punto de despegue de la cubierta de mi portaviones, el Enterprise, que se hab´ıa aproado al viento como en toda maniobra de despegue. Apret´e a fondo el acelerador del motor hasta alcanzar el m´aximo de revoluciones y esper´e la orden de iniciar el despegue. Se alz´o la bandera del jefe de puente al tiempo que se accionaba la catapulta que propuls´o mi aeroplano a m´as de 100 km/h en pocos segundos. El despegue de un portaviones requiere un entrenamiento especial que no se ense˜ na a los pilotos que disponen de pistas largas. Yo solo dispongo de 200 metros antes de hundirme en el mar. El vientro en contra y una maniobra de giro lateral propulsa el avi´on en altura al acabarse la pista. La maniobra de aterrizaje es m´as complicada todav´ıa ya que los 200 metros del puente son insuficientes para decelerar el avi´on y se utiliza un cable el´astico para atrapar las ruedas del avi´on y frenarlo. Si el avi´on tiene el m´as m´ınimo escoramiento o no alcanza un alineamento perfecto con la direcci´on del puente, se precipita inexorablemente al mar o, lo que es peor, se estrella contra el puente o choca contra las estructuras del nav´ıo con el desenlace final que cabe esperar. Es imposible aterrizar de noche sin un entrenamiento especial, raz´on por la cual el Almirante en jefe solo ha de ordenar un ataque de la fuerza embarcada si la distancia al enemigo es tal que los aviones pueden volver con luz diurna suficiente. En el caso que relato aqu´ı, Spruance orden´o el ataque sabiendo que los aviones volver´ıan de noche y se perder´ıan. ¿ Por qu´e lo hizo ? Ignoro la raz´on aunque la supongo: el bot´ın era demasiado apetitoso. Yo era el primer avi´on de una oleada de 200 bombarderos en picado, del Enterprise y el Hornet, pero hab´ıan salido ya otras dos oleados de torpederos y cazas, cuyo destino tr´agico yo ignoraba en este momento. En este punto del relato, tengo que explicar qu´e hac´ıa la flota de Spruance 100 millas al norte de la Isla de Midway y 200 al noreste de la flota japonesa de 4 portaviones al mando del almirante Naguno, la misma que hab´ıa atacado Pearl Harbour solo a˜ no y medio antes. ¿ Saben ustedes d´onde est´a Midway ? Su nombre lo indica, a medio camino entre la Costa Este americana y las Filipinas, es el sitio m´as remoto del planeta. Su u ´ nico m´erito es el de ser equidistante entre dos mundos opuestos. Pero hab´ıa razones poderosas para que pasara lo que iba a pasar. El Almirante Yamamoto segu´ıa con su poderosa flota de desembarco a la flota de portaviones de Naguno y cometi´o el mismo error que el Rey Persa en la batalla de Salamina. Pero ya nadie se acuerda de la estrategia de Temistocles, que ha dejado de ense˜ narse en las escuelas navales. Alertado por la Pitia de Delfos, igual que Nimitz por los mensajes descifrados del Alta Mando Japon´es, escondi´o su flota y la dej´o caer sobre el enemigo 106 cuando menos se lo esperaba. En cuanto a Yamamoto, quer´ıa desembarcar en Midway tras el bombardeo de la isla por los aviones de Naguno. Por fin se hab´ıa dado cuenta el Alto Mando Japon´es del enorme valor estrat´egico de las Islas Hawai, y Midway era el primer paso para invadir estas islas. Pero, al igual que en el ataque a Pearl Harbour, los japoneses ignoraban la posici´on de los portaviones enemigos, algo que les iba a resultar fatal. Tras rechazar las dos primeras oleadas de ataque, Naguno orden´o lanzar sus aviones contra Midway, creyendo todav´ıa que esa isla era el origen del ataque enemigo. Yo tom´e el rumbo sur-suroeste a una velocidad de 280 nudos y 4500 metros de altura. Portaba 2 bombas de 500 kilos, una bajo cada ala. Al cabo de dos horas divis´e entre las nubes unos puntos sobre el mar que dejaban tras de si una larga estela de espuma. Eran los buques de la flota japonesa. Mi escuadrilla perdi´o altura y las trazas de espuma, rectas a principio, se convirtieron en zigzagueantes. Nos hab´ıan detectado y los buques enemigos iniciaban la cl´asica maniobra defensiva de variar continuamente de rumbo. La sorpresa de los japoneses fue tal, que sus aviones estaban repostando combustible y municiones en cubierta, la peor situaci´on para repeler una agresi´on. Adem´as no ten´ıan cazas en el aire para impedir nuestra aproximaci´on y abortar el ataque, igual que hab´ıan abortado los dos ataques anteriores. Me lanc´e en picado seguido por todos los aviones de la escuadrilla. Aqu´ı acaba mi relato, el resto se halla en los libros sobre la guerra naval durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial. Las cubiertas de los portaviones de esa ´epoca carec´ıan de blindaje y eran muy vulnerables. Antes del combate, un portaviones ha de poner en vuelo todos sus aviones ya que su combustible y munici´on hace de ellos un material altamente inflamable. Hay que cerrar los hangares con puertas de acero para aislar los espacios internos, vaciar las tuber´ıas y colectores de gasolina a tanques blindados, lo mismo que los pa˜ noles de bombas y torpedos, y hay que llenar estos espacios inflamables de di´oxido de carbono. Por u ´ ltimo hay que cerrar escotillas y puertas estancas. Nada de esto hicieron los portaviones de Naguno. No hay apenas fotos del holocausto que se produjo. Los u ´ nicos testimonios que quedan de esta batalla fueron filmados en una rara pel´ıcula en color que muestra el aterrizaje de nuestros aviones vueltos del combate, con sus espectaculares amerizajes y colisiones contra las estructuras del portaviones. Estas escenas se reconocen por el coloreado t´ıpico de los celuloides de la Segunda Guerra Mundial y por la silueta de los portaviones de ´epoca. Cuando el Akagi se dispon´ıa a aproar al viento y los aparatos calentaban motores, son´o la alarma. Hubo un aterrador chillido seguido de una estruendosa explosi´on producida por un impacto directo. Luego un resplandor 107 cegador y una detonaci´on mucho m´as fuerte que la primera, seguida de una potente r´afaga de aire. Luego otra explosi´on menos potente y el silencio. Las ametralladoras hab´ıan dejado de disparar. Una de las bombas hab´ıa ca´ıdo en el ascensor central perforando la cubierta y haciendo explosi´on en el hangar, incendiando inmediatamente los aviones que empezaron a estallar uno tras otro. El hangar se convirti´o pronto en un infierno de humo, llamas y explosiones. Otra bomba perfor´o la popa con id´entico efecto. El buque insignia de Naguno qued´o a la deriva convertido en una inmensa tea ardiente. El Soryu fue directamente alcanzado por tres bombas de 500 kilos. La primera cay´o a proa del ascensor n´ umero 1 y las otras encuadraron la del comb´es. Estall´o el hangar y el ascensor proel se lanz´o contra el puente. Otras bombas hicieron estallar los aviones que abarrotaban la cubierta de vuelo. El buque era una espeluznante antorcha que emanaba estallidos terror´ıficos y tuvo que ser evacuado. Su capit´an decidi´o quedarse en el puente con su espada de samurai entonando el kimigayo, mientras el buque llameante se hund´ıa bajo las olas. El Kaga corri´o igual suerte. Una bomba mat´o a todo el personal del puente de mando y arroj´o por la borda a varios cazas del puente que se dispon´ıan a despegar. La gasolina se incendi´o incontrolable sobre cubierta y hangares, y el buque se convirti´o en una antorcha de proa a popa. Luego se escor´o peligrosamente, y lo que quedaba de su tripulaci´on se lanz´o al mar. El buque sigui´o girando sin rumbo hasta que un submarino le otorg´o la muerte piadosa de un torpedo. El Hiryu se salv´o, pero solo moment´aneamente, al haber perdido la formaci´on. Sus aviones fueron capaces de despegar y herir de muerte al Y orktown, el tercer portaviones de Spruance, pero cuando esto ocurri´o, la batalla estaba perdida, y Yamamoto hab´ıa anulado la operaci´on de desembarque. Spruance orden´o atacar al Hiryu, cuyo tim´on qued´o agarrotado por las explosiones, quedando a la deriva y a merced de los aviones americanos. Se incendi´o, explot´o, se escor´o y no se supo m´as de ´el. Jap´on dispon´ıa de un inmenso imperio de agua, la mitad del Pac´ıfico, pero ya no ten´ıa buques para defenderlo. Sus millones de soldados de tierra combat´ıan in´ utilmente en Birmania, Nueva Guinea, Guadalcanal y China Oriental. Era como Hitler tras Stalingrado, due˜ no de una inmensa estepa y sin soldados para defenderla. Soy emperador del Jap´on y me llamo Hiro-Hito. Soy un Dios cuya voz resuena en las altas esferas y vivo en un palacio encantado rodeado de un inmenso jard´ın de pagodas y templos budistas. Alguna pel´ıcula ha hecho 108 de m´ı un ser infantil y hasta un retrasado mental, pero no soy tan tonto como parece y me doy cuenta de las aberraciones pol´ıticas que ocurren en torno a m´ı y fuera de mi patria, del conflicto armado que asola al mundo provocado por ese bigotudo inculto que levanta la mano como si se le hubiera roto el brazo, yo que siempre saludo de la forma m´as cort´es posible, con una ligera inclinaci´on de la cabeza. Ya s´e que he firmado un pacto de alianza con ese bicho, pero no soy responsable de eso, lo han decidido los generales obtusos de mi gobierno, as´ı como esa maldita guerra en China, que iniciaron hace diez a˜ nos, y todav´ıa siguen all´ı peleando, con millones de soldados, ellos que prometieron que la habr´ıan ganado en un a˜ no como mucho. Yo soy bi´ologo, soy un cient´ıfico que estudia y diseca muluscos y congrejos de mar, y tambi´en soy poeta, no un gran poeta claro, pero soy emperador poeta como Marco Aurelio fue fil´osofo y pas´o a la posteridad por su est´etica y no por los conflictos que desencaden´o, que no fueron pocos. Estoy al frente de un gobierno fascista dirigido por un general criminal, Tojo, que ser´a ejecutado por genocidio y cr´ımenes contra la humanidad al final de la guerra cuyo comienzo me propongo relatar a continuaci´on. ¿ C´omo hemos llegado hasta aqu´ı ? Los libros de historia que explican todo de los acontecimientos pasados y nada de los venideros, han dado todas las causas posibles, tanto las ciertas como las falsas, de lo que ha pasado en Jap´on desde el comienzo del siglo, en que nos convertimos en una gran potencia naval. Ya se sabe, al menos desde C´esar, que todo gobierno que desencadena una guerra y la gana, acaba en una dictadura encabezada por el general victorioso. Roma pas´o con C´esar de Rep´ ublica a Imperio lo mismo que Francia con Napole´on. Pero C´esar y Napole´on, aun siendo dictadores, ten´ıan cualidades. Otras naciones se encontraron con dictadores menos clementes como Hitler y Mussolini. De la misma forma, Jap´on es hoy una dictadura fascista dirigida por un general. Se ve´ıa venir desde que ganamos la batalla de Tsu-Shima hace cuarenta a˜ nos. Hoy nos reunimos en consejo de ministros en mi palacio. Tojo me dice que hay que entrar en guerra inmediatamente, que los Estados Unidos han cortado los suministros de petr´oleo y que nuestro ej´ercito se quedar´a inmovilizado dentro de tres meses como mucho. Yo no pregunto ni por qu´e ni d´onde. S´e que una guerra no se sabe nunca ni por qu´e comienza ni d´onde. Para eso est´an los libros de historia, para explicar lo inexplicable. Pregunto el u ´ nico dato cierto que dan los manuales de historia de una guerra: su duraci´on. Tojo me responde que en cuesti´on de meses sentaremos a los Estados Unidos a la mesa de negociaciones y obtendremos una paz ventajosa para nuestros intereses. Le respondo que en China me dijo lo mismo y tras diez a˜ nos de 109 lucha cruel y miles de v´ıctimas, no se ve el final del conflicto por ninguna parte. S´e que mi pregunta es in´ util y que habr´a guerra. Si hacemos otra guerra es justamente porque la de China no la podemos ganar. Es una espiral sin fin. Si empiezas una guerra, ya nunca sabr´as como pararla. Creo que fue Churchill el que dijo eso o algo parecido. Lo u ´ nico que hay que discutir es el d´onde, algo m´as complicado de lo que parece, ya que no tenemos falta de objetivos, sino exceso de ellos. Podemos atacar a los rusos en las estepas heladas de Manchuria, ahora que su ej´ercito est´a atrapado luchando contra Hitler. Podemos atacar el Sur de China y hacernos con los enclaves ingleses de Hong-Kong y Singapur, ahora que los ingleses est´an ocupados en el desierto de Libia. Podemos atacar incluso la India, tras conquistar las selvas de Malasia y Birmania. Podemos conquistar Indonesia, al haber sido derrotada Holanda por Alemania, y luego invadir Nueva Guinea y las Islas Salom´on, como base de partida para un ataque contra Australia o Nueva Zelanda, seg´ un nos apetezca. Podemos atacar las Filipinas, y luego Midway y usarlo como base de partida para desembarcar en las Islas Hawai, con lo cual la costa este de los Estados Unidos quedar´a a nuestro alcance, y los americanos privados de bases en el Pac´ıfico para hacer frente a nuestra ofensiva. Finalmente podemos invadir Alaska tras apoderarnos de las Aleutianas, no se sabe muy bien con qu´e objetivo, pero ya puestos ning´ un territorio es despreciable. La decisi´on sobre cual de estos objetivos era el ´optimo dur´o horas y horas ya que los generales del ej´ercito de tierra quer´ıan atacar por mar y los almirantes por tierra, de forma que nadie fuera responsable en caso de fracaso. Finalmente, como siempre que han de tomarse decisiones entre demasiadas alternativas, se tom´o la decisi´on m´as absurda de todas: atacar todos los objetivos a la vez. Ni siquiera Hitler fue tan atrevido y demor´o el ataque a la URSS hasta que obtuvo victoria ante Francia. Solo quedaban por fijar algunos detalles t´ecnicos. Tojo me inform´o de que la flota americana se hab´ıa trasladado desde su base habitual en San Diego a la de Pearl Harbour en Hawai y que por tanto estaba al alcance de un ataque japon´es. Que el almirante Yamamoto llevaba meses entrenando a sus ‘zeros’ equipados con torpedos para despegar de los portaviones y atacar una rada de aguas poco profundas. Que los ingleses hab´ıan hecho lo mismo en 1940 tras la entrada en guerra de Italia y hab´ıan destruido toda la flota italiana en el puerto de Tarento. Que sin flota los americanos no pod´ıan acudir en auxilio de las Filipinas, Midway ni las Aleutianas, ni ninguno de los enclaves ingleses, ni siquiera de Australia o Nueva Zelanda, y se ver´ıan abocados a la negociaci´on. Que la guerra se ganar´ıa en mar y en tierra sin grandes p´erdidas y en pocos meses. Yo 110 dije que si los americanos hab´ıan trasladado su flota a Pearl Harbour era para tendernos un cebo. Que si nos hab´ıan cortado el petr´oleo era para que pic´aramos el cebo. Que solo hab´ıan movido los acorazados, pero no los portaviones. Que los que iban a caer en una trampa ´eramos nosotros y no ellos. Roosevelt no quer´ıa luchar contra nosotros, sino contra Alemania, pero su opini´on p´ ublica estaba contra la guerra y nosotros ´ıbamos a darle la excusa que necesitaba. No soy tan tonto como parece, y mis asesores hab´ıan hecho un buen trabajo. Se decidi´o que atacar´ıamos Pearl Harbour y hundir´ıamos all´ı la flota americana, por sorpresa, como en Port Arthur cuarenta a˜ nos antes. Luego desencadenar´ıamos ofensivas en las Filipinas, Hong Kong, Malasia, Singapur e Indonesia. La conquista de la India, Australia y Alaska quedar´ıa para m´as adelante, aunque nadie cre´ıa que fuera posible. El delirio era tal que nadie se hab´ıa dado cuenta de que nos dispon´ıamos a invadir la cuarta parte de la superficie del planeta, mares sobre todo, con un enorme ej´ercito de tierra de cinco millones de soldados, in´ utiles para defender tanta superficie marina. Depend´ıamos cr´ıticamente de nuestra fuerza de 6 portaviones y una docena de acorazados, similar a la americana. Pero los americanos estaban ya construyendo un centenar de portaviones y acorazados en sus enormes astilleros de ambas costas gracias a su extraordinario potencial industrial. El programa naval japon´es era tambi´en muy ambicioso, pero estaba paralizado por la falta de suministros de materias primas esenciales como el acero, donde depend´ıamos de los Estados Unidos. Era como dispararse uno mismo un tiro en el pie. Tras la batalla de Midway, perdimos nuestros portaviones y nuestro imperio se convirti´o en un gigante con los pies de barro. A los americanos les bast´o con conquistar tres islas para derrotarnos. Rara vez se ha dado en la historia una decisi´on tan obtusa como la nuestra de atacar Pearl Harbour en diciembre de 1941. El general Oc´eano nos derrot´o, igual que el general Invierno derrot´o a Napole´on en Rusia. La apocal´ıptica retirada de los franceses y el paso del Beresina recuerda la lluvia de fuego que se abati´o sobre el Jap´on desde el verano de 1944, cuando estuvo al alcance de los superbombarderos B-29 que despegaban desde la isla de Tinian en las Marianas. Despu´es de la guerra, me convert´ı en un emperador pac´ıfico que buscaba el bienestar de su pueblo. Si apoy´e la acci´on criminal de Tojo en 1941 era porque no ten´ıa poder para oponerme a ella. Los dioses son a veces impotentes ante la locura de los hombres, lo sabemos desde la Guerra de Troya. 111 Estamos en el Mar de Coral, una hora antes de la amanecida del 8 de mayo de 1942, justo cinco meses despu´es del ataque a Pearl Harbour, y un mes antes de la batalla de Midway. La raz´on por la cual estamos aqu´ı se explicar´a despu´es para no perturbar lo esencial del hecho sin precedentes que va a producirse: se van a enfrentar por primera vez dos portaviones americanos, el Lexington y el Y orktown, contra otros dos japoneses, el Zuikaku y el Shokaku, a m´as de 100 millas de distancia unos de otros. Hasta esta fecha, una batalla naval es un ca˜ noneo entre dos flotas que se avistan mutuamente, a 100 metros de distancia en tiempos de Nelson, y hasta 30 km para los grandes acorazados actuales. A partir de ahora, las batallas navales ser´an a ciegas, entre buques lejanos que se aniquilan sin verse. Los japoneses se hallan en este momento a 230 millas al norte de los americanos y nadie conoc´ıa la posici´on del enemigo. Se lanzaron aviones de reconocimiento por ambos bandos para barrer el inmenso espacio mar´ıtimo. A las 6:25, el Lexington lanz´o 18 aparatos mientras los japoneses pusieron en el aire 87 aviones, entre cazas, bombarderos en picado y torpederos. Estos aparatos iban a ciegas, pero tan pronto como la flota enemiga fuera avistada por un avi´on de reconocimiento, caer´ıan sobre ella en combate suicida que acabar´ıa normalmente con la destrucci´on de ambos adversarios. A las 8:15, los americanos descubrieron a los japoneses e hicieron despegar inmediatamente 84 aviones, que se cruzaron con los japoneses en direcciones opuestas pero sin detectarse. A las 10:57, el Shokaku fue atacado por aviones torpederos y bombarderos en picado. Empez´o a moverse en zigzag con violentas metidas de tim´on a una y otra banda, al tiempo que disparaba todas sus piezas de 127 mm y sus ametralladoras de costado. Cuando un barco observa un torpedo lanzado contra ´el, debe colocarse en paralelo a la estela del torpedo. Pero si es atacado por dos aviones en ´angulo, es imposible eludir el impacto. Las bombas de 500 kilos de los bombarderos en picado que se estrellan contra la cubierta de un portaviones, si hay impacto directo, no suelen alcanzar partes vitales del nav´ıo y por tanto son menos peligrosas que los torpedos, a menos que provoquen incendios que se propaguen por la cubierta o los hangares. El Shokaku solo encaj´o algunas bombas de 500 kilos y el Zuikaku logr´o deslizarse fuera del alcance enemigo, bajo el abrigo de las nubes. El ataque americano hab´ıa fracasado: los torpedos se lanzaron demasiado lejos, la artiller´ıa japonesa era muy precisa, y los aviones americanos eran m´as lentos que los ‘zeros’ japoneses. Los radares del Lexington y del Y orktown detectaron los aviones enemigos a 70 millas de distancia. Los portaviones aproaron al sudeste y lanzaron 32 aviones con la misi´on de interceptar al enemigo, pero no lo lograron. Los portaviones 112 americanos cometieron el error de distanciarse demasiado, m´as de 8 millas, dividiendo la cortina protectora de su escolta de 5 cruceros y 7 destructores. Los ‘zeros’ japoneses atraveraron la muralla de fuego de las piezas de 127 mm y lanzaron sus torpedos a ras de agua contra el Lexington. Los r´apidos bandazos del paquidermo de 36 000 toneladas que avanzaba a 30 nudos de velocidad no evitaron varios impactos cuyas v´ıas de agua inundaron 3 de sus 6 calderas. El buque se escor´o 8 grados a babor, pero las juntas de varios tanques de gasolina se hab´ıan debilitado y esto result´o a la postre fatal. El Y orktown solo fue alcanzado por una bomba de 360 kilos y al acabar el combate a las 11:45, parec´ıa que la flota americana hab´ıa salido indemne. Pero a las 12:47 se produjo una enorme explosi´on en el Lexington producida por la chispa de un ventilador el´ectrico. Otra violenta explosi´on sacudi´o el portaviones a las 14:45. El buque, convertido en un enorme brasero, qued´o al garete y tuvo que ser evacuado. As´ı acab´o esta batalla aparentemente anodina pero de dr´asticas consecuencias para el futuro. El Y orktown se dirigi´o renqueante hasta Hawai, donde fue reparado r´apidamente para poder participar en la batalla de Midway, pero eso es otra historia. Queda por explicar por qu´e se produjo esta batalla. Los japoneses hab´ıan invadido una superficie inmensa de agua, pero como les pasa a los grandes imperios, cuanto m´as conquistan m´as quieren conquistar. Adem´as, sus victorias hab´ıan sido tan f´aciles que pensaban ser invencibles y pecaron de exceso de confianza. Pensaban poder avanzar hacia el sur por las junglas de Nueva Guinea, cuya costa norte ya controlaban, hacia Australia y Nueva Zelanda, tras apoderarse de las Islas Salom´on: Bougainville, Nueva Georgia, Isabel, Malaita, San Cristobal y Guadalcanal, todas famosas por los encarnizados y sangrientos combates que iban a tener lugar en sus playas y junglas tropicales. El Mar de Coral, donde les esperaban los portaviones americanos, est´a a unas 500 millas al sur de estas islas. Naturalmente, los americanos estaban al corriente de todos los planes japoneses gracias a su capacidad para descifrar los mensajes del Alto Mando Japon´es y los esperaban all´ı para atacar sus covoyes de transporte de tropas. Si estas operaciones no acabaron con una severa derrota de la flota nipona fue solo por la falta de preparaci´on de los mandos y la flota americanos. Estos ten´ıan adem´as un arma formidable de la que carec´ıan los japoneses: el radar. Pero como demostraron los combates navales en torno a Guadalcanal, tardaron bastante en aprender a servirse de ese instrumento. 113 Son las siete de la ma˜ nana y me dirijo con rumbo sur sobre la isla de Oahu, pilotando un ‘zero’ equipado con un torpedo, id´entico al de los submarinos pero con un dispositivo que le permite, una vez lanzado, hundirse en el agua hasta una profundidad de dos metros, inferior a la habitual debido a las aguas poco profundas de la rada que me propongo atacar. Estoy al mando de una escuadrilla de aviones torpederos, seguida por otras de bombarderos de altura y bombarderos en picado. Esta primera oleada consta de 200 aviones y ha despegado desde cuatro portaviones que se han deslizado sigilosamente desde sus bases japonesas hasta el punto en que me encuentro en el centro del Pac´ıfico. La raz´on por la cual he llegado hasta aqu´ı y voy a hacer lo que relato a continuaci´on aparece en numerosos libros sobre la Segunda Guerra Mundial e incluso en alguna pel´ıcula. Yo voy a limitarme a contar lo que vi. Ni siquiera lo que sent´ı, porque en la guerra no hay tiempo para sentir, ni siquiera para tener miedo. El miedo es siempe retrospectivo, si no, nadie podr´ıa matar. Volaba como digo sobre la isla de Oahu con rumbo sur, hasta divisar la rada de Pearl Harbour, centelleante en esta amanecida sobre el tr´opico del 7 de diciembre de 1941. Mi mirada se dirigi´o inmediatamente hacia el dique norte, donde deb´ıan estar anclados los grandes buques de la flota americana. Vi ocho grandes buques perfectamente alineados amarrados de dos en dos y mi decepci´on fue inmensa al observar que todos eran acorazados, no hab´ıa un solo portaviones. Si yo hubiera tenido capacidad para pensar, habr´ıa anulado el ataque. Todav´ıa no hab´ıamos declarado la guerra. Pod´ıamos decir que se trataba de unas maniobras equivocadas o cualquier otra raz´on absurda. Todas las excusas son absurdas por definici´on, si fueran obvias no ser´ıa necesario darlas. Pero en la guerra no hay que pensar, de lo contrario no habr´ıa guerras y mis servicios ser´ıan prescindibles. A m´ı me hab´ıan entrenado para matar y eso es lo que deb´ıa hacer. Ni siquiera me voy a escudar en el hecho evidente de que obedec´ıa ´ordenes, y que las ´ordenes hay que cumplirlas sobre todo si son absurdas, si no no tendr´ıa m´erito hacerlo. Era domingo y conect´e en mi radiotransmisor la frecuencia de Honolul´ u con m´ usica t´ıpica del lugar. No se oy´o ninguna se˜ nal de alarma o inquietud y no vi ning´ un caza despegando, todos yac´ıan pl´acidamente en la pista del club de aviaci´on donde iban a ser liquidados en solo unos minutos. Al pasar por encima de la flota enemiga, no hubo ning´ un disparo de la artiller´ıa antia´erea, ni las tripulaciones tocaron zafarrancho para acudir a sus puestos de combate. El detalle grotesco de los marinos formando bien alineados en cubierta para asistir al toque de diana izando la bandera de las barras y estrellas es totalmente ver´ıdico. Sin embargo sab´ıa que el radar nos hab´ıa 114 detectado y nuestra presencia pod´ıa suscitar sospechas. La raz´on de por qu´e eso no fue as´ı solo la supe despu´es del final de la guerra. Los americanos hab´ıan descifrado todos los mensajes de nuestro gobierno a la embajada en Washington y sab´ıan todo sobre nuestros planes, incluso la hora del ataque. Roosevelt di´o una orden secreta al Almirante en jefe de la flota del Pac´ıfico: sacar inmediatamente los portaviones a alta mar. Sobre el ataque al puerto se call´o como un muerto. Inici´e un giro de 180 grados y todos los aviones de la escuadrilla me siguieron. Volaba a 1000 metros de altura y el objetivo se encontraba ahora al norte, a una distancia de aproximadamente 2 km. Perd´ı altura hasta alcanzar el nivel del mar y me dirig´ı en vuelo rasante hacia los buques enemigos. Al penetrar de nuevo en la rada y a una distancia de unos 500 metros, apret´e el dispositivo de liberaci´on del torpedo sobre el primer buque de la fila enemigo, mientras que el segundo avi´on de la escuadrilla hac´ıa lo mismo sobre el segundo buque y as´ı sucesivamente. Solo pod´ıamos alcanzar los cuatros acorazados de la fila exterior. Los bombarderos en picado atacar´ıan la fila interior mientras los bombarderos de altura barrer´ıan el aeropuerto. Hab´ıamos ensayado esta maniobra cientos de veces en una bah´ıa japonesa cuya orograf´ıa era casi id´entica a la de Pearl Harbour. Mi torpedo cay´o sobre las aguas remansadas de la bah´ıa, se hundi´o hasta la profundidad prefijada e inici´o su mortal carrera hacia el blanco, es decir las partes vitales del buque enemigo, sala de calderas y almac´en de explosivos, que alcanzar´ıa tras abrir una enorme boca de agua bajo la l´ınea de flotaci´on. Observ´e por el retrovisor la estela de burbujas de aire del torpedo bajo el agua, y puse el motor al m´aximo de revoluciones, al tiempo que ganaba altura para protegerme eventualmente del fuego de las ametralladoras enemigas que segu´ıa ausente, tal hab´ıa sido nuestro enga˜ no. Pas´e por encima de las dos filas de acorazados y observ´e por el retrovisor las maniobras de los dem´as aviones torpederos. Cuando empezaron a explotar los torpedos, me hallaba a m´as de 1 km de distancia y por tanto no pude observar nada, ni siquiera el ataque subsiguiente de los bombarderos en picado. Mi objetivo era unirme a los aviones de la segunda oleada y conducirlos al objetivo tras girar mi avi´on 180 grados. En esta segunda pasada, evit´e cruzar la rada, ya que pod´ıa estar protegida por un intenso fuego de artiller´ıa del enemigo, ya sobre aviso. Pero la maniobra de aproximaci´on desde el sur fue id´entica a la primera. Ten´ıa curiosidad por ver el destrozo del primer ataque, pero solo vi incendios y humo por doquier, adem´as de las rosas de p´olvora de las piezas de grueso calibre que forman una peligrosa muralla frente a los ataques a´ereos. Los blancos ya no eran visibles, raz´on por la cual hab´ıa vuelto para dirigir esta 115 segunda oleada. Mi maniobra en vuelo rasante fue id´entica a la primera, aunque ya no dispon´ıa de torpedo para lanzar. No puedo contar m´as. Despu´es de la guerra, aparecieron fotos del puerto tras el ataque, una vez que se hubo disipado el humo de las explosiones y los incendios a bordo de los buques. Se ve´ıan los acorazados hundidos hasta las torretas, tras tocar fondo, escorados, humeantes, reventados y uno estaba incluso completamente volcado y mostraba su quilla al sol. Murieron unos 2000 marinos. Roosevelt utiliz´o estas fotos apocal´ıpticas para galvanizar a la hasta entonces ap´atica opini´on p´ ublica americana. Dijo que no exist´ıa precedente de un ataque tan traicionero como el nuestro y declar´o la guerra al Jap´on. A los pocos d´ıas, Alemania declar´o la guerra a los Americanos, para recordar al Jap´on que ten´ıa pendiente una deuda con la Uni´on Sovi´etica. Roosevelt y Churchill se reunieron inmediatamente, y decidieron que el esfuerzo b´elico se dirigir´ıa prioritariamente contra Alemania. Jap´on fue vencido u ´ nicamente por los 6 portaviones que no logramos hundir en Pearl Harbour. Los 8 acorazados que hundimos all´ı no eran m´as que pura chatarra. ¿ Han o´ıdo ustedes hablar del rey Pirro y sus victorias ? Supongo que no. No importa. 116 X. Dream of America Una breve definici´on de mito es la siguiente: personaje del que se conoce todo sobre su leyenda pero nada sobre su biograf´ıa. Los mitos suelen aparecer en la literatura, y la cultura americana no ha generado tadav´ıa grandes mitos, quiz´as porque todav´ıa no ha alcanzado su madurez, pero ha generado ya un gran n´ umero de cuasi-mitos, que se convertir´an en mitos plenos cuando alg´ un escritor o cineasta de talento decida volcar su atenci´on sobre ellos. Estos cuasi-mitos han aparecido en la totalidad de los sectores: cultural, econ´omico, pol´ıtico, cient´ıfico, musical, deportivo y por supuesto cinematogr´afico. Los mitos del cine y de la canci´on son los m´as conocidos ya que se trata de ´ıdolos que atraen la atenci´on de las masas juveniles. De hecho se les llama tambi´en ´ıdolos juveniles (teen − idols). Pero no todos ellos se convienten en mito, ni siquiera en cuasi-mito. Nuestra atenci´on solo se ha volcado en dos casos claros: James Dean y Bob Dylan. En el deporte brillan los baloncestistas de color y los jugadores de baseball, que nosotros desconocemos en Europa igual que ellos desconocen a nuestros grandes jugadores de f´ utbol, como Di Stefano o Pel´e. Hay que citar a grandes atletas que han brillado en alguna Olimpiada como Dick Fosbury o Mark Spitz, pero sobre todo al exc´entrico ajedrecista Bobby Fischer, tan inclasificable como el deporte que practica. Muy pocos de los presidentes americanos llegan a mito. Solo consideramos que tres han pasado esta barrera: Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt y John Kennedy. Dado que el primero y el u ´ ltimo han atra´ıdo ya nutrida atenci´on en forma de libros o pel´ıculas, nos detendremos aqu´ı u ´ nicamente sobre el segundo. Queremos acabar este peque˜ no compendio de mitolog´ıa americana con hombres c´elebres que fueron grandes banqueros o industriales y que gobernaron los Estados Unidos igual que Lorenzo de Medicis gobern´o Florencia al final del siglo XV, sin ocupar ning´ un puesto pol´ıtico, en mecenas de las artes y de las letras, con enormes sumas de dinero para reconducir la pol´ıtica del gobierno en favor de sus intereses y luego donarlas en forma de inmensas colecciones de pinturas, manuscritos o piedras preciosas. Me refiero a John Rockefeller, el rey del petr´oleo, Dupont de Nemour, el rey del caucho, 117 Pierpont Morgan, el rey del acero, Henry Ford, el rey del autom´ovil, Paul Getty, otro rey del petr´oleo, y Bill Gates, el rey de la inform´atica. Cuando yo era joven, la fortuna de Rockefeller era ya un mito. Para los j´ovenes actuales, tal vez tenga m´as inter´es el caso de Bill Gates que inunda sus vidas con iPhones, iPads e iTablets. Ya veremos. ¿ Cu´antos nombres de ajedrecistas famosos conoce la gente ? Muchos solo conocen el de Bobby Fischer gracias a su memorable encuentro contra Boris Spassky en 1972, con el t´ıtulo de campe´on mundial en disputa. Todos los peri´odicos del mundo reprodujeron las partidas as´ı como los numerosos incidentes que ocurrieron durante el enfrentamiento, en que se quiso ver un nuevo duelo este-oeste. En definitiva, Fischer gan´o de forma aplastante y luego desapareci´o del mapa igual de r´apido que hab´ıa aparecido. Yo era por aquella ´epoca un mediocre aficionado al tablero, pero conoc´ıa de memoria las grandes partidas de Morphy, Anderson o Capablanca, las m´as famosas aperturas y algunos mates finales con rey y dos piezas contra rey. Tambi´en conoc´ıa la sutil diferencia entre un gambito y un sacrificio. Hubo dos fen´omenos que convirtieron a Fischer en mito: su paso mete´orico ante los focos del p´ ublico, como James Dean, y su car´acter caprichoso y mani´atico, que desconcert´o a todo el mundo y al cual incluso algunos achacan su victoria. Practic´o la t´actica, y no fue el primero, de poner nervioso a su adversario. Es poco elegante, pero puede incluso que no lo hiciera deliberadamente, era su forma natural de ser. Se quej´o de todo, de las piezas como del tablero, e impuso jugar a puerta cerrada, alejado de las c´amaras. Despu´es de ganar, perdi´o el t´ıtulo por incomparecencia ante el rival. Era un tipo ‘muy raro’. Para saber algo de ´el antes de 1972, o despu´es, hay que hurgar en sus raras biograf´ıas. Fue un ni˜ no prodigio nacido en 1943 en Chicago, de padres inmigrantes tal vez jud´ıos, sobre cuya identidad no se tiene certeza. Gan´o magistralmente todos los campeonatos a los que se present´o, desde los 14 a˜ nos. Era un prodigio del ajedrez, tal vez el mayor que haya existido nunca. Antes de pelear contra Spassky por el t´ıtulo mundial, se clasific´o como postulante frente a rivales como Larsen y Petrosian, ganando incluso por inapelables 6–0. En el memorable encuentro contra Spassky venci´o por 12.5–8.5, que es una victoria muy abultada para una final, y la diferencia hubiera sido mayor si el comportamiento err´atico de Fischer no le hubiera hecho perder las dos primeras partidas. Tras el match, Fischer desapareci´o hasta 1992... y reapareci´o en Yugoslavia, sometida por entonces a embargo por los Estados Unidos. Fue as´ı 118 como se convirti´o en fugitivo deambulando por Hungr´ıa, Alemania, Filipinas, Jap´on e Islandia, con ´ordenes de extradici´on y asilo pol´ıtico incluidos. Se hizo antiamericano y antisemita, y muri´o en 2008. Probablemente padec´ıa alg´ un trastorno mental que todav´ıa nadie se ha interesado en investigar, pero que explicar´ıa su comportamiento err´atico, como el de James Dean, por cierto. James Dean naci´o en Indiana en 1931 y muri´o en un est´ upido accidente de coche en California en 1955, a los 24 a˜ nos de edad. Fue por tanto un meteoro. ¿ Por qu´e se transform´o en mito ? Porque era un joven atractivo que encarn´o el papel de rebelde que demandaba la generaci´on del ‘baby boom’ surgida tras la Segunda Guerra Mundial. Dean marca un antes y un despu´es en el cine americano. Antes, las estrellas de Hollywood eran bellas actrices como Marlen Dietrich, Greta Garbo, Ginger Rogers, Vivian Leigh, Mauren O’Hoara, Ingrid Bergman, Rita Hayworth, Lauren Bacall, Ava Gardner, Elisabeth Taylor o Marilyn Monroe, junto a actores m´as bien maduritos como Gary Cooper o Humphrey Bogart. Despu´es de Dean, el p´ ublico americano busca sus ´ıdolos sobre todo entre los j´ovenes actores masculinos, una larga lista donde aparecen al final Leonardo Dicaprio y Zac Efron. James Dean hizo solo tres pel´ıculas en su corta vida: ‘Al Este del Ed´en’, ‘Rebelde sin Causa’ y ‘Gigante’, ´estas dos u ´ ltimas m´as bien mediocres y que salieron en sala tras su muerte. La primera, dirigida por Elia Kazan con gui´on basado en la novela hom´onima de John Steinbeck, es una de las grandes obras del cine americano y la actuaci´on de Dean es magistral. En su vida privada, Dean desarroll´o un comportamiento err´atico atribuido a problemas paternales, pero que pudiera tal vez deberse a un desorden mental. Mucho despu´es de su muerte se supo tambi´en que era homosexual. Las evidencias son abrumadoras: evit´o enrolarse en el ej´ercito alegando este motivo, tuvo novios que con el tiempo se fueron de la lengua, se dijo incluso que se acostaba con magnates de Hollywood para lograr avances en su carrera, como un vulgar chapero, y finalmente que era adicto al sadomasoquismo. Puede que haya mucho de invenci´on en todo esto y hoy se peca por exceso igual que en vida se pecaba por defecto. Otros muchos actores de Hollywood han sido homosexuales. Citar´e solo a Anthony Perkins y Rock Hudson, cuya orientaci´on sexual nadie cuestiona al haber muerto de SIDA. Para todos los dem´as, Dean incluido, los puritanos niegan la orientaci´on sexual diciendo que se limitaban a ‘experimentar con el sexo’. La viuda de Laurence Olivier, por ejemplo, admit´ıa que su difunto marido hab´ıa tenido relaciones homosexuales, pero que en calidad 119 de artista estaba obligado a experimentar con todo. Creo que la soluci´on consiste en cambiar de nombre a los homosexuales. A partir de ahora se les llamar´a experimentadores. Robert Zimmerman naci´o en Minnesota en 1941 y nada presagiaba que se iba a convertir en un mito, quiz´as el mayor ´ıdolo de masas de la canci´on pop, junto con los Beatles. Como en otros campos, los ´ıdolos son muchos, pero los mitos pocos. Si salt´o a la fama a principios de los a˜ nos 1960, bajo el nombre de Bob Dylan, es porque inici´o un nuevo estilo propio y desconocido para las masas: pas´o de un t´ıpico cantante de m´ usica country o f olk, a ser un cantautor social al estilo de Pete Seeger o Joan Baez. Pero Dylan era mucho m´as que ´estos, de lo contrario no habr´ıa entusiasmado tanto a las masas. Sus canciones como ‘Blowin in the wind’ o ‘Tambourine man’ son m´as que canciones de estilo pop − f olk, son joyas po´eticas, y no es casual si ha sido nominado al Premio Nobel de Literatura. Sus canciones no est´an ancladas en su tiempo ni en ning´ un tiempo, como las de los grandes juglares medievales. ¿ Fue la protesta contra la guerra de Vietnam la que cre´o el mito Dylan, o Dylan quien cre´o el mito de la protesta contra Vietnam ? No se puede responder a esta pregunta, es como el huevo y la gallina. En un famoso concierto en Woodstock, Dylan apareci´o ante cientos de miles de j´ovenes enardecidos, como Jesucristo en el serm´on de la monta˜ na. Estos j´ovenes quer´ıan un gu´ıa para salir del desastre de sus vidas cotidianas. Martin Scorsese lo ha explicado en su excelente pel´ıcula ‘No return home’: Dylan no era un profeta, no ten´ıa un evangelio, ni siquiera un programa pol´ıtico, era solo un artista. Lo que hizo fue para muchos una traici´on, pero ten´ıa raz´on, ´el experimentaba con m´ usica, no con campa˜ nas electorales. Pas´o a ser un m´ usico rock con su famosa ‘Like a rolling stone’, que en algunas listas aparece como la canci´on m´as influyente de la era moderna, no creo que por mucho tiempo. Las nuevas generaciones de j´ovenes tambi´en abandonaron la pol´ıtica y se fueron tras ´el. Luego al parecer se hizo presentador de televisi´on, pintor y cosas por el estilo. En definitiva, se convirti´o en una persona normal. Su vida privada todav´ıa se conoce mal. Se habla de varias amantes, de un matrimonio secreto y de momento poco m´as. Franklin Delano Roosevelt naci´o en Nueva York en 1882 y muri´o en su casa de campo de Georgia, pocos d´ıas antes de acabar la Segunda Guerra 120 Mundial. Fue Presidente de Los Estados Unidos y ejeci´o su cargo durante el tiempo record de doce a˜ nos, entre 1933 y 1945, es decir fue el u ´ nico Presidente que haya ejercido tres mandatos, hasta hoy. Se puede decir que es el creador del nuevo mundo, el surgido tras la Segunda Guerra Mundial, tras tomar tres decisiones transcendentales: El New Deal de 1933, la entrada en Guerra de su pa´ıs en 1941, y el reparto del mundo en la Conferencia de Yalta de 1945. El New Deal era un programa econ´omico de corte progresista para reflotar la econom´ıa americana, hundida tras la crisis de 1929. Su inspirador era el economista ingl´es Keynes, cuyas ideas hab´ıan sido despreciadas por los gobiernos conservadores ingleses de la ´epoca, pero inspiraron a los gobiernos socialdem´ocratas europeos de postguerra. Respecto a la entrada en guerra en 1941, se trata de la respuesta al bombardeo japon´es de Pearl Harbour. Con el tiempo se han sabido sus maniobras subterr´aneas para provocar dicho ataque. Por sorprendente que parezca hoy, cuando ya solo nos queda en el recuerdo el final de dicha guerra gracias a la intervenci´on americana, la opini´on p´ ublica de dicho pa´ıs en 1940 era ferozmente hostil a la intervenci´on, en otras palabras no quer´ıa elegir entre Hitler y Churchill. Pero Roosevelt s´ı quer´ıa elegir. Como todos los grandes presidentes, supo tomar decisiones en contra de su opini´on p´ ublica. Roosevelt entr´o en guerra ‘de facto’ ya desde 1940, justo despu´es de su segunda reelecci´on, al firmar con Inglaterra el tratado de lend − lease, mendiante el cual ced´ıa a este pa´ıs una ingente cantidad de material de guerra y suministros de toda clase, a cambio de nada. Este tratado era de facto una declaraci´on de guerra a Alemania. No es casual que fuera Hitler quien declar´o la guerra a los Estados Unidos y no al rev´es, tras el ataque de Pearl Harbour. Una vez entrado en guerra, tuvo que dirigirla. Convino con Churchill en que el enemigo prioritario era Hitler y el Pac´ıfico solo un teatro de guerra secundario, lo cual no deja de sorprender ya que fue atacado por Jap´on y no por Hitler. Pero si se analiza toda su actuaci´on anterior, esta decisi´on resulta evidente. Se dice que Roosevelt y Churchill eran amigos inseparables y ten´ıan la misma estrategia, pero esto es m´as que discutible. Roosevelt sab´ıa que no pod´ıa atacar a Hitler, de hecho no lo hizo seriamente hasta el desembarco en Normand´ıa de junio 1944, pero la URSS s´ı pod´ıa, y envi´o grandes cantidades de material a dicho pa´ıs. Pero para Churchill, la URSS era tan peligosa como Hitler y jug´o a provocar un cambio de poder en Alemania que le permitiera aliarse con dicho pa´ıs para derrotar a la URSS. Roosevelt hizo abortar estas maniobras, pero estos episodios subterr´aneos se conocen todav´ıa mal. Churchill quiso desembarcar en los Balkanes y no en Normand´ıa, para impedir que cayeran en su totalidad 121 en manos sovi´eticas. Si Roosevelt se impuso es porque ten´ıa el dinero y los medios. La actuaci´on de Rossevelt en Yalta ha sido muy discutida, en particular sus concesiones a la URSS, y se han achacado a su enfermedad latente, visible en la palidez de su rostro. En las fotos de la Conferencia, aparece con una capa negra que le da un aspecto de vampiro. All´ı se reparti´o el mundo como otrora el papa Borgia lo hiciera entre las coronas de Espa˜ na y Portugal. El resultado fueron 50 a˜ nos de guerra fr´ıa, pero la alternativa hubiera sido un enfrentamiento armado entre los Estados Unidos y la URSS, con resultado incierto. Los conflictos se desplazaron a Am´erica del Sur, Asia, Africa, y finalmente Oriente Medio. Desaparecida la URSS, sigue habiendo guerras, lo que prueba que la URSS no era el foco de todos los males. Como ocurre con muchos grandes hombres, mucho despu´es de su muerte se conocen detalles de su vida que resultan sorprendentes. Roosevelt sufri´o de joven una poliomielitis que le dej´o las piernas inermes, y solo pod´ıa desplazarse en una silla de ruedas. En su tiempo, esto pod´ıa paralizar una carrera pol´ıtica, raz´on por la cual en las numerosas pel´ıculas de ´epoca en que aparece, las tomas est´an h´abilmente enfocadas de forma que parece estar de pie, incluso cuando se dirige al Congreso desde la tribuna. En realidad fue un enfermo paral´ıtico que debi´o sufrir considerablemente. John Rockefeller naci´o en el Estado de Nueva York en 1839 y muri´o en su casa de campo en 1937. Fund´o la compa˜ n´ıa petrol´ıfera Standard Oil Company, en una ´epoca en la que barcos y trenes se mov´ıan con carb´on. Invent´o el queroseno y desplaz´o al carb´on tras aparecer el motor de explosi´on. Su fortuna se eval´ ua en un billion en sentido anglosaj´on, es decir mil millones de d´olares. Esto lo convierte en el hombre m´as rico de la historia, una vez corregida la cifra por inflaci´on, junto a personajes m´ıticos como Creso, Lorenzo de Medicis, Jacob Fugger y la familia Rothschild. Su biograf´ıa sigue herm´eticamente cerrada tanto a su vida privada como a los m´etodos dudosos que utiliz´o para amasar su fortuna, utilizando t´ecnicas monopol´ısticos, mal vistas incluso dentro del capitalismo salvaje vigente en su ´epoca. Es lo m´as que se sabe de ´el, aparte naturalmente de sus numerosas d´adivas a fundaciones que llevan su nombre o a la Rockefeller University de NY. No menos interesante es la biograf´ıa de su quinto hijo John Rockefeller Jr., que fund´o hacia 1930 el mayor banco del mundo, el Chase Manhattan Bank, rebautizado posteriormente JP Morgan Chase. De nuevo, sus bi´ografos prefieren detenerse en sus obras caritativas antes que en los m´etodos opacos y especula122 tivos que emple´o durante la crisis del 29, para lucrarse de forma espectacular. Otros Rockefeller han actuado en la cosa p´ ublica sin demasiado ´exito. El caso m´as sobresaliente es el de Nelson Rockefeller, vicepresidente con Gerald Ford en 1974-77, tras el esc´andalo Watergate. El d´ uo Ford-Rockefeller tiene el dudoso m´erito de ser el u ´ nico que ha ejercido en la Casa Blanca sin haber sido nunca elegido. Son muy escasos los cient´ıficos que se convierten en mito: Arqu´ımedes, Galileo, Einstein y pocos m´as. Tal vez Oppenheimer haga parte de esta lista selecta, tras aparecer en 1945 en la portada del ‘Times’ con el apodo de ‘Prometeo Americano’, una interesante r´eplica de la conocida f´abula de la mitolog´ıa griega. Tambi´en se convirti´o en portada de los peri´odicos tras sus audiciones de 1963, de las cuales ya hemos hablado suficientemente, pero que se asemejan igualmente al castigo que los dioses infligen a los mortales. ¿ Fue Oppenheimer un gran f´ısico o solo un s´ımbolo ? No hay ning´ un gran descubrimiento asociado a su nombre, raz´on por la cual no obtuvo el Premio Nobel. Sin embargo, no es posible hacer una historia de la ciencia americana sin nombrarle en un lugar prominente. Fund´o en Berkeley la primera escuela en USA de F´ısica Te´orica, y cre´o y dirigi´o el Laboratorio de los Alamos, ejemplo de gran laboratorio moderno de F´ısica, imitado luego en USA (SLAC, BNL, Tevatron) y el resto del mundo (CERN por ejemplo). Fue tambi´en el padre de la bomba at´omica, pero esto es un dudoso honor. El caso Oppenheimer nos lleva a rendir un homenaje a la ciencia americana, que ha producido aproximadamente el 50% de los galardonados con el Premio Nobel en las ciencias tradicionales, F´ısica, Qu´ımica y Biolog´ıa, tras la Segunda Guerra Mundial. Voy a limitarme a citar a los 17 grandes f´ısicos nacidos en Estados Unidos que han obtenido el premio en el campo de la F´ısica de part´ıculas. Son, por orden estr´ıctamente cronol´ogico: R.Millikan, A.Compton, C.Anderson, R.Feynman, J.Schwinger, F.Reines, L.Lederman, M.Perl, M.Gellmann, B.Richter, S.Glashow, M.Schwartz, S.Weinberg, S.Ting, D.Gross, D.Politzer, F.Wilczek. De estos 17, 13 han nacido en Nueva York y 11 son de origen jud´ıo. De nuevo cabe preguntarse qu´e fue antes el huevo o la gallina. Nacieron en el lugar adecuado (el barrio de Bronx) y en el momento adecuado (los a˜ nos 30) o fueron ellos los que crearon ese lugar y momento. Cuando se habla de la Escuela de Nueva York, se habla de arte, de moda o incluso de escritores y cantantes. Habr´ıa tambi´en que hablar de cient´ıficos, una historia que queda por hacer. 123 Cuando yo era estudiante, all´a por los a˜ nos 1970, Nueva York era la ciudad m´as poblada del planeta, con unos 10 millones de habitantes, mucho para alguien como yo que viv´ıa en Madrid, que no deb´ıa de tener mucho m´as de un mill´on por entonces. Hoy, con m´as o menos la misma poblaci´on, NY ocupa el puesto 18, tras ciudades como Shanghai, Istambul, Karachi o Bombai. Sin embargo, yo ser´ıa incapaz de dar el nombre de un solo edificio o arteria de esas ciudades. En 1970, y todav´ıa sin haber visto ninguna de las grandes pel´ıculas que har´ıan c´elebre a la gran urbe, ya hab´ıa o´ıdo de sus edificios de altura extravagante, pero tambi´en de Central Park, Wall Street y la Estatua de la Libertad, de los barrios de Manhattan y del Bronx, y de Broadway, la Quinta Avenida o la Calle 42, as´ı como de Greenwich Village. Con el tiempo supe de sus espectaculares museos, Metropolitan, Guggenheim, Pierpont Morgan Library, y de otros lugares interesantes, el Rochefeller Center, el Actor’s Studio y la Juliard School, entre otros. Ser´ıa incapaz de citar tantos edificios salvo para grandes ciudades en las que he residido largo tiempo como Madrid o Par´ıs. Nueva York es posiblemente un mito, como lo fueron en el pasado Atenas o Roma. Todos conocemos el mito de la creaci´on de Roma: la loba que amamant´o a R´omulo y Remo. El nacimiento de NY no es menos extravagante. Desembarcaron all´ı unos navegantes holandeses hacia 1600 y fundaron una peque˜ na colonia en la punta sur de la isla de Manhattan. El muro de protecci´on era precisamente Wall Street. Luego compraron toda la isla a los indios locales por la famosa suma de 1 penique (o equivalente en moneda local). Hacia 1660, los ingleses hicieron ver educadamente a los holandeses que deb´ıan irse, y les facilitaron incluso el asentamiento en remotas islas del Caribe. De esta forma Nueva Amsterdam pas´o a llamarse Nueva York y a convertirse en el puerto principal de la costa oeste de Am´erica del Norte, gracias a la enorme bah´ıa del R´ıo Hudson. A finales del siglo XIX fue el punto natural de acogida de millones de irlandes e italianos y su poblaci´on creci´o exponencialmente. Pero el mito de Nueva York empieza en realidad en los a˜ nos 1930, cuando faltos de espacio, los grandes empresarios empiezan a construir grandes rascacielos. Esos rascacielos son los s´ımbolos de la era moderna, como las grandes catedrales g´oticas lo fueron de la Edad Media. Tengo el honor de participar con vosotros en esta manifestaci´on que quedar´a en la Historia como la mayor jam´as vista en nuestro pa´ıs en favor de la libertad. Hace un siglo ya, un gran americano firmaba nuestra acta de emancipaci´on. Esta proclamaci´on hist´orica hac´ıa, como un gran faro, brillar 124 la luz de la esperanza ante los ojos de millones de esclavos negros marcados por el hierro candente de la injusticia. Era el alba feliz que pon´ıa fin a nuestra larga noche de captividad. Pero han pasado cien a˜ nos y el negro sigue sin conseguir su plena libertad. Tengo un sue˜ no profundamente americano: que en las colinas rojas de Georgia, los hijos de antiguos esclavos y de sus propietarios se sienten en la misma mesa, que el Estado de Mississipi, donde anida el fuego de la opresi´on, se transforme en un oasis de libertad y justicia, que en Alabama, carcomida por el vicio del racismo, los ni˜ nos puedan acudir al colegio cogidos de la mano. Si Am´erica ha de ser una gran naci´on, esto debe de convertirse en realidad. Desde New Hampshire hasta Nueva York, desde Pennsylvania hasta Colorado, California, Georgia y Tennessee, y en todos los Estados del Sur, Norte, Este y Oeste. Libres, libres al fin. Gracias Se˜ nor Todopoderoso, somos libres por fin. This is the end 125