We protest against the intention build the NATO military radar facility on the Pratzen Heights. We protest against any construction activity which would in any way disrupt the look of this locality and its current integration in the landscape relief. We consider such intention as the act of the clerical arbitrary rule. For thousands of people who feel the history as something more than just a glint of the past ages it is the place of the highest piety, the place honouring hundreds of thousands of the fallen of wars 200 years ago. This place should serve for the piety and contemplation, not for the construction of the radar sites. For them there are certainly many other suitable locations than the protected monumental zone. We appeal everyone to support our endeavour in order to change the decision and to stop any construction activities of this kind in the area of the monumental zone of the Austerlitz battlefield and its close proximity.

Defenders of the project to place a radar establishment on the Pratzen Heights regularly use emotive phrases in their argument. Using them they try to create the impression that the opponents are just irresponsible citizens not seeing the obligations coming out of our membership of NATO and not even the importance of such a facility for the security of the state. Further the radar construction defenders point out the inaccurate facts spread by its opponents – with that they try to make the public believe that the opponents stretch and exaggerate the truth, and that the radar will not be that big, that close and even that visible. Last but not least they stress the fact that the negative impacts on the environment and the population’s health in the particular area were not proved by the independent studies.

However, the Project Austerlitz 2005 builds its opposition against the radar site placement on very different arguments. However these were left without any meaningful response ever as always in a discussion with a demagogue.

1) The Project Austerlitz 2005 has never put in doubt the decision to place the radar in territory of the Czech Republic. Thus the argument of the defenders of the construction stressing out the importance of both the radar and the entire system for the security of the country and its allies is totally useless. The Project Austerlitz 2005 understands as much as the citizens and laics are able to understand the importance of such an installation especially today after the events of September 11th 2001. We don’t protest against the existence of the radar on our territory neither do we cast doubts on its benefits. However we do protest against the decision to place the radar site right in the Austerlitz battlefield. The argument with a liability to our NATO allies and the state security cannot in any way justify the placement of this radar on the Pratzen Heights.

2) The Project Austerlitz 2005 trusts the government and the General Staff of the Army of the Czech Republic regarding the declared health harmlessness of the new radar. We can’t imagine that these institutions would allow exposing the citizens to the health risks either intentionally or just by a simple mistake. However, it is a matter fact that it is not possible to describe unambiguously the long-term impacts of similar installations on human health. This concerns not only radars but also mobile phones, TV transmitters etc. It is therefore once again useless if the radar defenders argue with the “security”, “unproved dangerousness” or even “relative safety” (in comparison with the old Warsaw Pact radars installed on the site in the past). We do trust them.

3) The investor provided the particular and exact information about the radar with the significant delay and the erratic and inaccurate data presented by the Project Austerlitz 2005 were the only available until that time. Once they were provided, the Project Austerlitz 2005 published them. Thus it is ridiculous to attack the Project Austerlitz 2005 for publishing untrue facts. A) It was exclusively the investor’s responsibility to present the accurate data right in the very beginning; B) the Project Austerlitz 2005 is not interested whether the radar’s diameter is supposed to be 28 or 18 meters as well as the other opponents of the installation. The essential problem is the visibility of the radar from the distant vicinity, i.e. the disruption of the landscape character. This is the undeniable fact regardless of the difference of a couple meters in the information presented before and the latter official ones; C) the evaluation of the radar’s distance from the Peace Monument from the point of view of the spiritual dimension of the locality is the subjective matter and the Project Austerlitz 2005 might not comply with the investor in this point. However, to claim that the radar would not be visible from the Peace Monument as the sight is covered by the woods means the total “incomprehension” of one of the main arguments against the placement of the radar in the given locality.

4) The placement of the intended radar site on the Pratzen Heights would bring long-lasting damage to the landscape character of the Austerlitz battlefield. This our arguments is usually being backed off by the radar supporters only with silence as for them the Austerlitz battlefield is nothing more than the technically suitable area for the placement of the radar. On the Pratzen Heights the Army dispose of the area which can be from reasons of the state interest or country security excluded from the law preventing the battlefield against such construction interferences since 1992.

5) The Army property intended for the new radar site was expropriated in 50’s of the 20th century by the totalitarian regime and thus the current state is just an effective “consecration” of the communist arbitrary rule. The totalitarian regime expropriated the land in its very own way and in its self-confidence it didn’t even consider the formal correctness of the nationalization, didn’t respect the proprietary rights, and even its own law. Therefore it would be at least improper from the democratic government to not to try to correct the actual state. The paradox of this situation is even bigger because the result of injustice of the totalitarian communist dictatorship is now being used by the democratic government and the army of the democratic government as one of the main arguments. The mentioned expropriated land still continues to be the army property and as such it has many exceptions. Thus it offers a simple and convenient solution of the placement of the radar.

6) The alleged “impossibility” of the change of the radar placement is not caused by the technical parameters of the radar, system or strategic aspects – it is “caused” by the already invested finances into the preparatory works and the lack of time. The radar of which we talk here is the long-distance radar with the coverage of hundreds of kilometres. It is therefore useless to present the radar opponents as simple minded and claim that there not other suitable locations and that the system will work on the one and only place where the radar placement was planned. We don’t have doubts that the Austerlitz battlefield might be the technically suitable locality for the radar. However, considering the opposition which has risen against this intention we would regard as more than proper to find other suitable location matching the technical parameters of the radar. The Project Austerlitz 2005 is not here to find the suitable locations for the army but on the other hand we don’t believe that they don’t exist. The Project Austerlitz 2005 sees the entire problem in the absurd and arrogant progress of the officials who decided about the placement of the radar on the location of Sokolonice (Sokolnitz).

They have been trying to keep their decision secret for a long time, and the first official information about the radar arrived only in September 2004. However, in that time the preparation works were already under way. If they would find out the attitude of inhabitants and others possibly engaged in time they could either convince them in a discussion or rather change their decision. Instead of that they have chosen the progress well proved during the totalitarianism. They even haven’t published the necessary minimal information (something like: “We intend to build the important radar here which is going to look like this and will be placed exactly here.”). They have put all the possible opponents in front of the pure fact and apparently expected them to give up facing the invested amounts (their threats are totally absurd and ridiculous, e. g. “we will charge the communities for the lost investments” in order to discourage the mayors of the Austerlitz battlefield communities.

Those millions will be lost if the radar would be constructed elsewhere. This is the cause which the Project Austerlitz considers as the main reason for the current progress of the Ministry of Defence and the General Staff of the Army of the Czech Republic – to not admit the fault and finish the radar “in the interest of the country security”. Also the term of finishing which must be kept plays the indispensable role in this case otherwise the Czech Republic is going to have huge problems with the subsidy received from NATO. The already invested millions would go on account of the officials however it would have be the politicians to carry the responsibility for the problems with the term and the subsidy.

The problem of the radar in the Austerlitz battlefield will finish at the court if the Ministry of Defence would not give up their intention. The Project Austerlitz 2005 firmly believes in success. We are not going to tolerate methods which should have been forgotten 16 years ago. The support we are receiving from around the world proves the fact that the Austerlitz battlefield is an extraordinary historical monument. Any damage here would as well bring the damage to the reputation of the Czech Republic abroad. The contemptuous tone of arrogant institutions trying to push through the intention despite the common sense doesn’t offend us. However it shows a lot about the state of public matters in the Czech Republic. The entire fight against the radar on the Pratzen Heights is also the fight for their higher culture.