GERMAN-AMERICAN-RUSSIAN DIALOGUE
GARD
THIRD SEMINAR, KARTAUSE ITTINGEN, SWITZERLAND
JULY 17TH – 20TH, 2002
Seminar Program

Wednesday, July 17th, 2002

Open Discussion on the Post-Summits Landscape

Chair:
Catherine McArdle Kelleher (Project Director, GARD)
Speaker:
Konstantin Eggert (BBC Russian Service, Moscow)

Thursday, July 18th, 2002

First Session: 9/11 – causes, motivations, backgrounds

We still face the question of the deeper causes and motivations which led to the attacks of September 11th. What is behind these attacks? Particularly with regard to fundamentalist terrorist actors we are confronted with competing interpretations. Some see them as actors with political aims, related to the Near East conflict or to intra-Arabic power struggles. Others portray them as actors with a purely religious agenda led by their expectation of salvation and a fundamentalist, anti-secular rage primarily directed against Western societies.

This session aims to gain some insight into the spectrum of possible interpretations which might serve as a basis for a more comprehensive understanding.

Chair:
Robert Legvold (Department of Political Science, Columbia University)
Speakers:
Michael Vlahos (Applied Physics Laboratory, Johns-Hopkins-University)
Markus Ziener (Das Handelsblatt, Berlin)

Second Session: 9/11 - reactions

The attacks of September 11th have been widely perceived as a threat to Western-style societies. While formulating their policies in response to this threat, these societies have to decide how to act and to react. There may be a conflict between effective prevention and the preservation of values and civic rights which are fundamental to their selfperception and their constitutions. So how ‘open’ will societies remain at all when they are challenged that way? What is the price ‘open societies’ are willing to pay for effective prevention?

These questions should be also addressed from a more comparative perspective. Which impact have the policies of 'homeland security' and 'homeland defense' and the new legislation on societies in the U.S. and Germany? Are there similar discussions in Russia? Have the attacks of September 11th triggered tighter co-operation in the field of justice and home affairs? What are the consequences for the still evolving civil society in Russia? Will political and economical elites utilise external threats to stabilise their internal power?

Chair:
Robert Nurick (Carnegie Moscow Center)
Speakers:
Robert Legvold (Department of Political Science, Columbia University)
Yuri Dzhibladze (Center for Development of Democracy and Human Rights, Moscow)

Friday, July 19th, 2002

Third Session: International Institutions I – Free Trade or Endless Disputes?

Trade disputes over steel and farm subsidies have provoked retaliations which some call already a trade war. Recently, the U.S. has vetoed a request from Europe for the WTO’s dispute settlement body to rule on U.S. tariffs on steel import. The EU on her side has applied for retaliatory tarriffs. The allegation of ‘protectionism’ is raised whenever safeguard measures for domestic products are implemented without compensation for trading partners. Yet this it is not only a transatlantic fight. China, which has just entered WTO, and Japan has considered retaliatory measures, too. Australia, Canada, and Brazil, amongst others, have complained about the recent U.S. farm bill. Yet, some observe a spill over into the wider relations between the U.S. and their partners. Furthermore, the ongoing disputes seem to jeopardize a satisfactory outcome of the current WTO ‘Doha’ negotiations, and in more general terms, free trade in the global economy. Can the multilateral system hold with the major players not willing to deliver their part of the bargain?

Since the economies of all parties are hit by the negative effects of these quarrels, there should be a way to resolve this stagnancy. But, do we have the right tools and institutions to settle these disputes in a productive way?

Chair:
Oliver Wieck (Federation of German Industries – BDI, Berlin)
Speakers:
I. M. Destler (School of Public Affairs, University of Maryland)
Claudia Wörmann (Federation of German Industries – BDI, Berlin)
Sergej Afontsev (Russian-European Center for Economic Policy, Moscow)

Fourth Session: International Institutions II – A Time to Re-Organize?

After the terrorist attacks of September 11th, many expectations were raised regarding a vitalization of multilateral approaches in world politics. In reality, especially the U.S. seems to prefer unilateral action and, sometimes, coalition building, when required. Many of America’s partners suspect that U.S. commitment to multilateral action occurred only when it was tactically opportune and that the policy stance of the present administration is on loosening treaty obligations and organizational responsibilities. Thus, the question is, whether there still is a realistic way of embedding U.S. politics in international institutions. However, not only the U.S. but other countries as well should reconsider their institutional involvement and re-assess the trade-off between bilateral and multilateral action. Particularly with regard to future problems and challenges in the global arena they might come to the conclusion that it is a time to re-organize. A related problem is the question of bringing non-state actors into institutional arrangements.

Chair:
Klaus Segbers (Institute for East European Research, Free University of Berlin)
Speakers:
Thomas Biersteker (Watson Institute for International Studies, Brown University)
Simon Reich (Departments of Political Science and International Affairs, University of Pittsburgh)
Alexandr Pikaev (Carnegie Moscow Center)
Closing Address
Catherine McArdle Kelleher (Project Director, GARD)

See also GARD III Executive Summary

Back to the German American Russian Dialogue (GARD) Project