Peter Schneider was born in Lubeck in 1940 and grew up in southern Germany. He has greatly contributed to the literary and cultural life of Germany over the last four decades. After finishing his studies in German, History, and Philosophy in 1964, Schneider became a central figure in the 1968 Student Protest Movements in Berlin and Turin, Italy. After completing his Staatsexamen in higher education, Schneider began his career as a writer with his novel Lenz, a retelling of Buchner's novella.

After the success of Lenz in Germany, over twenty other novels, screenplays, and volumes of journalistic essays followed, including the English translated works Der Mauerspringer (The Wall Jumper, 1984), Extreme Mittelage (The German Comedy,1990), Paarungen (Couplings, 1996), and Eduards Heimkehr (Edward's Homecoming, 2000). Schneider's screenplays were filmed by Reinhard Hauff-Messer im Kopf (Knife in the Head) and Margarethe von Trotta - Das Versprechen (The Promise).

His essays can be found in Der Spiegel, Die Zeit, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, The New York Times, Time Magazine, and Le Monde.

His most recent novel Skylla, was published in March.

Following the recent elections in Germany, Heinz Bude will explain the election results and discuss the current political climate in Germany in terms of the larger historical and global perspective.

The End of '68:

One could call it a return of the vanished. After German society determined that the Federal Republic had only become a western, liberal country as a result of the Uprising of 1968, debates continue on how to view this place of remembrance of the post-war period. This is due to a surprising actualization and sobering historization of the Uprising at an exhibition at the Berliner Kunstwerke. Here, the attractiveness of 1968 is directly linked to the RAF. Not the disparateness but the unity of protest and terror represents the lure of the matter. This re-labeling of 68 as a form of "radical chic" finds its confirmation in more recent historical research that proves that no firewall exists between 68 and the RAF. The terror of the RAF did not represent an inversion of the protest of 68, but was constitutive for the entire movement. There is no innocence, no learning, only the successful disappearance of a bout of tragic political passions.

Then what was 1968? What must dismay us in retrospect, and what has taken roots in the cultural superstructure? Perhaps the unfinished debate between Jürgen Habermas and Karl Heinz Bohrer must be resumed: What about 1968 was universalistic emancipation and what was extremist surrealism?

From the outset, the transatlantic relationship has been more than a mere marriage of convenience. It encompasses a community of states, which are committed to common values, ideals and interests. Europe and North America can look back on a common cultural and intellectual history and they are bound together by a cultural affinity.

Transatlantic relations have benefited from the conscious decision made by the US not to withdraw from Europe in 1945, as it had done after the end of the First World War but, rather, to maintain a long-term presence. This injected an element of stability into Western Europe, which made it possible to tackle the European integration project.

Naturally, there are also conflicts of interests and areas of friction within this community of values. The transatlantic community has never been a perfect community of interests. We are each other's cousins, not identical twins.

Current contentious issues are not limited to the military action by the United States against the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Europe and the U.S. also have divergent viewpoints on issues such as climate protection, the death penalty or relations with international organizations. However, leading politicians on both sides of the Atlantic know that it is in everyone's interest to deal responsibly with such differences.

The visit by President Bush to Brussels and to Germany at the start to his second term as American president has helped to refocus the transatlantic relationship.

The accession of Cyprus to the European Union (EU) in May of 2004 constitutes the most positive strategic development in the history of the island state since its independence in 1960. In the last two years, the Cypriot people have experienced watershed events, filled with frustrations, challenges but also opportunities. Cyprus' EU membership has extended the borders of the EU to the strategic corner of the Eastern Mediterranean and has brought the Middle East ever closer to Europe. It is hoped that Cyprus' EU membership can contribute to the expansion of peace, stability, security and prosperity in the area. Cyprus is situated at the crossroads of three continents and civilizations, where global political and economic interests, as well as international security concerns, converge. Together with its American ally and with the help of its European partners Cyprus aspires to play a positive role, and to act as a bridge of mutual understanding and the promotion of sustained and result oriented dialogue between its Middle Eastern neighbors and Europe. At the same time, Cyprus strives to achieve a just, permanent, functional and mutually acceptable solution to the Cyprus problem, an end of the Turkish military occupation, reunification and prosperity for all Cypriots within their common European home.

His Excellency Euripides L. Evriviades presented his credentials as the Ambassador of the Republic of Cyprus to the United States to President George W. Bush on 4 December 2003. He is also accredited as High Commissioner to Canada. Ambassador Evriviades served as Ambassador of Cyprus to the Netherlands from August 2000 to October 2003. Prior to his posting in The Hague, he served as the Ambassador to Israel from November 1997 until July 2000. Earlier in his career, Mr. Evriviades held positions at Cypriot embassies in Tripoli, Libya; Moscow, USSR/Russia; and Bonn, Germany.

A lecture by Timothy Garton Ash to mark the 15th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall and the election of the 44th President of the United States.

Timothy Garton Ash's new book Free World: America, Europe and the Surprising Future of the West will be published in the United States on November 9, the day the Berlin Wall was breached in 1989. He is a Professor of European Studies at Oxford University and a Senior Fellow of the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. His previous books include The Magic Lantern, his eyewitness account of the velvet revolutions of 1989, The Polish Revolution: Solidarity, The File: A Personal History, In Europe's Name: Germany and the Divided Continent" and "History of the Present.

In the context of the Iraq Wars, references to totalitarianism multiplied across the political, cultural, and intellectual spectrum. For every equation of Saddam with Hitler, another followed projecting the Nazi past onto the American present. While the end of the most recent war has led to the macabre discovery of the Iraqi killing fields, some German intellectuals have drawn the conclusion that American moral authority has come to an end. Current politics aside, the first question we hope to raise involves the legitimacy of this proliferation of the term totalitarianism, either directly or through rhetorical invocations of features of Europe in the thirties and forties: appeasement politics, firebombing, attacks on civilians. A conservative usage of the term might restrict it to the regimes of Hitler and Stalin; alternatively, it could be utilized as an analytical tool for multiple political phenomena of the late twentieth century (and beyond). We want to explore the consequences of these different strategies through a reflection on the term itself and its appropriation in various venues.

While these questions can and should be pursued with regard to many national histories, the German experience with totalitarianism in the twentieth century is particularly intriguing. The Weimar Republic witnessed the rise of both Communist and National Socialist movements, with revolutionary aspirations, in the wake of which, ultimately, two dictatorial political systems followed. To be sure, the two cases are not symmetrical; the GDR was unthinkable without Russian occupation and the Cold War. Nonetheless, large segments of the German population lent their support to both regimes, at times with enthusiasm and at times under duress. While the collapse of the Nazi regime led eventually (if not quickly) to a critical discourse on the past, a parallel scrutiny of the Communist era has not yet developed to the same extent. In light of the renewed totalitarianism discourse, a review of this past seems more urgent than ever. We are interested in examining the Communist experience in relationship to National Socialism, with regard to both similarities and differences, and in terms of philosophical, historical, and literary/cultural frameworks.

June 4, Friday

9:00-9:30

Continental Breakfast

9:30-10:00

Opening remarks by Norman Naimark and Amir Eshel

10:00-12:30

Panel I: The Meaning of the Allied Occupation for Austrian History

Chair: Norman Naimark, Stanford University

Speaker: Michael Gehler, Innsbruck University, "Still 'Occupied' by Germany, 1945-1955"

Speaker: Oliver Rathkolb, Democracy Centre, Vienna, and the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for History and Society, "The 'Allied Occupation' and the Collective Memory of Austrians after 1945"

Speaker: Guenter Bischof, University of New Orleans, "The Meaning of the Allied Occupation for Austrian History"

12:30-2:00

Lunch

2:00-4:30

Panel II: Society and Culture in Four-Power Austria

Chair: Amir Eshel, Stanford University

Speaker: Wendelin Schmidt-Denger, University of Vienna, "Austria 1945-1948-1995: Literature"

Speaker: Kristin Rebien, Stanford University, "Beyond the Dream: Paul Celan on Postwar Austrian Surrealism"

Speaker: Matti Bunzl, University of Illinois, Urbana, "Thinking the Center through the Margins: Jews and Homosexuals in Post-World War II Austria"

June 5, Saturday

9:00-9:30

Continental Breakfast

9:30-12:00

Panel II: The Soviet Factor

Chair: David Holloway, Stanford University

Speaker: Vojtech Mastny, Wilson Center, Washington D.C., "The Soviet Factor in the Remaking of Austria after World War II"

Speaker: Wolfgang Mueller, University of Vienna, "Some Aspects of the Political Mission of the USSR in Austria, 1943-45"

Speaker: Gennady Bordiugov, AIRO-XX Publishers, Russia, "Germany and Austria: View from the USSR"

Speaker: Norman Naimark, Stanford University, "Stalin and the Austrian Question"

12:00-1:00

Lunch

1:00-3:20

Panel IV: Central European Perspectives

Chair: Ludger Kuenhardt, Bonn University

Speaker: Arnold Suppan, University of Vienna, "Austria and Its Neighbors in the East, 1945-1948"

Speaker: Dietrich Orlow, Boston University, "Austria and Germany after World War II: Similarities and Differences Protocol"

Speaker: Peter Kenez, University of California, Santa Cruz, "Hungary, 1945-1948"

3:40-4:00

General Discussions