The 2007 Ukrainian elections are a clear move forward in a variety of ways. Ambassador Steven Pifer sets out why, as well as the options for the creation of a coalition government. Mr. Pifer also clearly explains the number of key issues that the new government will have to face.

Synopsis

Ambassor Pifer begins by explaining the election results from September 2007. He reveals who he believes were the winners and losers, as well as who thinks we will have to wait for and see. Mr. Pifer argues that, in any case, the election was good news for democratization in Ukraine. Citing that this has been the third consecutive national election, he believes that the country is getting a grip of how elections are to be run. Mr. Pifer reinforces this by explaining that the election was free, fair, and basically fraudless. Another point Mr. Pifer emphasizes is the fact that the parties generally accepted the outcome, as well as that major parties such as Tymoshenko’s bloc are breaking out of their regional bases.

However, Mr. Pifer explains that the elections do not mean the work is over as a coalition is yet to be formed. He examines the possibility of the an ‘orange restoration’ involving a coalition between President Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko, but there are some fears that Tymoshenko may not receive the necessary number of votes in Ukraine’s parliament to become prime minister. On the other hand, others have looked towards the possibility of a coalition between President Yushchenko and Viktor Yanukovych. Mr. Pifer believes this seems more natural, but he is again not sure deputies would support it. Mr. Pifer also examines what President Yushchenko might want personally and what would benefit him politically.

Although which coalition will be formed is not clear, Mr. Pifer feels there are some clear challenges for the government to face when it comes into power. He argues that while the economy is strong, evidence includes the emergence of a middle class, there are several steps to be made on the economy. He explains that Ukraine must complete WTO accession, abolish its outdated commercial code, free the sale of agricultural land, and reform the tax and regulatory systems. Most urgently, Mr. Pifer argues that energy security must be taken care of, and this must be part of a necessary effort to manage relations with Russia better. Inside the government, Mr. Pifer notes ambiguities in the constitution which must be amended, and he stresses serious steps must be taken to counter corruption. Mr. Pifer also hopes that Ukrainian government can develop habits of cooperation and compromise and move beyond politics to pass policies. He concludes by emphasizing that he is optimistic about Ukraine’s opportunities, but he also feels Ukraine has a tendency to miss them rather than seize them.

about the speaker

Steven Pifer is a senior adviser with the Center for Strategic and International Studies. A retired Foreign Service officer, his more than 25 years with the State Department focused on U.S. relations with the former Soviet Union and Europe, as well as on arms control and security issues. His assignments included deputy assistant secretary of state in the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs (2001-2004), ambassador to Ukraine (1998-2000), and special assistant to the president and National Security Council senior director for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia (1996-1997). He also served at the U.S. embassies in Warsaw, Moscow and London, as well as with the U.S. delegation to the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces negotiations in Geneva. He holds a B.A. in economics from Stanford University, where he later spent a year as a visiting scholar at Stanford's Institute for International Studies. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Selma Leydesdorff will speak on the results of her interviews with the women who survived the worst massacre in Europe since World War II. She will discuss these women as individuals and as a group, explain why they are today labelled 'difficult' and what such a label means, and will take a closer look at the memory of the trauma of the genocide and the years of the violent siege of Srebrenica.

Professor Leydesdorff received a MA (1972) and Ph.D. (1987) in modern history from the University of Amsterdam. She has served as a member of the Women’s Studies Research Council at the University of Amsterdam (1985-88), a member of the National Science Committee (1985-91), Chair of the National Oral History Association (1986-96), Secretary of the International Oral History Association (1990-96), Secretary of l’Association de Development de l’Approche Biographique (1990-97), and she currently chairs the Commission on the History of Culture of Jews of the Dutch Royal Academy. She is also the principle editor of Memory and Narrative (Transaction Publishers Inc, 2005). She has been a visiting scholar at European University in Florence and at Rutgers University in New Jersey, and has held visiting professorships at Dickinson College, Anton de Kom University in Suriname, Sabanci University in Istanbul, Xiamen University in China, and most recently at New York University. Professor Leydesdorff is currently a fellow at the Remarque Institute at NYU.

Event Synopsis:

Dr. Leydesdorff recounts the 1995 massacre at Srebrenica in which 7,749 Muslims were killed by Bosnian Serb troops as Dutch peacekeeping forces stood by. Leydesdorff asserts that official inquiries ignored voices of the survivors - many of them women who had lost sons and husbands. Today, the survivors continue their campaign to have their stories heard, to find out what happened and why, to uncover information on victims yet to be identified, and to improve their economic conditions. They also believe the Dutch should apologize for failing to prevent the genocide.

Dr. Leydesdorff describes her own research project in which she interviewed women survivors. She conveys the chaos and despair resulting not just from the genocide of men and boys but of the simultaneous rape of women and girls by the Serbian soldiers. She explains why so many survivors have remained silent, and discusses the complexity of relationships between neighbors who once lived in peaceful coexistence but who now live with memories of betrayal and grief. 

Finally, Leydesdorff described ongoing efforts of the group, including monthly marches on Sarajevo and a funeral for hundreds of newly identified victims that was attended by 60,000 people.

Secondly, the presentation uses multidisciplinary approach, relying not only on contemporary history, but also on social psychology and political science.  

Based on the seminal distinction between massacre and genocide, this study identifies the main steps of a general process of destruction, both rational and irrational, made of a "delusional rationality". It describes a dynamic structural model with, at its core, the matrix of an imaginary construct which, according to its fears, resentments and utopias, shapes the social body, razing and eliminating “the enemy”. The presentation argues for a model with multiple variables, the act of massacre being determined both by local parameters and the international context, identifying the main stages that can lead to a genocidal process, without presupposing any historical fatality, and explaining how ordinary people can become perpetrators.

The lecture will address the German occupation policy in the Protectorate Bohemia and Moravia, in Slovenia, and Serbia; including the occupation zones into the German war economy; with the mass murdering by the SS, Gestapo and Wehrmacht of resistance groups; with the problem of collaboration in the ruling class and in the population; with the destruction of the Jews in the Protectorate and in Serbia; with the problem of the figures of the victims; with the preparations of revenge and expulsion, and with the consequences of the total war in Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia.

Synopsis

Dividing his lecture clearly into twelve points, Prof. Suppan explains and analyzes the past century’s history of relations between German minorities, particularly in Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia, and the region’s natives. Originally a primarily peaceful coexistence, Prof. Suppan discusses the fact that rivalries started to develop between the two communities in as early as the 1880s. Prof. Suppan adds that World War I also did much to increase ethnic tensions. Moreover, he sees the persecutions that took place from 1914 to 1918 to have really poisoned the relationship between Serbs and Germans. After World War I, Prof. Suppan reveals that the new states of Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia further suffered in their relationship with Germany over issues such as border setbacks or minority rights. However, when the global economic crisis created mass unemployment, many turned to Hitler. Prof. Suppan argues this was significant to the annexation of both countries by Germany.

These annexations, as Prof. Suppan reveals, were not the result of consistent strategic planning but rather part of Hitler’s ideal of conquest. Prof. Suppan discusses the illegality of many Nazi occupation laws which led to calls for vengeance and retribution as the war neared its end. Prof. Suppan explains the result of the mass lawless displacement of Germans which turned into various settlement agreements. Even so, Prof. Suppan argues that the decrees and resolutions on the subject of the displacement of Germans should be seen as a political reaction to German occupation and led to a great death toll.

Prof. Suppan feels that overall the conflict was one of extreme bloodshed, citing the 40 million deaths that occurred from 1938 to 1948 throughout the entire region to reinforce his point. Moreover, Prof. Suppan engages in the debate on whether the conflict should be branded genocide or ethnocide. Prof. Suppan also argues that the former German settlements in Eastern Europe suffer to this day. He concludes by revealing that historical contradictions still exist between the various peoples. Prof. Suppan argues that to overcome this each side must have a deeper understanding of what they both suffered and perpetrated and must participate in the “spirit of European reconciliation.”

About the speaker

Arnold Suppan is professor of history at the University of Vienna and Chairman of the Historical Commission at the Austrian Academy of Sciences. He is currently a visiting professor wtih the Forum on Contemporary Europe at Stanford University.