Praised by international organizations, Slovenia and Estonia constitute the most successful post-communist economies. These two states are likewise success stories when it comes to democratic consolidation and state-building. Slovenia has opted for gradual market reforms guided by social justice while Estonia quickly reformed its Soviet economy into one of the most liberal in the world. Still, I argue that their roots of success coincide. Crucial opportunities of civil initiatives were never repressed in Slovenia and Estonia during the Communist period as in several other Yugoslav and Soviet republics. Distinct national identities continued to form and re-form during these decades and became deliberated rather than repressed, later strengthening reform capacities in decisive areas. In Estonia, national identities were further emphasized by ethically dubious processes that locked large Russian-speaking minorities out of citizenship.

Li Bennich-Björkman is Johan Skytte professor in political science at University of Uppsala, Sweden. She has published on the organisation of creativity, Organising Innovative Research, (Elsevier/Pergamon Press, 1997), on educational policies, integration and political culture. A dominant theme in her present research on Eastern Europe and post-Soviet States has been how historical and cultural legacies relate to the divergent post-communist trajectories. A particular focus has been on the three Baltic States. Within this framework, Ukraine has been included. Recent research activities have concerned the impact of the European Union on elite values and political culture in Ukraine, Bulgaria and Romania. Her latest publication is a monograph published with Palgrave/Macmillan, Political Culture under Institutional Pressure. How Institutions Transform Early Socialization, (2007), dealing mainly with the Estonian Diaspora. Articles have appeared in the Journal of Baltic Studies (2006), East European Politics and Societies (2007) and Nationalities Papers (2007) as well as Higher Education Quarterly (2007). Comparative state-building in Estonia and Latvia was addressed in a recently published volume on Building Democracy East of the Elbe (Routledge/Sage:2006).

Economic security, sustainable development, clean energy and energy security, better regulations, greater innovativeness and the growing share of Polish economy in the international market; these are the main priorities of the Polish government and Ministry of Economy. How is Poland going to handle the 21st Century challenges? How will Poland find its niche in the globalized economy? These are the questions that will be discussed by the Polish Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy, Mr. Waldemar Pawlak.

Born in 1959, Mr. Waldemar Pawlak graduated from the Warsaw University of Technology with an engineering degree in automotive and construction machinery. He has served as a member of the Polish Parliament since 1989; as President of the board of the Warsaw Commodities Exchange from 2001 to 2005; as Prime Minister of Poland in 1992 and again in 1993 to 1995; and as Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy of Poland since November 2007.

This seminar is jointly sponsored by the Forum on Contemporary Europe, the Center for Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, the U.S.-Polish Trade Council, and the Consulate General of the Republic of Poland in Los Angeles.

Mr. Biberaj and Mr. Kesic both examine the issue of Kosovan independence from different persepectives. Mr. Biberaj explains why he believes that supervised independence is the only way forward. Mr. Kesic, on the other hand, expresses concern at how this decision is being made.

Synopsis

Mr. Biberaj argues that if Kosovo is not to remain part of Serbia, then it has only two options. The first is a continuation of the status quo, which Mr. Biberaj feels is untenable. The second is supervised independence. Mr. Biberaj believes that this is a defining moment for the Balkans, and the region needs to move on from this issue. He argues that danger of renewed violence is exaggerated primarily because there is now a different situation and NATO peacekeeping forces are on the ground. Although a transition will not be easy, Mr. Biberaj feels that it will be manageable due to the widespread support this move has from the US and many European states. In addition, Mr. Biberaj argues that Russia and Serbia are powerless to do anything about the move.

What is crucial, however, is that Kosovo must rapidly look to the challenges ahead. Its government, which will be a coalition, must reach out to the Serb community, create a secure environment, and battle corruption and economic difficulties. Although Mr. Biberaj argues military confrontation must not be ruled out, to him, the general situation is relatively stable. Addressing religion, Mr. Biberaj explains that Serbian Islamists are self-assured and moderate and do not pose a serious threat in Serbia and Kosovo. Most importantly, Mr. Biberaj stresses that this is perhaps the last opportunity to peacefully solve this Albanian-Serb conflict without partitioning Serbia. He explains that the Serbs will eventually learn to live with Kosovo’s independence but also emphasizes the US must stay until “business is finished.”

Citing the withdrawal of troops in particular, Mr. Kesic argues, on the other hand , that Kosovo is an example of failed US diplomacy. It was taken for granted that Russia and Serbia would reluctantly accept the US and European states’ approach to the Kosovan problem, and the issue was dealt with too much as a vacuum, not taking into account neighboring players. Moreover, Mr. Kesic feels that the whole process has left Serbia no reason to trust the US and the European states involved. NATO has not fulfilled its promise of protecting minorities, the US is still not satisfied with Serbia even after it has gotten rid of Milosevic, and Kosovo is being treated as an exception to the territorial integrity principle employed for dividing up former Yugoslavia. Mr. Kesic argues that if the decision of Kosovan independence is made through continuing this same diplomatic process then instability will follow. Furthermore, supervised independence with protection by NATO is a selective interpretation of a UN resolution. Mr. Kesic believes such interpretations create chaos, make bypassing diplomacy the norm, and undermine UN peacekeeping efforts. In addition, what is the point of establishing democracy in Serbia if the international community treats it in the same humiliating way as it did Serbia’s previous regime? To Mr. Kesic, we must also continue to take seriously issues that could lead to war, such as tensions between Albanians and Serbs in Kosovo itself. Finally, Mr. Kesic concludes by arguing that the EU’s common foreign policy is really what is being “put on the line.”

ABOUT THE SPEAKERS

Elez Biberaj is a 27-year veteran of the Voice of America. As division director, he brings to bear considerable radio and television broadcasting experience and Eurasian market knowledge in planning, directing, and developing VOA's multimedia programming in Russian, Ukrainian, Albanian, Bosnian, Croatian, Greek, Macedonian, and Serbian. Dr. Biberaj joined VOA's Albanian Service as an international radio broadcaster in 1980. From 1982 to 1986, he worked in the Press Division of the former U.S. Information Agency as a senior writer/editor, specializing in Soviet and East European Affairs. Dr. Biberaj returned to VOA as Albanian Service Chief in 1986, and, for the next 18 years helped transform the service into one of VOA's most successful broadcasting units. For over a decade, he served in dual capacity as chief of the Albanian Service and director of European Division writers and researchers. In the latter capacity, he directed the work of division writers and researchers, developed broad strategies for providing program material and research, and assigned coverage of events and topics of importance to Eastern Europe, and edited program material for use by division services.

Dr. Biberaj was named the Eurasia Division's managing editor in 2004, became acting director the following year, and was appointed division director in December 2006. In his Eurasia Division managerial positions, Dr. Biberaj helped develop new programming strategies that enabled language services to take advantage of new technologies, improve existing programming formats, and better meet audience demands in a highly competitive media environment. His expertise and knowledge of Eurasian affairs and of U.S. foreign policy objectives have been recognized inside and outside of VOA. On many occasions, he has been invited by the State Department, the National Security Council, and other U.S. government agencies, academia, and non-governmental organizations to participate in policy planning exercises, conferences, and panel discussions. He has also appeared on television outlets such as CNN, ABC, Fox, NBC, and CBC to comment on Balkan affairs.

Dr. Biberaj has written widely on the horrors of communist rule in Albania, the long struggle of Albanians in former Yugoslavia for human and national rights, and the daunting challenges that Albania has faced in its transition from communism to democracy. Elez Biberaj has a Ph.D. in political science from Columbia University. He has authored three books on Albanian affairs and contributed chapters to several others. He has also published articles in Encyclopedia Britannica, Conflict Studies, Problems of Communism, Survey, The World Today, East European Quarterly, The Wall Street Journal/Europe, etc.

Obrad Kesic is a Senior Partner with TSM Global Consultants, LLC. Mr. Kesic is also currently working with the Balkan countries on behalf of the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast. Over the last decade, Mr. Kesic has been working with the governments and with nongovernmental organizations in South Eastern Europe. Mr. Kesic also serves as a consultant on Balkan affairs for various US and international organizations and agencies. Mr. Kesic has provided analysis and briefings for US government agencies and officials, including The Department of State, The Department of Defense and the United States Information Agency. Mr. Kesic also provides frequent commentary and analysis for the US and international media, including for National Public Radio, CNN International, BBC, Voice of America, USA Today, and Monitor Radio. Mr. Kesic has authored dozens of articles and essays on Balkan affairs and on US policy toward the Balkan states. He is a frequent speaker to community, professional and scholarly groups. Mr. Kesic is a member of the Board of Directors of the Institute on Religion and Public Policy. He is also a member of the Board of Directors of the private company, SuperDrive, Inc.

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.

No country is changing as rapidly as China has done since the reform process started close to three decades ago. China - until then a country at the margin of the global economy - has become the third largest economy in the world and the world's second largest trading nation. In some respects, China is hardly recognizable. In other respects, it is very much so. The latter is particularly true of the political system which, even though much less "micro authoritarian" than it used to be, remains Leninist at its core.

At the recent party congress, the word "democracy" was used more than 60 times. Still, the aim is clearly to reform rather than dismantle the one-party state. Respect for human rights has been written into the constitution, but fundamental rights such as freedom of speech and freedom of association do not exist and the legal system is far from independent of the party. More and more people are, however, demanding their rights and "rights consciousness" is on the rise.

Where will these conflicting developments take China and how should the international community relate to China? There is a lot of talk about containing China but how could that be done and would it be desirable? In practice, most countries, like the US and the member countries of the European Union, Sweden included, try to engage China on a broad frontier, economically as well as when it comes to human rights, climate change and other issues of great concern for the future of us all.

Ambassador Börje Ljunggren, will address these issues on the basis of his own experiences as Swedish ambassador to China between 2002 and 2006 and as scholar.

Ambassador Börje Ljunggren has served as head of the Political Section of the Intelligence Department, Swedish National Defence (1968-70), Regional Economist for Asia at the Swedish International Development Authority (SIDA) (1970-73), secretary, Swedish Commission for the Review of Development Cooperation (1976-78), deputy director, Area Division, SIDA (1980-83; 1984-86), coordinator, Swedish Asia Strategy Project, Ministry for Foreign Affairs (1997-98), and deputy director general, head of the Department for Asia and the Pacific, Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs (1999-2002). In addition, he has served as Swedish ambassador to Vietnam (1994-97) and as head of the Development Cooperation Office at the Swedish Embassy of Bangladesh (1973-75), Laos (1978-80), and Tanzania (1984). He has been a scholar in residence at the Rockefeller Center in Bellagio, Italy (1994), a diplomat in residence at the Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, Australian National University (1997), and a visiting scholar at the Harvard Institution for International Development (1990-91). Most recently, Dr. Ljunggren served as the Swedish ambassador to China (2002-06), before accepting his current post as ambassador with the Asia Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

This seminar is jointly presented by Stanford University's Forum on Contemporary Europe, Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, and by the Dui Hua Foundation.