Best Drupal HostingBest Joomla HostingBest Wordpress Hosting
FOLLOW US

      

FOCUS ON

Illuminating the Arts-Policy Nexus 

Illuminating the Arts-Policy Nexus is a fortnightly series of articles on the role of art in public policymaking.  This series invites WPI fellows and project leaders as well as external practitioners to contribute pieces on how artists have led policy change and how policymakers can use creative strategies.

 

WPI BOOKS
Every Nation for Itself: Winners and Losers in a G-Zero World

 

In Every Nation for Itself: Winners and Losers in a G-Zero World, World Policy Institute Senior Fellow Ian Bremmer illustrates a historic shift in the international system and the world economy—and an unprecedented moment of global uncertainty.

AddToAny
Share/Save

GCLS UPDATE: Poland as a Global Power

PANEL: President Lech Kaczynski: Poland in Globalization Introduction: David A. Andelman, Editor, World Policy Journal Featuring: President Lech Kaczynski, Republic of Poland Panel summary by Max Currier, World Policy Journal Amid glazed sea bass and raspberry chocolate purse, David Andelman introduced Lech Kaczynski, president of the Republic of Poland, as “the leader of perhaps the single most dynamic nation to emerge from the Warsaw Pact.” President Kaczynski agreed, pointing out through a translator that Poland is a large geographic nation with an emerging economy that will soon be the sixth largest in the European Union in terms of GDP growth per capita. Poland, he later added, should be the 20th member of the G-20 because it is robust economically and it seeks to “contribute” as an engaging and productive member of the global economy. Before a mixed European and American audience, President Kaczynski praised “the new U.S. administration” for taking “momentous decisions” regarding missile defense. “What we’re seeing is a new offer of American leadership in the world” based on “universal negotiations” for which “I wish all the best.” He characterized the U.S. "offer" in "the context of a changing multilateral world,” implying a difficulty in engaging both Europe and the United States, as well as Russia. “Reconciliation is better than conflict. … Development is always better than going backwards,” he said. "We will see in the coming years if this offer is doable.”

THE INDEX — September 2, 2009

Read more

Jonathan Power: Russia, Europe's Other Half

Read it for yourself, and don’t dismiss it, as most western commentators have. The Pan-European Security Treaty, proposed by Russian president, Dmitri Medvedev, is worth a read. Doubtless it can be modified, improved and ambiguities removed. But it makes a lot of sense, and it would be another step forwards to what the last Soviet president, Mikhail Gorbachev, urged—the creation of a “European house”, that contains Russia as one of its inhabitants. Only those “with one foot in the Cold War,” to quote President Barack Obama on the eve of his recent visit to Moscow, should find it objectionable. Indeed, play down Bolshevism and the Cold War. The moment communism, the Cold War and all its baggage were over, Russia itself quickly revived. This was, after all, a period of only 70 years in Russia’s long history—which began even before Prince Vladimir, its ruler, accepted Orthodox Christianity for himself and for his people a thousand years ago. It is 500 years since Byzantium Orthodoxy handed over the torch of the Church’s leadership to Russia. When Constantine in 326 AD moved the throne of the Roman emperor to Constantinople and took his newly adopted Church with him, the city became the headquarters of the Christian faith and its patriarch. When it was overrun by the Ottomans in 1453, the only place for both the spirit and the headquarters of the Church to move to was Orthodox Russia and the Slavic lands.  The “legitimate Church” was now the heritage of Russia. And 1453 was also the end of the Roman Empire. The consequences for Europe have been immense. The cushion of Orthodoxy in Russia saved Europe from the full impact of the eastern nomads and Islam. A Muslim Russia would have meant a very different history for the West. In 1767, the Empress Catherine categorically stated that “Russia is a European state.” In his ambitious study of Europe, Norman Davies wrote that “Fears of the ‘Bear’ did not prevent the growth of a general consensus regarding Russia’s membership in Europe. This was greatly strengthened in the nineteenth century by Russia’s role in the defeat of Napoleon, and by the magnificent flowering of Russian culture in the age of Tolstoy, Tchaikovsky, and Chekov.” Indeed it is clear that when it comes to the proficiency in all the arts, Russia has no peer in Europe. Even in the worst of times under Soviet totalitarian rule many individual Russians, not only Gorbachev, in their hearts wanted a European identity—not difficult to believe among those who were conscious of the natural links of their country’s artistic talents and their (repressed) Church. The end of the communist dictatorship enabled Russians and many of the other peoples of the former Soviet Union to greet, in Vaclav Havel’s phrase, the “Return to Europe."