Salzburg Global Seminar

Newly Indepdent Institute for Historical Justice and Reconciliation Launches in The Hague

2009-05-28T11:28:00.004+02:00

The Institute for Historical Justice and Reconciliation (IHJR), which began five years ago in Salzburg as an initiative of the Seminar, was formally launched as an independent institute in The Netherlands at an imposing ceremony in The Hague on May 26.

The setting, in the Great Hall of Justice in the Peace Palace, where the International Court of Justice holds its sessions, could hardly have been more magnificent. And the opening statement was made the President of that court, His Excellency Mr. Hisashi Owada of Japan, who has been a strong supporter of the Institute from its beginnings, and is a member of its Board of Advisors.

Judge Owada apologized for arriving late, but he had the best possible excuse – he had come straight from a lunch with the Queen of the Netherlands in honour of President Michelle Bachelet of Chile, which had run over time. Seated next to the guest of honour, Mr. Owada could hardly slip away unnoticed. But when he explained where he was going, the Chilean president, whose father was a victim of the Pinochet dictatorship, told him she had gone into politics to work for national reconciliation, which could only be based on a clear acknowledgement of historical facts, however unpleasant.

And that is precisely the mission of the IHJR – to promote reconciliation, tolerance and understanding in divided societies by dispelling public myths of disputed historical legacies – as was explained in the course of the meeting by Justice Richard Goldstone, Chairman of the Board of Advisors (who is now also a Director of the Salzburg Global Seminar); by co-founders Timothy Ryback (former vice-president and resident director of the Seminar) and Elazar Barkan (director of the human rights program at Columbia University); and by Catherine Cissé van den Muijsenbergh, who now co-directs the Institute with Professor Barkan.

Dr. Ryback, who is now director of programs at the Académie Diplomatique Internationale in Paris, described the Institute’s achievement in bringing together Israeli and Palestinian scholars to compile a shared narrative of events in and around 1948 (celebrated by Israel as its war of independence but remembered by Palestinians as the naqba or disaster when many of them were driven from their homes). Dr. Cissé spoke about its work in the Balkans, where it has helped found the Center for History, Democracy and Reconciliation, and more recently in Kenya where it is helping local scholars and artists to examine myths and legacies relating to land use and ownership, and to express their identity through shared narratives. And Prof. Barkan explained the philosophy of the Institute, following the lead of Justice Goldstone who related its origins at a meeting in Salzburg in 2004.

The meeting, which lasted nearly three hours and was attended by several judges of the ICJ, also heard tributes from Ambassador Ed Kronenbourg, Secretary General of the Dutch Foreign Ministry, and from the Mayor of The Hague, H.E. Jozias van Aartsen. (Both the ministry and the city have given generous support to the Institute, enabling it to establish its headquarters and permanent staff in the The Hague.) The Salzburg Global Seminar was represented by Professor Laurens Jan Brinkhorst, a member of its Board of Directors, who moderated the proceedings, and by Edward Mortimer, Senior Vice President and Chief Program Officer, who is a member of the Institute’s Board of Advisors. The Institute continues to hold many of its meetings of scholars in Salzburg, and the Seminar hopes to maintain a close association with it and benefit from its work.

Other speakers contributed insights from “the front line” of work in post-conflict societies: H.E. Pieter Feith gave a detailed account of his mission as the EU’s Special Representative in Kosovo, while Allan Wagner, a former foreign minister of Peru, and Claudettte Antoine Werleigh, former prime minister of Haiti, described some of the painful dilemmas of justice and reconciliation in their respective countries..

Also in The Hague, on the previous day, an equally distinguished gathering had witnessed the acceptance by Justice Goldstone of the second MacArthur Award for International Justice. The award includes $500,000 which the recipient can distribute to non-governmental organizations of his choice, and Justice Goldstone has generously chosen the IHJR as one of the five that will benefit.

In a memorable and moving speech, Mr. Goldstone described the advance of international criminal justice since his appointment as Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in 1994. He expressed his pride that his own country, South Africa, had warned Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir that if he attended the recent inauguration of President Zuma he would be arrested and handed over to the International Criminal Court; and also described how the UN Human Rights Council had, on his insistence, expanded the mandate of its inquiry into events in Gaza to cover human rights violations by all parties, before he would agree to head it.

Visit the IHJR's homepage here.

Score Card of Obama's First Hundred Days

2009-04-24T16:47:00.016+02:00

Last November, immediately following the US elections, the Salzburg Global Seminar held Session 458, “The US and the World: New Strategies of Engagement.”

The session was held in partnership with the Financial Times, and included a wide variety of experts and specialists from the US, Europe, East and South Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America.

At its conclusion we produced a “Roadmap for Re-engagement: The World’s Advice to the New Administration.” One of the main components of this Roadmap was an “8 Point Plan for the First 100 Days”, which has proved remarkably accurate. (The Roadmap can be accessed here)

April 29, 2009 will mark the 100th day of Barack Obama’s Presidency. How has the Obama administration done against those goals? What has succeeded? What has failed?

We asked eight international experts to address these questions, and to offer their grades of Obama's performance.

A summary of the findings is also available on the Financial Times website.

What do you think?

The 8 Point Plan:

1. “Go Big” in the Inaugural Address

Theodore C. Sorensen, author of Counselor, A Life At the Edge of History; former special counsel and speechwriter for President John F. Kennedy

Grade: A

An Inaugural Address, unlike a Party Platform or a State of the Union Address to Congress, should not be judged on the basis of specific concrete pledges that necessarily await the assembling of the new President’s complete team and detailed studies, but instead on the basis of his clear communication of his principal priorities. On this basis, Barack Obama’s powerfully plainspoken address of January 20, 2009 deserves an “A,” even when measured against the specific high hopes of last November’s Salzburg Global Seminar’s “Roadmap for Global Re-engagement.” Obama’s “global view,” as conveyed in that address, “went big” on all three objectives singled out by the Seminar, without unrealistically promising that any of them would be accomplished in his first 100 days:

Meet the global financial crisis multilaterally:
“The state of our economy calls for action, bold and swift…what is required of us now is a new era of responsibility -- a recognition on the part of every American that we have duties to ourselves, our Nation and the world… [T]o the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you… [T]o those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to the suffering outside our borders.”

Work for global nuclear disarmament, with renewed American leadership for peace:
“To all the other peoples and governments who are watching today…know that America is a friend of each nation…who seeks the future of peace and dignity, and we are ready to lead once more…not just with missiles and tanks but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions…our power alone cannot protect… [O]ur security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint… [N]ew threats…demand even greater cooperation and understanding between nations…with old friends and former foes, we will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat…America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace…”

Stop catastrophic climate change:
“We cannot consume the world’s resources without regard to effect…the ways we use energy threaten our planet…we will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories.”

2. Fight terrorism under the Rule of Law

Mark S. Ellis, Executive Director, International Bar Association, London

Grade: B

On January 22, 2009, two days after his inauguration, President Obama issued a series of executive orders that inter alia set in motion the closure of the Guantanamo Bay prison, the suspension of all trials at Guantanamo for 120 days pending a review of the military tribunals, the decommission of secret CIA detention centres in foreign territories and the prohibition against such centres in the future, a formal injunction against “enhanced interrogation techniques” inconsistent with the Geneva Conventions and the U.S. Army Field Manual on intelligence collection, and a reversal of the Bush administration policy of refusing to release documents under the Freedom of Information Act if they related to the interrogation and treatment of detainees.

With these and other acts, President Obama’s first one hundred days have been a welcome antidote to a deeply troubled period in American history marked by international strife and the degeneration of international legal norms. Obama’s first directives were intended to demonstrate a recommitment by the United States to international humanitarian and human rights law, and to reassure the world that his administration would embark on a new path premised on the rule of law. In many ways, he has succeeded.

However, without minimizing the importance of President Obama’s actions, they were nonetheless the least controversial in the eyes of the international community and the constituency that elected him to office. In the face of more nuanced and politically controversial issues, the Obama administration shows signs of uncertainty. Continued wavering or failure to act decisively on several difficult fronts may weaken the President’s political capital and contradict his pledge to fight terrorism “in a manner that is consistent with our values and our ideals.”

For example, the government has been sluggish in conducting habeas corpus hearings for Guantanamo Bay detainees. The administration also plans to appeal a recent Federal Court ruling that allows foreign-born detainees held by U.S. forces in Afghanistan to pursue habeas corpus proceedings.

Furthermore, the Obama administration has yet to voice strong commitment to the International Criminal Court (ICC). The continued absence of the United States as a State-Party to the Rome Statute is a stark reminder that the U.S. remains outside the key international framework constructed to ensure that those who commit the most egregious violations of international criminal law are brought to justice.

Most worrisome in the first hundred days, and a key test in the coming months, is President Obama’s equivocation regarding the possible prosecution of individuals involved in torturing detainees under U.S. control. President Obama has stated that “we have been through a dark and painful chapter in our history. But… nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying the blame for the past.” More recently he suggested that those who laid the groundwork for torture might after all face prosecution.

Obama’s early statements dismissed the need for accountability - one of the most fundamental principles of customary international law. Continuing on this course would be an embrace of impunity and legally indefensible. As a signatory to both the Geneva Conventions and the U.N. Convention Against Torture, the United States is obligated to prosecute those who have committed crimes of torture and other inhumane acts. It would be misguided and paradoxical if this administration were to ignore past human rights violations while espousing the virtues of the rule of law.

3. Review the missions in Iraq and Afghanistan
Francois Heisbourg, Special Advisor, Fondation pour la Recherche Strategique, Paris; former Senior Vice President Strategic Development at MATRA-Defense-Espace, Paris

Grade: B+ (with an A for effort)

President Obama is following through on his campaign commitments regarding Iraq and Afghanistan. Concerning Iraq, the plan is to withdraw combat forces by the second half of 2010, a timetable roughly in line with the 16 month post-inaugural calendar asserted during the campaign. In parallel, and in keeping with campaign promises, the president is vigorously pursuing efforts to open a broad-spectrum dialogue with Iran, the regional power which exercises the greatest political influence in Iraq.

It remains to be seen whether overtures towards Iran will be crowned with success, and, if so, whether they will lead to long-term stability in Iraq.

President Obama has presented a new road-map for Afghanistan, which has been discussed at head of state level with America's European partners at NATO's jubilee summit in April. The new road-map assumes a much greater political role for Afghanistan's regional neighbors, while increasing the number of US troops: therefore, the new plan is unlikely to lead to a greater sense of ownership by the Europeans, whose role is, iin practice, being de-emphasized. Rather than a collectively developed strategy, the road-map was made in Washington: its success or its failure will be laid at Obama's doorstep. By the same token, this has not led to a transatlantic row, as little is being asked of the Europeans in terms of additional military forces.

After having been NATO-centered since 2004, the western commitment in Afghanistan is shifting back towards a coalition-based approach, as in 2001/2 albeit this time with a deliberate and welcome attempt to integrate the political, economic, diplomatic and military dimensions of the conflict. It remains to be seen whether the new American strategy will work; what we do know is that the NATO-centered effort is failing.

As in the case of Iraq, Obama has improved his chances of success in Aghanistan by scaling down the ambition of America's war aims. Building democracy is no longer a war aim.

4. Strengthen the Transatlantic Partnership
Constanze Stelzenmüller, director of the Berlin office of the German Marshall Fund of the United States; the views expressed here are her own.

Grade: A-

President Obama has made remarkable progress in reinvigorating transatlantic relations, in style as much as in content. “If you’re not with me, you’re against me”: the divisive style of Obama’s predecessor George Bush had made it easy for Europeans to say “no”, or “maybe”, and sit back comfortably to watch American policies fail in action. (The case of Georgia comes to mind most readily, but there are many others.) Obama, in contrast, manages to wrong foot his European colleagues with the slightest of gestures. Take the bobby in front of No. 10 Downing Street who, startled and delighted by a casual handshake from the American visitor, stretched out his hand to his Prime Minister – only to be sternly ignored. So much for “Cool Britannia”. Or the moment during Obama’s London press conference, where he called on the “foreign press”, caught himself, and said “wait, I’m the foreigner here”. Hard to imagine a more casually elegant – and lethal – critique of past American hubris. And equally hard to imagine a European leader being similarly self-deprecating about the flaws of European foreign policy.

Not that there has been a shortage of new content. Iraq, torture, CIA prisons, Afghanistan, Russia, Iran, Syria, Cuba, arms control, NATO and the UN Human Rights Council, climate policy: the “reset button” is being activated across the spectrum of foreign policy issues. Nothing like it has been seen in Europe for a long time; it is making Europeans take a hard look at their own politicians. Conservative U.S. critics have been accusing Obama of making too many concessions to his allies – not true. The President compromised gracefully where it was clear his allies had no political capital to spend (e.g. on stimulus packages and troops for Afghanistan). But when Turkey blocked Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s candidature for Secretary General of NATO, it was the visitor from Washington who resolved the impasse. It only made the lack of new ideas and initiatives on the European side all the more apparent.

But the absurdly intrusive U.S. vetting process for political nominees is deterring some of the best candidates, and blocking the formulation and implementation of policy. It’s a weakness America can ill afford in times of crisis.

This President, as an idealist, is clearly willing to work with his European allies, recognizing that even America needs help in tackling global challenges. But they may not realize that if they do not respond in kind, he will continue as a realist – alone.

5. Recommit the US to the United Nations System
Stephen Stedman, Professor of Political Science and Senior Fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation, Stanford University, Palo Alto; Author of A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility, United Nations High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change.

Grade: A-

President Obama’s remarks, tone, and appointments to Turtle Bay in his first 100 days suggest that he wants to work with and through the United Nations to tackle transnational threats. He has thrown America’s hat in the ring for a seat on the Human Rights Council, signaling his desire to make the institution more effective. His Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, has won high marks for shepherding the Security Council to a presidential statement condemning North Korea’s missile launch. Her office has garnered respect for its understanding of how the UN operates and how it can be made more effective. Throughout the administration one finds an open door for discussions on strengthening UN peacekeeping, and many options long off the table, such as supplying lift capacity, bolstering over the horizon response forces, and strengthening civilian security capability are in play.

Unlike some issues, however, that can be gauged in the first 100 days, recommitting the United States to the UN is a long term project, more akin to working towards a graduate degree rather than a one issue short course. It has been decades since the UN has been more than a box to check when the US seeks to act internationally. Old habits die hard. The best test of recommitment will come during crises, when we see whether the UN is central stage or just a bit player.

President Obama understands this. In his meeting with Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon at the White House in March, he stated that one of his primary goals is that by the time he leaves the presidency, the American public will understand how important the United Nations is to American security. The success of this endeavor will depend on whether the UN will be able to live up to what the new President asks of it. Here the signs do not look good as the most UN friendly American president in decade must deal with one of the most unimpressive Secretaries General in memory. For some this is a tragedy, but for others a farce.

6. Engage in Global Public Diplomacy through carefully staged events
Mark Malloch Brown, Minister of State for Africa, Asia, and the UN, British Foreign and Commonwealth Office; former Deputy Secretary General, United Nations

Grade: A

The sixth point in the Salzburg Seminar’s 8-Point Plan of last year was to “Engage in Public Diplomacy Through Carefully Staged Events”.

After the mixed reactions at home to his speech at the Brandenberg Gate during the campaign last summer, it was not risk-free to embark on such a high profile trip to Europe. Although perhaps for this President in these circumstances there could be no ‘low’ profile travel.

But if President Obama was afraid of scepticism at home about any distraction from the domestic economic crisis or facing the pitfalls of international diplomacy, he exhibited no signs of it. It was a confident performance at every turn that followed the Seminar’s script to a tee. He attended three summits, visited five countries, plus a stop-over in Iraq, gave two town halls, spent two days in a Muslim country, Turkey, and in the trip’s opening, the G20 London Summit, he spoke eloquently to the wider agenda of poverty and economic and environmental sustainability – rather than the rescue of bankers.

Having seen him up close on that first leg of the trip, I can attest this was impressive public diplomacy. There was not one message or style for the private meetings and another for public consumption. The strategy flowed straight from Obama; it was no add-on by aides. In his ability during the Summit to arbitrate spats between other conference participants, he showed a sure touch which instantly set him apart as a senior statesman rather than the rookie.

In public, his references in Turkey to his upbringing in a Muslim country and having Muslims in his own family broke no new biographical ground, but it demonstrated the power of empathy to overcome the hostility aroused by the US in recent years. It was his core messaging and his personal capacity to reach out to America’s foes and critics, in ways that were neither condescending nor craven, that made it a remarkable international debut.

If there is a cautionary note to this glowing review it is that public diplomacy can lead reality – but over time reality must begin to catch up with perception. Obama showed his power to re-engage Europe on the basis of trusted partnership. But the implication of that was that Europe and the rest of the international community would rise to the occasion and respond to the problems that America considers itself to have carried too large a share of for too long. That reality remains to be proven.

For the President, the polling back home shows that the trip helped consolidate his standing among independents and moderate Republicans. This cross-party Reagan-like dimension of Obama’s appeal shone bright on this trip. An A for public diplomacy.

7. Pursue a Bi-Partisan Legislative Agenda
Jim Kolbe, Former Member of the US House of Representatives, Arizona’s 8th District; Senior Transatlantic Fellow, German Marshall Fund

Grade: C-

It is probably foolhardy to believe that one can gauge the performance of any President after only 100 days in office. After all, 150 years after the Lincoln presidency scholars are still assessing his performance. Still, the public at large wants instant results and immediate evaluations, so—foolhardy or not—here would be my own report card on the Salzburg Global Seminar’s eight-point plan for the first 100 days of the Obama administration.

Of the 8-Point Plan, I think the least robust grade would have to given to this one—“Pursuing a Bi-Partisan Legislative Agenda”. If measured solely on the basis of counting votes by political party on the key legislative items submitted by the President, bi-partisanship has failed dismally. This is not to assign blame, but simply states a fact. The President’s two major legislative issues—the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the stimulus package) and the 2010 budget resolutions in the House and Senate—received not a single Republican vote in the House and only three for the stimulus package in the Senate. Never in recent memory has a President with so much popularity and with such national economic anxiety run into such a headwind of partisan political opposition at the outset of his administration.

The underlying mistake was that the President “outsourced” the writing of the stimulus package to Congress. Democrat leaders immediately seized it as an opportunity to address eight years of pent up demands and rejected any cooperation with a minority which was just beginning to find its own “fiscally responsible” legs after eight years of fiscal confusion under President Bush. By the time President Obama was President and invited Republican leaders to the White House for discussion, the lines were drawn and hardened. This only made it easier to say “no” to the next significant economic legislative item—the budget resolution for 2010.

Meanwhile, on cap and trade, the President has floated some tentative proposals, only to see them swatted down by Members of his own party. It is clear that this issue will divide not along partisan lines, but geographic and economic lines, but that will not make the President’s task any easier. Offers to negotiate a new limitation on nuclear weapons have been put on the table with Russia, but Congress has remained silent on the topic. And on new presidential trade negotiating authority, the President is still boxed in by his own campaign rhetoric which was harshly anti-trade. Although this language has been significantly softened since he assumed office, the anti-trade crowd is still dominant in Congress. It is very hard to imagine that the President will want to confront his liberal congressional allies on this issue when he needs their support on the rest of his economic, regulatory and health care agenda.

Generously, I think the President gets a “C-“ on the congressional bi-partisanship front. But then, there is still plenty of time in the remaining 1300 days to raise that grade!

8. Be a Leader who Listens
Kishore Mahbubani, Dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, NUS, has just published The New Asian Hemisphere: the Irresistible Shift of Global Power to the East.

Grade: B

Obama’s election significantly changed the chemistry of America’s relations with the world. Anti – Americanism diminished globally. However, the great expectations of him have been tempered by the realization that his capacity for change – the slogan he campaigned on – is limited. To make matters worse, Obama has assumed the Presidency at one of the worst economic times. His options are limited.

So far, Obama has made the right noises. The disenchanted 1.2 billion Muslims have welcomed Obama’s assurance that “America is not at war with Islam”. It was brave of Obama to mention Muslim members in his own family. Yet many Muslims are acutely aware that Obama’s hands are tied on the Israel – Palestine issue. His incapacity to even attend the UN Racism Conference confirmed this. Until Obama delivers peace in the Middle-East, the Muslims will suspend judgment of Obama.

Obama has also made the right noises to China. Sending Hillary Clinton to East Asia first instead of Europe was a brilliant move. It showed Obama’s recognition that power is shifting to Asia. But China remains wary of Obama. It understood George W Bush. China is still trying to understand Obama. Curiously, the world’s largest democracy, India, is also wary. Manmohan Singh told Bush that he was “the best President vis-à-vis India in the past 50 years”. By contrast, Obama’s obsession with Afghanistan and Pakistan makes India fear that it would once again be paired with Pakistan. In short, Obama still has not won over the two most populous countries. Does he have the capacity to listen to their concerns?

Fortunately, Europe remains enraptured with Obama. Russia too is pleased that Bush is gone. Latin America is happy that Obama has reached out to Cuba. And, of course, the continent most in love with Obama is Africa. In short, he has unleashed new reservoirs of goodwill towards America in many corners of the world. Now, the world will wait to see whether his policies match these great expectations.

How would you rate the Obama Administration each of these objectives?

Download the Full PDF Scorecard at http://www.salzburgseminar.org/mediafiles/MEDIA48611.pdf

New News on Obama Appointments

2009-04-02T15:57:00.004+02:00

Since the US election last year, we have been trying -- as most everyone has -- to figure out which Fellows and Faculty of the Salzburg Global Seminar would be appointed to high level positions within the Obama administration.

Several have been confirmed: Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State (Session 348, Educating Youth: Challenges for the Future, 1997); James Steinberg, Deputy Secretary of State (Common Interest Forum, 2003); Anne-Marie Slaughter has been nominated be Director of Policy Planning in the US Department of State (Session 418, Reinventing the West: Redefining the Transatlantic Agenda, 2004); and William Burke-White (Session 457 Islamic and International Law, and Session 458, The US and the World) has been nominated to be Senior Advisor in the Office of Policy Planning in the US Department of State.

In addition, word has it that Kenneth Lieberthal (Session 438, China: The New Global Economic Engine?), is also being considered for US Ambassador to China.

And as of today, we also know from Scott Malcomson's (Session 458, The US and the World) recent Huffington Post blog that Carlos Pascual (also Session 458) is under consideration for US Ambassador to Mexico.

More updates as they come.

Democracy and Sustainability: India as a Case Study

2009-03-25T18:51:00.010+01:00

When and how does democracy facilitate sustainable development? This was the central question for participants at a three-day event from 2 to 4 February organised by 21st Century Trust and Salzburg Global Seminar in collaboration with the Paul Hamlyn Foundation and the Environment Foundation.

Participants began their discussions with a visit organized by “Growth-for-All” and partners near Rithala. They spent the afternoon seeing how coordinated civil society initiatives were supplementing government resources in areas such as health and education.

Nitin Desai opened the formal part of the event, calling for a new set of global ethical principles to underpin climate negotiations. We need real international democracy.

The gap between organic decision-making at the local level and ‘inorganic’ official decision-making was a theme. Kalyan Paul advised patience: “Some people sometimes feel ... that all institutions should flower at the same time and create a house full of lovely aroma – but it takes time to create democratic institutions.” For Sushma Iyengar when pro-sustainable development practices at the local level are lost, democracy can be weakened: “We’ve all seen how communities are dependent economically on each other – for example sheep rearers and weavers. When you remove the economic interdependency it reinforces huge divisions at the community level.”

Can India’s 8% growth target be sustained alongside a commitment to democracy? India’s rapidly growing energy needs are a test-ground. Ajit Kapadia noted that: “whatever India’s road map to energy security and sustainable development, I do not believe that in a democracy it can happen without popular support and advocacy”. But there are real risks here: “India will not, as a democracy, be able to build new power plants sufficient to meet projected demand of up to 800,000 megawatts. Constructing for the capacity that will be required can only happen if this country is a dictatorship...” warned Chandra Bhushan.

Processes of economic and development change at local level need to be supported by proper appreciation of the right to be responsible oneself as a citizen. As Dr. Rajendra Pachauri emphasised, concluding the discussion, leadership through lifestyle choice and modest consumption are important at every level.

2008 Winter Festival Experience

2009-03-16T14:22:00.002+01:00

There may not have been any snow in town, but the 2008 Winter Fest began and ended on high notes. In the afternoon of 22 December everybody assembled in the Great Hall with its familiar and comforting roaring fire to be greeted by its welcoming staff. We were promised a week of outdoor activity, wining and dining, intellectual stimulus and friendship. That promise was delivered in full.

Skiers were fitted out the night before so that they could make a quick start the following day at Mühlbach. The coach dropped off the non-skiers in the village, while the skiers went straight to the ski lift. Despite the time of year there were no lift queues and the terrain was forgiving to those (and that was nearly all of us) who had not put on skis for a year. The non-skiers explored the village or tried their hands at sledging. Before dinner we were treated to an amusing lecture by Georg Steinitz on The True Story of the Sound of Music. It provided refreshing insights for those who watched the film afterwards.

On the following day, Christmas Eve, the sun came out and the entire group went to Filzmoos, where we enjoyed a magical horse drawn sleigh ride up to an Alpine mountain hut. Despite a huge breakfast most of us managed a hearty lunch. The kids decided to bombard us all with snowballs after we emerged from the hut with replenished bellies. The snowball fight drew on the experiences of Wolfe and Montcalme at the Heights of Abraham. The kids commanded the higher ground while the adults were bombarded from above. Unlike General Wolfe the adults were unable to scale the heights and were reprieved only by the summons to return down the mountain. In the early evening, we all sat around the fire. The programme consisted of readings revolving around the main themes of Christmas. It included multilingual renditions of Silent Night and O Christmas Tree, ably accompanied by Ian Brown on guitar, and an exchange of stories about Christmas traditions in USA, Romania, Japan and other countries. Then it was time to go to Hotel Elefant in the old town for an outstanding dinner.

By Christmas Day it seemed that we had known each other for ever. The brunch presented yet more food, high in both quality and quantity. By then the atmosphere resembled a family occasion and it was in good cheer that we visited Königsee. It was covered in mist and cloud but it added to the mystery. By then it had turned cold and after a brisk walk around St Bartholomä we retreated to the local hostelry to…..eat and drink again! That was sufficient to fortify us for the first of two sumptuous more formal dinners. Nobody was defeated and we all went on to dance in the Great Hall. The toddlers, needless to say, had the most energy but the prize for terpsichorean style had to go to Astrid and Hector who danced like professional dancers.

There was no forgiveness for those who stayed up late to dance. The next day the bus took us to Bad Hofgastein. The skies were blue and beckoned the skiers to the slopes, while others repaired to the spa and enjoyed the waters, a swim or a massage. The day flew by. On the bus we all drooped, but were invigorated either by exercise or the pampering at the spa center. It felt like a feat to attend either Salzburg’s famous Winter Festival or to just watch Mama Mia! But all were made of sterner stuff and confounded the Sandman by not only staying awake for the performances, but also by putting the world to rights late into the night in front of the Great Hall fire.

The next day was more forgiving. It began with an introduction by Stephen Salyer on the incoming Obama administration and was followed by an animated discussion. The afternoon was free but we obviously all missed each other, since almost the entire group reconvened a few hours later at the Augustinerkeller, a giant beer hall where we drank beer, schnapps and ate the local snacks.

The last day was a fitting climax to the week. After an informative tour of the salt mines in Berchtesgaden and yet another huge buffet lunch at a local Gasthaus, we prepared for our final evening. It encapsulated the spirit of the Salzburg Global Seminar. Everybody looked glamorous. The evening began with an outstanding presentation from Reinhold and Günter Wagnleitner on the subject of the globalisation of jazz. The talk was interlaced with jazz piano from Günter. We were all spellbound, particularly as the exercise combined learning with entertainment. Then we took ourselves to the stunning Venetian room, lit by only candles. The final gala dinner in the Marble Hall, also by candlelight, was magical. The chefs had surpassed themselves (almost a contradiction in terms) and the place buzzed. The toasts were affectionate and witty. Then a final dance in the Bierstube. The conversation was the same everywhere. We are all sad it had come to an end and there was universal agreement that the week had delivered on its promise: there was fun, good food, breathtaking scenery, exercise, intellectual stimulus and companionship. Above all, we arrived as strangers, but left as friends.

Festival Hosts, Vicki & Bobby Garson

ISP visits San Jose State University

2009-03-02T09:32:00.008+01:00

The ISP tour continued in San Jose, as Reinhold and Tom made their fourth stop at San Jose State University. Rave reviews from each show had preceded them to the Bay Area, and the crowd response paralleled the stature of the exciting night. Several hundred people turned up for the events, which took place on the 12th and the 16th of February, and were delighted to meet Tom and Reinhold at the intimate gatherings which peppered their visit to San Jose State. The fantastic support shown by the high number of faculty alumni in the area (pictured below) is one reason that the shows garnered such outstanding numbers, and is testament to the strong, lasting relationships that are created between visitors to Schloss Leopoldskron.

Reinhold embraces long-time friend and colleague Bill Reckmeyer, professor of leadership and systems at San Jose State and ISP Session Chair of the Salzburg Global Seminar.

Reinhold delivering part of his informance.

"There was a global, 'What Now?'"

Tom McDermott relaxes after one of his performances, and is greeted by some friendly faces: Bill DeVincenzi, Fiona Marshall, Darci Arnold, Jill Steinberg, Dennis Jaehne, and many others.

As the 2009 iteration of the ISP tour of the United States winds to a close, it is appropriate to thank the people who have made it possible, and who have guaranteed that it was a true pleasure for everyone who could attend. We at the Seminar are deeply grateful for the support and hospitality that each of the liasons in the States has shown to Tom and Reinhold during their extensive tour. We also are happy to announce that more than 2,500 people attended more than a dozen performances over the two week stint, and that Reinhold and Tom are back home safe and sound, albeit exhausted. Thanks to every member of the audience, and everyone who lent a kind hand to helping organize these massive events; we are proud--and hopeful--to see that the messages of the importance of global citizenship, involvement, and awareness reverberate so deeply.

ISP visits Tarrant County

2009-02-05T16:19:00.016+01:00

We have some fantastic news (and, as if that were not enough, we also have pictures).

Reinhold Wagnleitner and Tom McDermott have successfully completed the first leg of their 15-day tour of several schools Texas and California. Their gracious hosts were the ISP alumni of Tarrant County College in Fort Worth, Texas, who were treated to two shows earlier this week. The first of these was Reinhold's data-rich presentation “The United States of America and the World: Views from a Distance", which took place on Monday evening on TCC's South Campus. Tuesday evening carried with it a bit more of a fanciful note, as renowned pianist Tom McDermott joined Reinhold to put on “Jazz – the Classical Music of Globalization”.

The Seminar extends its most sincere thanks to the kind folks at Tarrant County College, and in particular to Jane Harper and Carolyn Carney, who organized the stay. Dr. Harper has sent along these beautiful photographs of the event so that we might be a part of the exciting informances. Please enjoy!

Reinhold and Tom arrive at Tarrant County College, and

are greeted by ISP fellows from that institution: Dr. Rob Levy, Dental

Hygiene; Cindy O’Neal, Dental Hygiene; Scott Parker, Art; Dr. Antonio Howell,

Dean of Humanities; Rebecca Balcarcel, English; Dr. Cynthia Reed, Psychology.

Dr. Jane Harper, Vice President for Teaching and Learning, introduces Reinhold's lecture "Jazz -- Classical Music of Globalization" on Tuesday night.

Reinhold Wagnleitner's informance.

Tom McDermott, on the ivories.

Tom and Jane, enjoying some lunch between activities.

A lovely ISP reunion between Reinhold and ISP fellow Karmein Bowman.

Tom and Tarrant County ISP alums Cindy O'Neal, Scott Parker, and Rebecca Balcarcel.

Nicole Vallee, Pauline Griffith, Reinhold Wagnleitner, Carolyn Carney, and Margaret Lutton.

Reinhold during his lecture, discussing the global "What now?"

Tom, Rebecca, and Reinhold at the Fort Worth Stockyards.

For more information on this lecture tour and to reserve tickets at the various sites, please visit the post immediately below. Within a few days of each lecture stop, new pictures will be posted on this blog. Check back with us to follow along, or visit the schools and get the full show!

D. Travis Campbell

ISP in the USA

2009-01-26T20:12:00.021+01:00

Visits to the United States are a common item on the busy agendas of the ISP directors and faculty members. These trips are a manifestation of the Seminar's fundamental belief in the vital role played by deliberate, personal action to affect change in the world. Reinhold Wagnleitner, a professor at the University of Salzburg and a perennial faculty member of the ISP sessions, will be revisiting the United States once again to give his celebrated lecture entitled "Jazz: the Classical Music of Globalisation". Wagnleitner is an esteemed commentator on American history and an avid jazz enthusiast, and each of these passions is on display in his presentation, which neatly demonstrates the transnational cultural exchange exemplified by jazz music. In earlier iterations of this performance, which has been described by multiple audiences as an exercise in "infotainment," Wagnleitner has assayed lecture in conjunction with his brother Gunter and alternately with pianist Tom McDermott, who is featured in the current national tour.

The format of the presentation is intentionally simple, such that the creativity and import of its message are highlighted. Wagnleitner will conduct a survey of the history of jazz music, with particular reference to its spirit of rebellion, its potential as a tool of unification, and its global appeal. McDermott's performances of thematically relevant jazz pieces pepper the lecture, which, combined with Wagnleitner's flair for showmanship, serves to supplement the archetypically dense university lecture with a unique emotional appeal.

Wagnleitner will also showcase another of his keynote lectures, entitled "The United States of America and the World: Views from a Distance". This piece is decidedly of a more formal bent, as it provides a broad compilation of and commentary on some extra-national views of the United States. A thoroughly researched production, this presentation includes some startling statistical figures, provocative news items, poignant interview statements, insightful pop culture materials, and a massive amount of otherwise disparate information which correlates with the topic of the United States' tumultuous image over the past decade.

The information listed below is of three kinds. First, an outline of the tour dates and sites can be found, along with the type of lecture that will be given on that occasion. Following that list is a brief directory which contains the contact persons at each respective institution. Any interest in attending a performance, including further questions and reservation requests, should be directed to those listed. Finally, there are several links that will direct you to additional information on Wagnleitner, including his website and recent book regarding jazz music. Comments to this blog entry will also be answered promptly in order to facilitate anyone interested in attending one of the dates on the tour. The Seminar extends its warmest congratulations and best wishes to both Reinhold Wagnleitner and Tom McDermott, as they embark on yet another exciting trip around the United States!

-------

List of tour dates:

2 February 2009
Tarrant County College District South Campus, Fort Worth, Texas

“The United States of America and the World: Views from a Distance"

3 February 2009
Tarrant County College District North East Campus, Fort Worth, Texas
Informance: “Jazz – the Classical Music of Globalization” featuring Tom McDermott

5 February 2009
Houston Community College, Texas
Informance: “Jazz – the Classical Music of Globalization” featuring Tom McDermott

5 February 2009

Houston Community College, Texas

“The United States of America and the World: Views from a Distance”

10 February 2009
Santa Monica College Main Campus, Santa Monica, California
“The United States of America and the World: Views from a Distance”

10 February 2009
Santa Monica College Performing Arts Campus, Santa Monica, California
Informance: “Jazz – the Classical Music of Globalization” featuring Tom McDermott

11 February 2009
Santa Monica College; Main Stage Theater, Santa Monica, California
Informance: “Jazz – the Classical Music of Globalization” featuring Tom McDermott

12 February 2009
San José State University, Salzburg Program
Informance: “Jazz – the Classical Music of Globalization” featuring Tom McDermott

16 February 2009
San José State University, Salzburg Program
“The United States of America and the World: Views from a Distance”

18 February 2009
Richland College, Dallas
“Satchmo Meets Amadeus” featuring Tom McDermott

18 February 2009
Richland College, Dallas
“The United States of America and the World: Views from a Distance”

19 February 2009
Richland College, Dallas
Informance: “Jazz – the Classical Music of Globalization” featuring Tom McDermott

-------

For more information or for ticket inquiries, please contact:

Tarrant County Community College

CAROLYN.CARNEY@tccd.edu; JANE.HARPER@tccd.edu;

Houston Community College
kent.mcgaughy@hccs.edu; linda.cook@hccs.edu

Santa Monica College
NEVEAU_JUDY@smc.edu;

San José State University
reckmeyer@sbcglobal.net

Richland College
stevem@dcccd.edu; GNapoles@dcccd.edu;

-------

Additional Resources:

Book: Satchmo Meets Amadeus by Reinhold Wagnleitner

Website: Satchmo Meets Amadeus by Reinhold Wagnleitner

Visit Us: Reinhold Wagnleitner

Tom McDermott

Salzburg Global Seminar

D. Travis Campbell

Every New Dawn

2009-01-20T12:09:00.009+01:00

Since November of last year, Mr. Steven Salyer and Mr. Edward Mortimer have contributed their time and efforts to crafting several blog entries which have aimed at inspiring a dialogue around the new American president. I feel as if I have so many hopes for this new administration, that a short comment would sound rushed and would exhaust the reader. But while I refrained from comment on those two posts, I do believe that the prompt is well-taken. Below is a post imported from my personal blog, regarding some thoughts on the impending inauguration of a new leader, and hopefully, of a different prospect for my future.

-----

"I am not asking you to believe in my ability to bring about

real change. I am asking you to believe in yours."

--Barack Obama

The first hours of the day always start out the same. Externally, there is always a bit of a haze, because the light has been shut out for a long while, and the sky is just being allowed to breathe again. Things begin to wake up again, to stretch their arms and to blink their sleep-stung eyes, and to extract themselves from their lethargy. There is a burst of color now, where there was once only opaque streetlight, or darkness. And now, once again, there are options. Internally, some transitions are taking place, but the most important ones are in secret. Getting out of bed because the light is breaking the curtain, everyone can see that happening. But what is different about this day in particular, when it is set against all the other early mornings which have come before it? If the calendar simply flips and another dawn comes, the day skirts away from you without notice or consideration, and then the light speeds away, then you have lost something dear and uncommon: a new chance.

Today is the occasion of the inauguration of Barack Obama, or, as most people seem to conceive of it, it is the last day that George Bush will hold office in the United States. It has been my experience that the reaction is categorically positive, but even so, there is a tremendous amount of gradation. I have spoken to some people who seem to feel that the switch can be nothing but positive, and yet are wary that the promises which have been made far exceed the degree and the quantity that will be possible in the near future. Some people are optimistic about the new president as a person, but are not confident that he, even in concert with other governmental leaders, can rectify the drastic situation in which find ourselves economically and politically. Yet others still profess total faith that Obama will rebuilt and steady the great ship which has been steered astray, torn at by the choppy sea and wrecked upon ancient boulders. For my part, I am not sure that I buy into any of these viewpoints, but that is my general position as a skeptic. I am neither sure that the drive behind any of these beliefs truly matters, considering the sort of world that I would favor.

The concept of America as the dominant power--or maybe even as a world power--is obsolete. It is laughable, quite literally, when politicians talk about restoring the United States to supremacy: that rhetoric holds absolutely no weight with the academics I have met here, who suggest unwaveringly that the arrogance and blindness of our governmental leaders is the exact reason that what they say will happen, will not. Communitarianism and continent-nations in the vein of the EU are coming, and it is simply embarrassing: the assertion that a nation with nearly one-thousand military bases, the third-lowest opinion rating, an atrocious economy, the 15th best access to high-speed internet, and a pitiful healthcare crisis will be restored because we have the liberal thinking sufficient to have elected a black man to be president. With the global economic downturn and the morass in the Middle East, both of which are commonly linked to a negative perception of America specifically, the incredible animosity that most of the world otherwise feels towards our nation is immediately evident as an American abroad. A bar fight erupted in Old Town, and the Austrian student I was chatting with mentioned, upon hearing one of the combatants yelling in a Slavic language, "I'm surprised he's not American." Two students from the Fachhochschule asked me if Bush was kidding about not having decided about evolution, and then looked at each other uncomfortably when I apologized for him. It seems as if almost everyone else in the world is uneasy having the United States around.

And the academy knows it. Several of the presentations that we have seen so far have showcased some staggering statistics about the image of America in Europe and Asia. The surveys revealed that those asked cared more for North Korea and Russia than for the United States; they believed that the second biggest shame of the Bush administration, and second leading contributor to a negative view of the United States, is the response to Hurricane Katrina; they voted 97.7% for Obama in a global internet poll, while 52% of Americans did. Incidentally, Guantanamo Bay, and the immaterial policies that echo that physical structure, seem to be third. It is not the case, that the American public is doing direct harm to these people who express ardently anti-American sentiments. But look at the statistics. In that global poll, McCain only carried four nations: the Sudan, the DRC, Cuba, and Iran. The United States, based on percentage of votership, would be fifth on this list. This is the crisis, not the strength of our dollar or the morale of the consumer. It is not that we have no power, it is that we have no companions.

But a new dawn breaks, as it tends to, just when things are in their darkest hue. I do not believe that a new presidency and a new year will mean a new prominence. I believe that a change means a chance, and that perhaps the most important first step is a disintegration of the vision that we project on the conditions in the world. Enough with the obsession about being the last best hope for protecting human rights: we are not that. Abandon the notion that we are deserve or achieve full spectrum dominance, politically: we have failed. The good news, though, is that these statuses are wholly irrelevant in the face of challenges that we must address together. A hegemonic attitude is a reversion, and it confounds us. Let us not permit this day to flight before our eyes; I implore you, on behalf of a youth which has a desperate hope for the success of its shared future: let us blink ourselves awake, take the new dawn into our hands, and make this occasion worthy of positive note in our collective memory.

D. Travis Campbell

The Great Shift

2009-01-18T14:45:00.007+01:00

The first plenary session of ISP 29 provided some background information about education theory, and about university responses to the shifts in economics and social stressors. I did not know much about higher education as a field of study before arriving in Salzburg, but given my five-year career as a citizen of the California State University system, I considered myself to be qualified to speak about it experientially, and to analyze the lag between producing a problem and identifying it, between identifying it and lumbering to fix it; and moreover, the synapse between the theory and the application is sometimes so incredibly wide, that it rivals the gorge between recognition and rectification. During my term at San Jose State University, I had the fortunate opportunity to participate on a very few faculty-strong panels, to work closely with individual faculty members on academic pursuits, and to provoke some conversation regarding the often unseen bits of university politics: the committees. But I never got to flick on the light and peer around the pedagogical room. I wonder--and wonder is the only verb whose meaning I might pick, because we undergrads are not allowed to know how most decisions on campus are made--how often professors and deans stay static on their theories of higher education simply because choosing to change would be too much work. Certainly, there is a bounty of examples evident to students which make us say to each other, Why does no one address this? How can it be that they cannot see this imbalance or the other, this deficiency, that flaw? And if they can hear, why don't they listen?

Tish Emerson, who lectured on the nature of university politics, mentioned quite poignantly that "moving from the edges to the center doesn't just change you, it changes the center." In context, Emerson seemed to be charging the university faculty in attendance with actively engaging the groups who currently rest on the "fringes" of the institution. As the conversation around developing this archetype of "student as global citizen" begins to build momentum and to take a discernible shape, this mandate is an important one to keep in mind. After all, it seems to me that if there is a fringe, we must infer that there is some group that is less welcome and perhaps included less often than others. And if we exclude some types some of the time, how, then, can we consider ourselves to be global citizens? This prescription seems to be self-evident to me, and it met with general affirmation from each of the audience members; it was certainly worth making public, so that the idea remains in the forefront and acts as a lens through which to scrutinize the projects that each university will produce.

But surely, when the term "fringe" comes about, we cannot settle for thinking that this is a reference to one economic class or religious sect or cultural background; it is not a term that necessarily recalls an academic discipline or sexual orientation, a language or belief or a custom or any other political stripe. I fall into the traditionally empowered set of virtually every classification, so I am certainly not in a position to complain about personal disenfranchisement. But in my experience, when the university is the setting, sometimes the "fringe" group is the students themselves.

The awkward part for students, I feel, is that much of the important activity takes place behind a sort of administrative curtain, which shrouds from student input all of those decisions which will result in drastic changes to student life. It was my tiny experience that I had a voice, that its use was encouraged, and that its quality was nurtured. But many of my peers, who eventually became frustrated by the confusing maze that can be university bureaucratic procedure, simply grew tired of using that voice to affect any sort of change on our own behalf. I very often felt that I could raise a concern, but that it was as if I was talking into a pillow: the hum of my concern was inaudible, and it went unheeded. I realize that as struggling undergraduates, we may not be able to provide sharp and critical commentary on the university's current or proposed pedagogy, but we are certainly able to tell how the decisions that the faculty make are affecting our days on campus, the quality of our degrees, and our general satisfaction with the institution. It is manifest that we, the students, have neither the training nor the experience to be able to make high-level decisions, but should we not have input? If the administrators are to take Emerson's advice, perhaps the first step would be something of an inventory of all major panels to whom it is charged to make influential policy decisions, and to then examine how much input students are able to offer to the panels; or alternatively, take account of how many of the staple committees in academic affairs or student affairs are chaired by faculty who are champions of student affection, instead of an administrator with whom no student can identify? I just loved my experience at San Jose State. The degree of diversity that I experienced there, culturally and ideologically, was fantastic. My most fervent wish for that institution--and any like it--is that future students will be able to reflect on their tenures, and feel that they were mixed into the center, a part of what the university was.

D. Travis Campbell

Our Fireside Chat

2009-01-18T13:24:00.003+01:00

"...and so we beat on, boats against the current,
borne ceaselessly back into the past..."
--F.S. Fitzgerald

After the welcome reception, a group of the academic insomniacs at the Seminar gathered near the fireplace in the Great Hall. A welcome break from the usual grind which mostly takes place in front of a computer, this chat, which turned into a four-hour demi-debate mostly about international politics. I wish I had a more exact means of recording the content so that my review of the event would have some context, but burying my face in a computer or a moleskin would have sort of an effect opposite from the one I was glad to have achieved.

For the majority of the night, I was the only recent undergraduate student; a few of my colleagues are currently pursuing masters degrees in Europe, so their extended insight stood as a pleasant supplement to my own. Others, who had been or are currently professors, have such a comprehensive knowledge of world events and global political stressors that they seem to speak in a unique language. Interestingly, I heard a great deal of recollection and criticism of historical circumstance, which was often mitigated by an analysis of the way in which those events--and even people, mirrored, and in some cases--foreshadowed, ones that we currently face.

One idea, presented originally by my direct boss and brilliantly creative thinker David Goldman, kept resurfacing. It sounded Orwellian to me, but the scrutiny that the ardent student historian provided proved the archetype to be historically tenable, and hardly just a literary device. Whereas in the past the United States (and to some extent, Europe) had an enemy with a illuminable visage--that is, that it has generally been the case that we could point to a picture of who our enemy is, what he looks like, those issues which he holds to be important and true--the current administration and indeed world now face several respective enemies which are either intangible or or undefinable. An attempt to describe exactly which sorts of things we are fighting politically, for example, seems to be like trying to capture a morning fog with a butterfly net. This is to say nothing of our often maligned military pursuits, our confusing--and for me, virtually incomprehensible!--economic peril, and more broadly, our philosophical positions as ethical agents who must lead as well as apologize.

Another of the men in our group, Reinhold Wagnleitner, who is a perennial ISP faculty, American studies scholar, prime historian, and native Austrian, talked a great deal about the difference between the culture in the United States regarding voting for an issues or a candidate versus the idea that "the Europeans" have of how Americans actually think about those things. For example, he recalled, that even in a conservative Austria, there was a great deal of shock--followed closely by terror, I would imagine--in 2004 when Bush was re-elected. Reinhold outlined that the European electorate would never imagine that an American electorate would consider issues such as abortion rights, gay rights, and so-called "family values" when voting for a commander-in-chief. These are, conversely, the exact issues on which Bush ran his moderately successful platform for re-election; unimportant were his failure in Iraq and largely with any international government relations, his ignorance regarding climate control and environmental concerns, and his confounding stubbornness around the area of rational intellectual process versus stark religious adherence.

Another of the men and perhaps one of my chief mentors academically was Jochen Fried, a scholar whose repute exceeds even my aspiration. The words that the man chooses to use seem to be selected without effort but with great exactitude, and one of these words was "boldness". Jochen used the term to describe a hypothetical strategy which he and I, lone vocal islands in a group of eight, believed Obama may pursue: drop the wars in the Middle East, adopt a bit of an conscious isolationist strategy, and effectively declare to those unsettled and restless nations, "Fine, then: you deal with it, and consider us now left out". In my thinking, our interest in the countries with which we do not currently enjoy very diplomatic relations would now be fundamentally reactionary, in terms of foreign policy: we are willing when they are, any aggression will be addressed post hoc, and otherwise, we are now otherwise occupied with issues which are more likely to benefit from our concern with them (considering further that our isolation is also an acknowledgement that we are not wanted, and that we should therefore refrain from interference where we are not welcome).

I followed with a speculation that was mentioned as radical, a term which is generally a good check that I've made a comment worth making. Jochen, I saw, smiled at several points during offerings such as these. In considering the breadth of challenges that face us, I suggested that we might have fallen victim to an iteration of the logical fallacy of false dilemma. In other words, whereas a traditional false dilemma fallacy posits that there are only two solutions to a problem which has many, and then condemns one of the solutions so that the speaker's alternative is portrayed as the only favorable course, this manifestation of the pesky fallacy creates the illusion that there are two alternatives which are pursuable and result-bearing, when in fact there is only one: to address one of the many impending issues that affects human beings categorically. These, which I suggested we might think of as meta-issues, would have a greater potential to yield results, or, conceived differently, absolutely must yield a result lest some sort of drastic and devastating change come about. Upon pursuing a solution to one of these meta-issues, we might, through our posture or our rhetoric, demonstrate: do you see the way in which we, the superpowers in this small world, are working on your behalf as well as ours? And we may challenge: now, what is it that you are protesting? Against whom do you now fight, and should you? It is this sort of realignment of the nexus of goals and ideology that will necessarily undermine any Nietzschean slave mentality aimed at tearing down the nations which control world processes, and similarly, will embolden any country or people whatsoever to achieve something which has not before been conceived: to fight alongside one another out of need, to imagine self-defense as confederacy with present enemies, because the goal has been changed.

D. Travis Campbell

ISP 29 and 30 Overview

2009-01-17T13:39:00.013+01:00

The strand of the Salzburg Global Seminar which currently employs me is called the International Study Program, hereafter referred to as ISP. The 29th constellation of this program convened this January 6-13th, and was comprised of faculty and administrators from Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) and members of the Appalachian College Association (ACA). A year prior, they had been charged with the project of transforming their campuses into sites of global citizenship; this meeting signified the second time that they had assembled their teams at the Seminar in order to forward their talks. For the next twelve months, those teams, which are supported by grants from the Mellon Fellow Community Initiative, will do the work that I imagine as the necessary evil related to many tasks at university: the often sluggish process of paring down plans, garnering assets and stakeholders, and most importantly, securing the approval of their trustees and planning boards, such that these global citizenship programs are irreversible.

In order to guide them a bit at this stage of their conceptualization, we offered six plenary sessions of various persuasions. The details of those sessions, along with some commentary of them, will be the subject of many of my impending blogs.

The institutions included in that first cohort are:

Bennett College for Women (HBCU)

Brevard College (ACA)

Clark Atlanta University (HBCU)

Dillard University (HBCU)

Ferrum College (ACA)

Fisk University (HBCU)

King College (ACA)

Lees-McRae College (ACA)

Mars Hill College (ACA)

Morehouse College (HBCU)

Spelman College (HBCU)

University of Charleston (ACA)

Warren Wilson College (ACA)

West Virginia Wesleyan College (ACA)

Xavier University of Louisiana (HBCU)

This week--indeed, the process that is unfolding around me at the present, while I update you here--is called ISP 30. The focus of this congregation is identical, but serves to broaden the reach and underscore the mission established by the institutions invited for ISP 29. In this iteration of the ISP, 12 entirely new schools from the HBCU and ACA systems have sent faculty who are now just beginning to learn about the theory and strategy behind conceptualizing a university program related to globalization or international studies. All told, ISPs 29 and 30 will have hosted nearly 100 faculty, staff, and administrators from 27 different schools; each institution has a unique goal and plan, but several of them appear to be interested in acting as a confederate in order to make maximum use of financial and institutional resources during this time of pecuniary instability.

The second cohort:

Alderson-Broaddus College (ACA)

Bethune-Cookman College (HBCU)

Bluefield College (HBCU)

Carson-Newman College (ACA)

David & Elkins College (ACA)

Emory & Henry College (ACA)

Howard University (HBCU)

North Carolina Central University (HBCU)

Shaw University (HBCU, will attend in 2010)

Tusculum College (ACA)

University of the District of Columbia (HBCU)

Wheeling Jesuit University (ACA)

As a student, I am very pleased to hear that professors and presidents care so much about addressing a much maligned area of many university curriculums, and I am encouraged by the progress that has been made toward that end. When I was pursuing my undergraduate degree, I was sometimes overwhelmed by the feeling that there was no one outside of the student body itself who truly cared about the wishes and interests that were so dear to the students who attended the university. My impression was often that faculty were so busy with research or with tenure-track pursuits, that they often snubbed efforts that I made to get to know them, to travel to other local universities and to take advantage of their resources, or to otherwise broaden the scope of possibilities afforded to us as fervent members of the academy. These ISP sessions give me the acute impression that there is a simmering intent to establish this sort of connection with students, and what is more, that it has an orientation: I heard many times that faculty wanted to create something that was both fresh and enduring, because they had the distinct notion that their versions of this sort of program had the power to change students' lives. Such was the investment in their voices that I was frequently moved during their presentations; but more lingering still is the feeling of hope that I have, that in a decade or more, the plans which have been developed here will be steadfast monoliths on each campus, which will allow for inter-institutional and inter-national collaboration on scale which, as it blooms, grows ever more vital.

If you are interested in learning a bit more about the distribution of these schools, we have created a Google map with each of the 27 institutions represented. To the left of this map, the schools are listed again, each with a hyperlink to its own webpage. The orange points are participants from ISP 29, while the blue points represent those invited for ISP 30.

D. Travis Campbell

A Fond Hello

2009-01-16T17:09:00.004+01:00

The breadth of influence that a person has remains hopelessly tiny, if each of us commits only to whisper quietly to his peers from atop a unique and distant pillar. For all the rustle of activity in the world, and all of the obfuscation created by the errors of history and conflicts of the present, there is no response which can find its legs and gather velocity, unless we act in balanced confederacy against the problems that are manifest before us. As an aspiring writer in the areas of philosophy and international law, I intuit that these are truths which I believe because, in some way, I must: in order to believe that there is hope for change, I must also believe that there is a means to affect it. It is my humble impression that this blog is founded tacitly upon that principle, and it is with this approach in mind that I am honored to contribute.

By way of introduction, I am currently an intern for the International Study Program (ISP) at the Salzburg Global Seminar, and I have been asked to chronicle the events of ISPs 29 and 30, as well as other proceedings of the Seminar. It is my great pleasure to invite you to read both my posts, which are intentionally personal, and to monitor the posts made by my dedicated colleagues. I implore anew each reader follow along on this blog, but also to comment, and thus to give a voice to a viewpoint which would otherwise be screamed in solitude, alone and abandoned on its solitary pillar: permit this blog to be your connection to each other, to this process, and to our shared future.

D. Travis Campbell

Countdown to Inauguration Day

2009-01-07T16:44:00.010+01:00

Dear Salzburg Fellows around the world,

Greetings and Happy New Year!

Eight weeks have gone by since Session 458 - The US in the World: New Strategies for Engagement - was together in Salzburg, and in less than two weeks President Obama will be making his inaugural address.

I hope most of you have seen, and I know many of you have joined, the conversation about US foreign policy which Stephen Salyer launched from Salzburg on November 14. (http://salzburgglobal.blogspot.com/2008/11/salzburg-on-capitol-hill-join.html)

If so, you will know about the briefing we gave to the House Foreign Affairs Committee in Washington on November 19, and the memo and video based on your work which we presented to that and other audiences. The above links will refresh your memory, as will this cartoon sent in by Volha Charnysh which I think beautifully captures its spirit.

Of course a lot has happened in those eight weeks – including a lot more depressing economic news, and the even more depressing conflict in Gaza with its terrible human cost. The challenges facing the new US president on January 20th and after seem if anything even more formidable and more urgent than they did in November.

Therefore I am writing now to invite you all to send in your updated suggestions for President Obama's first acts in office, from the economic stimulus package, to a possible statement on Guantanamo, to the war in Gaza or whatever you believe is most urgent. Please enter those thoughts in the comments section we have created for this purpose. We will then compile them into a news item which we will post on our main website and send to all the influential policy-makers whom we have access to.

I look forward eagerly to reading what you have to say.

Edward Mortimer
Senior Vice-President & Chief Programme Officer
Salzburg Global Seminar

ISP Faculty Member on American Tour

2008-12-18T15:45:00.011+01:00

Reinhold Wagnleitner, a long-term faculty member of the Salzburg Global Seminar who has served at a host of International Study Program events, participated in multiple sessions on American culture, and even performed jazz “informances” with his brother, Günter, at Salzburg Festival events, has recently returned from a speaking tour that took him to the campuses of Seminar partner-schools in the United States and even to the headquarters of the United Nations.

One highlight of the tour came in the form of the Appalachian College Association Summit 2008 held in Abingdon, Virginia from October 16 to 18. In a panel devoted to the integration and expansion of global learning across the curriculum, lead by Ferrum College’s David Howell, participants discussed intensifying faculty involvement in global citizenship perspectives across campus curricula and also the implementation of several ideas and practices inspired by work in Salzburg. This was followed immediately by Professor Wagnleitner’s keynote speech, "America and the World," which met with rave reviews from the audience of nearly 500 participants.

Professor Wagnleitner also presented at a variety of locations, including Dillard College in New Orleans, what has been called an "innovative approach to the history of cultural globalization," namely his informance, "Jazz the Classical Music of Globalization," with pianist Tom McDermott. A musical excerpt of this presentation, performed by Tom McDermott is available on the Salzburg Global Seminar's website.

What is the Future of U.S. Foreign Assistance Programs?

2008-12-10T09:49:00.003+01:00

Dear Salzburg Fellows and Friends,

The many thoughtful responses to my 14 November posting - asking the Salzburg global community to offer advice to President-Elect Obama - provided excellent preparation for our “Members Only” breakfast on Capitol Hill two weeks ago.

Since that time, our attention has shifted tragically to the horrific events in Mumbai. The Seminar has hundreds of Fellows and friends in India and, on behalf of our worldwide fellowship, please know that we are united as we stand with you.

Though world events seem to unfold at an ever quickening rate, I did want to report briefly on the Capitol Hill briefing and ask for your additional thinking in response to two questions posed by the Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman, Representative Howard Berman.

Chairman Berman indicated that in coming months the House Foreign Affairs Committee would take up the question of U.S. foreign assistance programs. He invited the Salzburg Global Seminar to address: “To what degree should Congress and the Administration re-direct and re-structure the way that foreign assistance is pursued?

Second, he asked: “How should the U.S. change its attitude toward and use of the United Nations, and what should replace the G-8 as a forum for coordinating economic policy?”

I would welcome the thoughts of Salzburg’s worldwide alumni on Chairman Berman’s questions.

As Chairman Berman acknowledged, one development in the second Bush term was to increase substantially U.S. support for foreign assistance, particularly in Africa. Which of the Bush policies in this area should be preserved, which changed?

In the second area, can the United Nations overcome its structural limitations, especially in matters of war and peace? Further, who should be at the table when heads of state convene, especially in this time of international economic crisis?

We would like to compile the best of these responses for use in a follow-up communication to the transition team and to members of the House Foreign Affairs and Senate Foreign Relations Committees in Washington. Please add your voice to the comments field below, and to find additional information about the Capitol Hill briefing, click here.

Thanks for your contributions and for standing with and being a part of the Salzburg global community.

Stephen Salyer
President
Salzburg Global Seminar

P.S. The Seminar’s work and its independent status as a global institution would not be possible without people who value it and offer contributions, small and large, so that it can continue. To show your commitment, please visit our web site: www.SalzburgGlobal.org and select Support Our Work, or go to: https://secure.groundspring.org/dn/index.php?id=2278.

The Seeming Irrelevance of IP on Cultural Products

2008-12-10T09:18:00.002+01:00

Last night we moved from the technology and science sphere to the intellectual property of culture. Lawrence Weschler, the director of the New York Institute for the Humanities at New York University (my alma mater), gave his passionate defense of free-speech and fair use of cultural products such as paintings, music, movies, and books.

Despite his admission that his views can be radical, his hyperbolic examples of restrictions placed on culture creators were pertinent. A big movie studio wanted $10,000 of the total $100,000 documentary budget to be paid for the use of a tangential mobile phone ring-tone heard in the background. Meanwhile, the theatres refused to show the documentary because of fear of litigation.

It seems that the actions that follow from our legal codes have gone beyond their original scope or intention. Unfortunately, after 5 days of discussing the IP-Innovation paradox, it is becoming clear that any good solution at reconciling the opposing sides should not help boost lawyer’s billable hours; adding laws is not the solution.

Culture is a different industry than science or technology. Cultural progress has been achieved through re-expressions and re-interpretations of original works. Of course, large media companies want to be paid for their incremental investment into the creative process. However, IP laws have had the effect of keeping the dinosaur-like media industry dependent on old technologies while the net-generation has adopted alternative modes, in effect bypassing the media corporation’s bank account. To be fair, some media companies are jumping on the bandwagon but the first-mover advantage has already been given to the crafty entrepreneurs who originally created the peer-to-peer software.

The representative from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), John Tarpey, informed the seminar’s participants about his organization’s initiative to build effective public awareness about piracy. And, it was done from my generation’s perspective—how novel! Whether WIPO’s resources are best spent on combating the theft of culture or the counterfeiting of dangerous drugs will be left for another time and place. Nonetheless, it is clear that media companies have acquiesced to this generation’s needs and wants.

While artists, agents, and large corporations figure out how to build parallel value-added technologies to entice consumers, young cultural interlocutors will continue to find their cultural commodities at the best price, $0. The biggest retribution for media companies is when all of Lawrence Weschler’s students come into class on day#1 wearing the putrid smells of Britney Spears perfume and Justin Timberlake cologne. He then may realize the somber effects of illegal downloading.

The Politics of Innnovation

2008-12-09T09:20:00.013+01:00

The Mixing of Realism and Idealism

With the ongoing discussions about the functionality of different IP systems and designs for emerging ones, I am thinking that before launching into any global framework, nations ought to address their self-interests first if innovation is really going to benefit human society. Edward Mortimer, the Salzburg Global Seminar's executive director, opined that the modus operandi of innovation was always meant to further human development and create good for society. Martin Wolf of the Financial Times elaborated on this very point today during his treatise on innovation and developing countries. In his presentation, he mentioned that "the creation and dissemination of knowledge is a fundamental attribute – I would argue the fundamental attribute – of the human species." He added that intellectual property regimes tradeoff "a bad – the creation of a temporary monopoly – for a good – innovation, invention and creation." He went on to challenge whether developing countries, as a matter of economic development, are being compromised by formal knowledge protection (i.e. pharmaceuticals) or whether they need to join the IPR party to effectively play economic catch-up.

Joseph Schumpeter and other Austrian economists agreed in the power of innovative entrepreneurs. The Schumpeter economic thinking was guided by the belief that entrepreneurs are required to truly advance society. Entrepreneurs would positively disrupt economic systems for the good of society and economic development.

It appears as though innovation has been snatched from its natural home: the entrepreneur's eureka moment. With the increased salience of intellectual property, individuals involved in the innovation process may be looking to better society but first and foremost, they usually are hoping to better their company’s balance sheets and/or further some nationalistic goal.

On the issue of technology transfer between the United States and China , the United States, considered an advanced IP system, is concerned with protecting the technical know-how of American corporations from countries with less developed IPR systems such as China. The company’s profits are better served by allocating its scarce resources to diligently working on its next generation of products, not litigating in the courts. 'Illegal' technology transfers can, in effect, speed up the innovation timeline by motivating the C-suites to expedite the company’s product cycle.

However, governments are often times working against this natural momentum. In the name of fairness, public officials often use innovation policy to manage their country’s economic power. For example, the U.S. does not want to transfer wealth at its expense while China is leveraging its status as an emerging power. As the governments are argue, unlocked innovative capacities are idled. Innovation and intellectual property rights is just one other forum where governments can project power.

Traditionally, innovation has been practiced by entrepreneurs. Schumpeter hypothesized in the early 1900s that having risk takers to disrupt the economic system could be tremendously beneficial. Otherwise, the economy and society would remain static. While laws can be necessary to maintain order, they are often too conservative. Once we're in Salzburg for this seminar, let's all remember innovation's Austrian roots.

-Doug Horn

Session 460 Rapporteur

Session 460 on New Models of Intellectual Property - Days 1 & 2 Wrap Up

2008-12-07T21:39:00.006+01:00

Global, Local, Open, and Closed Innovation Systems: How Can These Divergent Paths Merge?

While I will leave the finer points of the debate for the hallways, this blog is designed to serve as a forum to pose key questions, emphasize important takeaways, and advance the dialogue and action on emerging models of intellectual property.

Note: Italicized questions are those of the blogger not the aforementioned presenter. Nonetheless, anyone may use them to his/her intellectual benefit or detriment.

Douglas Graham, executive director of Open Innovation Society, woke us up this morning to the extent of locked up economic value in organizations. To liberate these potentially innovative resources, he proposed an open IT-based platform where innovators, managers, and the public can collaborate in a secure environment.

Open innovation models are less expensive—or even free—compared to closed systems. How does one design an open global, national, and/or corporate system that protects individual innovators as much as our current intellectual property legal regime?

Given that open-source cannot be mandated, how do we tweak our current system to benefit all the divergent players?

Joseph Straus of the Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property, Competition, and Tax Law discussed the need for patents and the benefits that have been accrued by some countries since the World Trade Organization consented to TRIPS (Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights).

Gary Litman from the United States Chamber of Commerce elucidated that intellectual property is essentially the innovator's communication a) to the public that he has something new to share at a price and b) to the government that he/she has the right for that particular innovation not to be violated.

Innovative products may be able to get ‘us’ out from the current financial downturn in contrast to the financial innovations that contributed to the economic crisis. How can future IP legislation promote global cooperation given the existing non-transparency of most innovation systems?

With the costs of complying with IP laws so high, what is the impact of large organizations monopolizing innovation? Are we chiseling away at entrepreneurship in exchange for managing system-wide predictability?

Meanwhile, John Vaughn amplified the possible tensions between the core mission of a university and adhering to and benefiting from intellectual property. He also brought up the contrasting goals of the IT and pharmaceutical sector.

To borrow from the current climate change discourse: Can we have common but differentiated innovation policies for different sectors? For different countries?

The day’s sessions ended with two concrete solutions; one from the Human Genome Project set forth by Tim Hubbard, and the other by Johnson Kong of ip.com. Both advocated for the tremendous net benefits of open access publishing.

Till Tomorrow,
Doug Horn
-Rapporteur

Salzburg on Capitol Hill - Join the Conversation

2008-11-20T09:12:00.014+01:00

Dear Salzburg Friends,

The many thoughtful responses to my 14 November posting - asking Salzburg Fellows to offer advice to President-Elect Obama - were most heartening and provided the perfect preparation for our “Members Only” breakfast briefing this morning on Capitol Hill.

Chairman Howard Berman welcomed members of the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee and key staff, as well as the speakers who represented the recently concluded Salzburg Global Seminar on “The United States in the World: New Strategies of Engagement.” These included:

Timothy E. Wirth (President, United Nations Foundation), François Heisbourg (Special Advisor, Foundation for Strategic Studies, Paris), Edward Mortimer (Senior Vice President, Salzburg Global Seminar), and Carlos Pascual (Vice President and Director of Foreign Policy, Brookings Institution).

We began by screening a short, 5-minute film that presents the diversity of perspective that was offered last week in Austria. The film can be seen here:

Brief statements were then offered by Mortimer, Heisbourg, and Pascual. They outlined very briefly some of the key considerations they believed should be uppermost in the minds of the new Administration, and the appropriate committees of Congress, as they take office in January 2009. Click on the following links to see the summary report from the Salzburg gathering, as well as an executive summary of a new report, “Managing Global Insecurities” which was a key part of the discussions.

Chairman Berman asked the group to address two major questions that would be on the minds of the House Foreign Affairs Committee in the coming months. First, to what degree should Congress and the Administration re-structure the way that foreign assistance is pursued in the coming years?

Second, he asked how the U.S. should try to balance its attention to and use of United Nations versus the pursuit of new mechanisms such as reform of the G-8 to become the G-20 or some such.

I’ve asked Edward Mortimer if he would offer a comment later today on some of the other substantive points raised in Salzburg, in your comments, and at this morning’s meeting. Watch for that later today.

In the meantime, I’d like to ask for your thoughts on Chairman Berman’s questions.

Both from the perspective of the receivers of foreign assistance and from that of those experienced in the supplying of such aid, how might you recommend that the U.S. foreign assistance program be changed by the Obama Administration and the new Congress?

On the second area, who should be at the table when heads of state convene, especially in this time of international economic crisis and when international institutions need reforming to take account of new realities in the world?

I’m hoping we might compile the best of these responses for use in a follow-up communication to the transition team and to members of the House Foreign Affairs and Senate Foreign Relations Committees in Washington.

Thanks in advance for your contributions.

Stephen

Stephen Salyer
President
Salzburg Global Seminar

The United States and the World: New Strategies of Engagement

2008-11-14T20:57:00.002+01:00

From Stephen Salyer, President & Chief Executive Officer, Salzburg Global Seminar

Today in Salzburg an exceptional international cast is gathered to consider “the world’s advice to the newly elected Obama Administration.” Next week, session representatives will brief a “Members-Only Congressional Breakfast” at the U.S. Capitol on the ideas and recommendations flowing from this extraordinary assembly.

It’s an historic time, with people in every part of the world demanding inspired leadership. The Seminar is pleased to be part of this exchange – helping translate world views for the new U.S. Administration, and in turn helping the world understand and make the most of the changes that are underway in Washington.

Earlier today, Sashi Tharoor, former Under Secretary General of the United Nations and columnist for the Times of India, offered his own ideas and then fielded incisive questions and comments from attending fellows from some thirty countries.

We want the Salzburg community more broadly to participate, and I invite you today to join the conversation. Please offer a short reply to one or both of the following questions:

What is the single most important action the new American administration could take that would build its credibility with the world community?

What step(s) can the Seminar take to best serve the world in this urgent moment?

Gideon Rachman's Financial Times Blog -- A Comparison of Real Work

2008-11-13T12:50:00.007+01:00

Gideon Rachman's most recent post on the Financial Times' Blog highlights the on-going Session in Salzburg, Session 458, The US and the World: New Strategies of Engagement, makes some interesting comparisons to Ditchley Park, and ultimately concludes that these kinds of sybaritic events "can be very efficient ways of getting a sense of the debate."

Gideon Rachman's FT Blog

An American Abroad

2008-11-13T12:02:00.001+01:00

This is a fascinating time for a student of American politics to be traveling abroad.

Although it may be hard for many Americans to believe, the response to Barack Obama’s election has been even more enthusiastic in Europe than in the US—where a mere 53% of the electorate voted for the eventual winner. It is tempting to say that the new president is twice as popular here.

News-stands across the Continent have trumpeted these election results, with Obama peering out beneath glowing headlines in every language. “Un President Historique” proclaims the French magazine Le Point. “Der Traum Wird Wahr,” announces Germany’s Die Zeit. And the local newspaper, Salzburger Nachrichten, poses the hopeful question, “Sind wir jetz alle Amerikaner?” I already know the answer: a very senior French analyst I witnessed in Paris the morning after the election, at a breakfast hosted by the International Herald Tribune, greeted one expatriate with a hug: “We can at last say we are all Americans again!”

It is in this remarkable environment that some sixty participants from 26 countries have convened to contemplate what the future of US foreign policy might look like in the new era. And the results have been, appropriately, sobering. To be sure, there is enormous zeal within the global community for the changing face of this new administration. Especially among the Europeans, there is a very strong sense of relief about what some are terming here the end of “the Unipolar moment.” But the closer one looks at the vast array of problems President Obama will inherit, as we have been doing over the last three days, the more cautious one becomes in declaring that this election prefigures peace on Earth and good will toward all men (and women).

At dinner in the Marble Hall on the session’s first night, I found myself seated next to Palestinian spokeswoman, and fellow alum of the University of Virginia, Hanan Ashrawi—to whom I observed, based on my studies of presidential history, that we seem to be experiencing in the political world a lot of irrational exuberance. “And look at what that did to our economies,” she answered with a wry smile. It might be added that she is one of a few people who, for completely understandable reasons, refuses to indulge in flights of fancy about the future path of US efforts abroad.

The purpose of this session is to construct a set of realistic recommendations to present to the Obama administration as it seeks to set a new direction in the world. I expect these will be relatively modest suggestions, and, based on the discussions I have heard, will fully acknowledge the extraordinary constraints the new president will confront as an unexpected financial crisis dominates his early time in office.

There are extraordinarily thorny issues to be worked out with the rest of the world—including agreements on trade, climate change, and questions about security and terrorism. Those issues cannot long be put off, but for right now something as simple as consultation and meaningful dialogue—because of their evident lack in recent years—may suffice. Indeed, perhaps the most hopeful sign here for an American visitor is the extent to which others seem willing to exercise patience with the new US team as it finds its way. They certainly don’t wish to be ignored. But they seem willing to wait their turn to dance, so long as they begin hearing the proper music quickly.

By: Russell Riley, Miller Center of Public Affairs, University of Virginia

The 2008 Summer Festival Experience

2008-11-12T16:50:00.009+01:00

The 2008 Summer Festival took place in July in the midst of the cultural throng that is Salzburg during its International Festspiele.

Having been a faculty member at two SGS seminars, the ‘festivals’ are the perfect way to experience the ethos and sheer brilliance of the Schloss Leopoldskron with family and friends. They also provide an excellent opportunity for anyone who has not had the SGS experience, to meet and make permanent friends with an impressive list of guests from across the world. Like the Seminars, most if not all participants, leave SGS festivals with a feeling of emotional warmth and immense fulfilment of having taken part in an unforgettable experience.

My wife Catriona & I were privileged to be asked back to host the Festival at the Schloss. In the summer of 2007 we had been impressed by the exemplary performance of ex-Salzburg Seminar President Herb Gleason and his wife Nancy hosting the 60th anniversary Summer Festival. They are a hard act to follow. We were lucky, however, to have had some practice when we hosted the first Thanksgiving Festival last November.

The sheer privilege of being invited to ‘host’ was tripled as the 2008 Summer Festival was to be the last for the wonderfully charismatic Kathleen Schendl, who has organised them since their inception. It was also to be the final event of a year in residence by SGS President, Stephen Salyer and his wife Susan Moeller before they moved back to continue their roles from their home in the USA.

SGS Festivals have a theme, but unlike the more purposefully themed seminars, they do not require an output, apart from sheer enjoyment. When Catriona and I were invited by Stephen to host this year’s Summer Festival we agreed that an obvious theme would be one linked to its timing alongside one of the world’s most important artistic events - the Salzburger Festspiele.

The week included two official visits to Festspiele performances. The first to a well reviewed production of Die Zauberflöte (The Magic Flute) conducted by Riccardo Muti and the second, a concert which included a rare performance of Bartok’s Miraculous Mandarin by the Cleveland Orchestra brilliantly conducted by Franz Welser-Möst. Many of the guests also booked up other concerts to attend. We, for instance, went with our newly found friends from Japan to a Lieder recital provided by the tenor Ian Bostridge and the pianist Mitsuko Uchida.

In line with its cultural theme, three talks were timetabled. My contribution was an illustrated talk on ‘classical’ music and world order’. Catriona provided an introduction to The Magic Flute and the erudite Georg Steinitz gave us the ‘inside story’ from his time as the assistant producer of the film The Sound of Music, filmed at the Schloss. You may not be familiar with the term ‘informance’ but we were certainly treated to one, by brothers Günter and Reinhold Wagnleitner in the Great Hall of the Schloss. Whilst Reinhold, a professor at the University of Salzburg, presented the ‘in’formation with a theme of Jazz – the classical music of globalisation, Günter illustrated with a per‘formance’ at the piano. By the way – if you are interested in such things you should read Reinhold’s book ‘Mozart meets Satchmo’.

All festivals are the perfect combination between the pleasure of their ‘theme’ and the enjoyment of the stunning environment that surrounds Salzburg. In August, as well as the very well ‘organised’ trips to Wolfgangsee and the world’s oldest cable car ride up to the Berghotel Predigtstuhl in Bavaria, we had time to simply do our own thing. We don’t have any cable cars where we come from in Cornwall, UK. So we took the opportunity to travel on the dramatic Untersbergbahn to get to the top of the Untersberg which overlooks the Schloss from the other side of its beautiful lake. Catriona, who doesn’t enjoy heights, was very brave and we had lunch at a very nice restaurant at the top with Elizabeth, the wife of deputy director Edward Mortimer. For the next four days unfortunately Catriona could not find her camera. We eventually deduced that she had left it on a rock at the top of the Untersberg. We were amazed that it had been retrieved by a kind mountain trekker and Edward very kindly collected it from the cable car station.

Any events at the Schloss, and especially Festivals, should not be mentioned without reference to the exceptional cuisine and service from the staff. The Venetian Room with its ornate panelling and the marble hall are fully utilised as venues for the consistantly excellent meals.

As with the seminars, the last evening always involves a formal photograph and a concert (organised through links with the Mozarteum Conservatoire) followed by a farewell dinner. The conclusion of the Summer Festival is no exception and formalities began with a recital provided by the Japanese pianist Akiko Okamoto. Her programme concluded with a very special performance of a piece by the Argentinian composer Alberto Ginestera. The farwell dinner was a poignant occasion as, not only was it the last formal event for passing on contact details, it was also the time to formally say, on behalf of all Festival participants past and present, goodbye to the lovely Kathleen. Kathleen, supported by Astrid Koblmüller has been responsible for all the happy memories etched on the brains of all festival participants.

The dinner finished with a rare appearance of head chef Kiesling to accept the thanks of all for such excellent food, Simon for the well chosen wine and Veronica and Reinhold for being such conscientious and friendly waiting staff.

With the formalities over, it was time to let our hair down. With our ‘long-time back’ backgrounds in professional opera Catriona and I had a last few surprises for Kathleen. We were more than ably assisted in our après dinner sing-song by Edward Mortimer. Very appropriately Edward had rewritten the words to ‘I’ll Take You Home Again Kathleen’ and the Papageno/Papagena duet from ‘The Magic Flute’. These never to be repeated versions, with great apologies to the composers (especially Mozart) and writers were ‘performed(?)’, with no rehearsal, by Edward and myself accompanied on the Bösendorfer by Catriona. After talented performances from various Festival participants we all retired to our beds with a week of great memories behind us.

Thanks Kathleen, Astrid, Stephen, Edward and all of the staff at the SGS for yet another superb experience. Welcome to Ian Brown who has taken over the management of future Festivals.

The next is the Thanksgiving Festival and the Christmas Festival – if you have the opportunity they are fully recommended.

Tim German

Obama's Road Map for US Reengagement -- What Can We Expect from the Next US President?

2008-11-10T09:37:00.004+01:00

Session 458, The United States in the World: New Strategies of Engagement, begins today in Salzburg.

This session will bring together foreign policy experts from inside and outside the United States as well as representatives from the public, private, and non-profit sectors, to discuss and develop creative new strategies for US foreign policy. Participants will struggle with the following questions:

How will the US adjust to the growing importance of China, Russia, India, and the EU as major global players?
What will the transatlantic relationship look like in the coming decade?
What strategy will the new administration in Washington adopt to advance democratic values, freedom, civil society and the rule of law internationally?
Will a new modus operandi emerge in relation to the transnational challenges of climate change, pandemics, and terrorism?
What are the prospects for more effective cooperation in the United Nations and other multilateral institutions—particularly between states which, though located in different regions of the world and being at different stages of economic development, share a broad commitment to human rights and democratic values?

Participants will grapple with these and other issues, with a view to drawing up a series of foreign policy recommendations to be shared with the new powers-that-be in Washington and their foreign counterparts.

The speakers include:

Richard Gardner (Co-Chair) - Professor of law and international organization, Columbia Law School; Counsel, Morgan Lewis; former US Ambassador to Italy and Spain, New York
Eva Nowotny (Co-Chair) - Ambassador of Austria to the US, Washington DC
Giuliano Amato - Professor of Law, European University Institute; former Prime-Minister of Italy, Rome
Hanan Ashrawi - Chair of the Executive Committee, Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy, "MIFTAH," and member of the PLC.
Alan Beattie - World Trade Editor, Financial Times, London
William Burke-White - Assistant Professor of Law, University of Pennsylvania Law School, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
David Hannay - Member, House of Lords, Parliament of the United Kingdom, London
François Heisbourg - Director, Fondation pour la Recherche Stratégique, Paris, former Senior Vice President Strategic Development at MATRA-Defense-Espace, Paris
Edward Luce - Bureau Chief, Financial Times Washington Bureau, Washington, DC
Beate Maeder-Metcalf - Head of North America Division, German Foreign Ministry, Berlin
Fumio Matsuo - Journalist and Author, Former Washington Bureau Chief, Kyodo News
Farah Pandith - Senior Advisor to the Assistant Secretary for Europe & Asia, United States Department of State, Washington, D.C
Carlos Pascual - Vice President, Brookings Institution, Washington, DC
Gideon Rachman - Chief Foreign Affairs Editor, Financial Times, London
Özdem Sanberk - Director of the Turkish Economic and Social Studies Foundation, former Ambassador to the UK and the EU, Istanbul
Stephen Stedman - Professor of Political Science and Senior Fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation, Stanford University, Palo Alto
Shashi Tharoor - Chairman, Afras Ventures, Dubai; Former United Nations Under-Secretary General; New York
Wu Jianmin - President, China Foreign Affairs University, Beijing

Attached is a directory and preliminary program.

-- Astrid Koblmüller