40 Years

Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy

at the University of Hamburg 19712000

1974 2007 2003

2002 2009 19991979

2006 1994

1981 2001 1983 1977 1985

1997 IFSH 2008 1998

1984 1989 1995 1973

1986 2005 19751978 1982 1992 1990 2010 1980 1988

2004IFSH 1971-2011 +++ 40 Years +++ Research - Consultancy - Teaching 1976 1993 1972 19961987 1991 2011 Institute for Peace Research and Security Policy at the University of Hamburg Beim Schlump 83, 20144 Hamburg Phone: 0049-40-866 077 0, Fax: 0049-40-866 36 15 e-mail: [email protected] www.ifsh.de Editor: Susanne Bund Translation: MDS Editing and Translation Services, 53343 Wachtberg Production: Druckerei Schierhorn, Gilbertstraße 22, 22767 Hamburg

Hamburg 2011 Reproduction, including excerpts, only with the permission of IFSH. IFSH Contents

The Directors of IFSH since 1971 2

The IFSH 1971 – 2011 3

Disarmament and Arms Control 5

European Security Policy – 40 Years a Topic at the IFSH 11

Leadership Development and Civic Education in the German Armed Forces A Traditional Subject of Research at IFSH 16

Consultancy at the IFSH 21

The Research Programme of the IFSH 25

Internship, Study, Doctorates The Promotion of Junior Researchers at the IFSH 29

IFSH – 40 Years of Public Relations Work 34

IFSH Chronology 38

The Authors 40

1 IFSH The Directors of IFSH since 1971

Egon Bahr, 1984 - 1994 (Photo: Holger Noß)

Count Wolf von Baudissin, 1971 - 1984 (Photo: Baudissin Dokumentationszentrum)

Dieter S. Lutz 1994 - 2003

Reinhard Mutz, 2003 - 2006

Michael Brzoska since 2006

2 IFSH The IFSH 1971 - 2011

It is infinitely easy to argue about whether the world has become a more peaceful place over the last four decades and life in Europe safer. What is indisputable, however, is this: creating more peace and security remains a paramount task of responsible politics. Making a contribution to this through scientific research and teaching, the critical accom- paniment of political decision-making, and the elaboration of alternatives is the aim of our work at the IFSH. Change and continuity mark the work of this Institute in its concern with fundamental current questions of peace and security. There has been a change in world politics, especially in Europe and Germany, marked above all by the end of the Cold War and the division of Europe but also via the subsequent wars in Europe and on its periphery. Yet there has also been a shift in the topography of academic research: while in its early years the IFSH was somewhat isolated because of its location at Falkenstein, its high de- gree of practical orientation and its relative distance from university concerns, it is now – thanks to the establishment of the MPS study course, the increasing networking and acad- emisation and also not least through its move to the university area of Hamburg – an inte- gral part of academic life with all the manifold requirements of legitimation, networking and – above all – competition. The overview of the last four decades of IFSH in the follow- ing chapters illustrates this change using teaching activities and the promotion of junior researchers as examples. These facets of our work have taken on a prominent role for the IFSH over the last decade. The following thematic chapters also offer numerous examples of the changes that have taken place in the research work of the IFSH. But more strongly than this they exhibit continuity: disarmament and arms control, European security policy, leadership devel- opment and civic education within the armed forces, and the role played by armed forces were topics which the very first director of the IFSH, Count Wolf von Baudissin, dealt with. These are still topics dealt with by IFSH, albeit with a different weighting and new ap- proaches, and they are so because they still have high relevance for peace and security poli- cy. Certain examples, such as the nuclear-free world of US President Obama or the war in Afghanistan under German participation, attest to this. This combination of change and continuity is mirrored in the work programme at the IFSH. The current work programme “Trans-nationalization of risks of violence as a challenge to European peace and security policy” stands in the tradition of studying peace and security for and in Europe. At the same time, however, it also gives prominence to an element of current security-policy challenges that has dominated the political agenda Michael Brzoska since 2006 particularly since the attacks of 11 September 2001 but is also very closely linked to the changes caused by economic and social globalisation.

3 IFSH

For years the name IFSH has stood for quality: in consultancy, in the public sphere, and in the media – and now, increasingly, also in academic and research circles. The directors Count Wolf von Baudissin, Egon Bahr and Dieter S. Lutz have all made substantial con- tributions to this, supported by the staff of IFSH, of whom too few are mentioned in the following texts. The good name and reputation that IFSH has established through its hard work over the years are as much an inspiration and obligation to all those working at the Institute as is their work on topics of existential significance. In the next forty years IFSH intends to continue being one of the best addresses in Europe at the interface of peace research and security policy. That is, unless the dream of comprehensive security comes true and our deliberations and research on its conditions and fundamental principles becomes un- necessary.

Hamburg, July 2011 Michael Brzoska

4 IFSH Disarmament and Arms Control As processes through which to strengthen peace and security in international relations, disarmament and arms control pursue the same aims by different means: they are in- tended to lower the probability of war, decrease the extent of destruction and devasta- tion if political attempts to prevent war fail, and reduce the cost of maintaining military security (see boxes: “Disarmament” and “Arms control”).

Disarmament refers to the removal of or reduction in existing stocks of weapons, military equipment and armed forces in negotiated and agreed amounts or to fixed upper limits. Such agreements usually entail reciprocal obligations. However disarmament can also take place unilaterally as an advance gesture and in expectation that the other side follow suit. By contrast, forced disarmament, which the winning side might impose on the party defeated in a war, does not generally count as disarmament.

In order to ensure compliance, disarma- tims of the war made it impossible for them ment agreements are normally accom- to take on the role of accuser, there was not panied by regulations concerning veri- even pressure to try to justify the accumu- fication measures (the exchange of data, lation of military equipment. Measured on-site inspections). Apart from material against the fact that, after the sufferings restrictions on certain armaments, disar- of the First World War and the anti-war mament agreements can also set regional attitude of the masses in the countries that limitations. took part in it, disarmament conferences The fact that disarmament diplomacy took place on an almost permanent basis, did not gain entrance into international their results seem more than modest. Suc- politics until relatively late on was due to cesses, in the relative sense, were mainly the historical link between the state and reserved for humanitarian efforts. These military power on the one hand and, on led among other things to a comprehen- the other, to the fact that those governed sive codification of the international law were excluded from the business of gov- of wars (Hague Conventions on the Laws ernment. What country, what empire and Customs of War on Land 1899), the would ever have reached greatness and ban on war gas and bacteriological weap- renown in any other way than from bat- ons (Geneva Protocol 1925) and a general tlefield to battlefield? War was the proven proscription of war as a means of politics ultima ratio through which to decide ri- (Briand-Kellogg Pact 1928). Nonetheless, val claims between states and not an ille- a further six decades were to pass before a gitimate outrage, and, as long as this un- disarmament agreement – the American- derstanding prevailed, there was no rea- Soviet INF Treaty of 8 December 1987 on son to limit the means of war. And, more- the elimination of intermediate-range over, as long as the impotence of the vic- ballistic missiles equipped with nuclear

5 IFSH weapons in Europe – removed a modern, ing the strategic balance that is an impor- operationally ready weapon of war from tant psychological prerequisite, also for the arsenals at all for the very first time. the political principle of peace-building” (ibid., p. 5). The advantages of arms control Naturally peace is less in danger if it is not dependent on the will to maintain over disarmament it but rather on an inability to break it. The world crises of the early 1960s (Ber- This is where the disarmament postulate lin, Cuba) brought about and/or strength- draws the suggestive nimbus that adheres ened a change in thinking in the discus- to patent remedies. Nonetheless there sions on disarmament. The fixation on the is a real gulf between a system of states immediate reduction in armament levels whose members define their relationships right down to the maximum goal of gen- in terms of competition, rivalry and con- eral and complete disarmament faded into flict and a pacified world community from the background. Its place was taken by a which the means of military violence have modified, more complex approach which disappeared, a gulf which cannot be over- the English-speaking debate among prac- come by the intent to disarm however seri- titioners called “arms control” and Count ously this is intended. The excessive accu- Wolf von Baudissin, the first director of mulation of means of violence is without a IFSH, called “kooperative Rüstungssteu- doubt absurd, unproductive and irrational erung” (KRSt, cooperative arms control). from the point of view of the system as a The best way of putting it is probably: whole; but from the perspective of individ- “Preventing war through strategic stabil- ual members of the system, the same con- ity”. While certain aspects of the armed clusion is not equally compulsory: many forces and armaments which serve securi- nations have their own experiences with ty should remain intact, their capacity to this and these still have their effect on the be a threat should be reduced by way of present. The experiences of the Soviet Un- disarmament intervention measures that ion in the Second World War, to mention encourage transparency and the lowering just one example, implied that the fate in- of costs. Cooperative arms control (KRSt), tended for it by Hitler’s Germany could be von Baudissin hoped, would bring about warded off, and this was done through mil- progress in as far as the realization gained itary means. ground that “the aim of arms control did At the latest by the time armament tech- not lie in taking advantage of the other but nologies rendered killing and destruction only in an increase in security for both”. a process lasting no more than a few mo- (Count Wolf von Baudissin, Grenzen und ments and precluded defence, the value of Möglichkeiten militärischer Bündnissys- historical analogies relativised itself. Since teme, in: Europa-Archiv 1/1970, p. 9.) And the moment when a war conducted with moreover: “Progressive cooperative arms weapons of mass destruction made no al- control will regulate military armaments lowances for the borders of states and al- at an ever lower level without endanger- liances, and winners and losers could no

6 IFSH

Arms control is a collective term for the provisions that are aimed at regulating the international “rambling“ (anarchic) armament process to prevent effects that would be desta- bilising from a security-policy perspective. It likewise uses cooperative means but does not necessary lead to the lowering of current arms stocks. Its traditional in- struments are bans on production, deployment and use, as well as control and inspection agreements. In addition, qualitative arms control tries to prevent the constant modernisation of armaments and the enhancement of the effective char- acteristics of weapons (range, firepower, accuracy, mobility) from eroding the gain in stability once more which has been achieved through quantitative arms limi- tation. Preventive arms control goes even one step further in that it attempts to lessen the risks of the dynamics of military technology already at the phases of the research, development and testing of new weapon systems. longer be distinguished, the differentiation vantages in arms; removal of preemption in matters of preventing violence between and escalation elements from the prevail- the overall interests (of the international ing military strategies; and finally, the reor- system) and the individual interests (of na- ganisation of the structures of armed forces tional societies) has become questionable. to make them more suitable for defence and That which contradicts collective rational- less suitable for attack. This list sounds like ity no longer satisfies the measure of even an excerpt out of the research agenda of individual rationality. IFSH during the first half of its existence. Arms control, albeit without von Baudis- Hopes of demilitarising security ... sin’s alternative proposal for a name which did not take on, constituted a focal point Among the topics that played an important and trademark of the work of the Institute role in the arms control policy agenda of from the very beginning. At the threshold the 1970s and ’80s were the following: pre- to the fifth decade nothing has changed. It cautionary measures against a war by mis- comes as no surprise that, in the wake of take or because of a technical fault; safe- the Founding Director, all directors of the guards against a surprise attack; the con- Institute are in themselves not only advo- ception of confidence- and security-build- cates of this field of research but have also ing measures; sharpening of the analytical enriched and shaped it decisively with their instrumentarium for comparing military own authoritative contributions. forces; rules and processes for the verifi- When with the collapse of the Warsaw cation of agreed arms limitations; models Pact Organisation and the following dis- of geographic arms limitation for regions integration of the Soviet Union the era of with a high intensity of conflict; preven- East-West confrontation ended, it seemed tion of the development of weapons that as if the hour had come for the sweeping could lead to destabilising qualitative ad- demilitarisation of European security.

7 IFSH

References − Wolf Graf von Baudissin/Dieter S. Lutz (eds), Kooperative Rüstungssteuerung – Sicherheitspolitik und Strategische Stabilität, Baden-Baden 1981. − Dieter S. Lutz, Weltkrieg wider Willen? Die Nuklearwaffen in und für Europa, Hamburg 1981. − Dieter Lutz/Erwin Müller (eds), Vertrauensbildende Maßnahmen – Zur Theorie und Praxis einer sicherheitspolitischen Strategie, Baden-Baden 1982. − Erwin Müller/Götz Neuneck (eds), Rüstungsmodernisierung und Rüstung- skontrolle – Neue Technologien, Rüstungsdynamik und Stabilität, Baden-Baden 1992. − Hans-Joachim Gießmann (ed.), Konversion im vereinten Deutschland – Ein Land, zwei Perspektiven?, Baden-Baden 1992. − Wolfgang Zellner, Die Verhandlungen über Konventionelle Streitkräfte in Eu- ropa – Konventionelle Rüstungskontrolle, die neue politische Lage in Europa und die Rolle der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, Baden-Baden 1994. − Götz Neuneck, Die mathematische Modellierung von konventioneller Stabilität und Abrüstung, Baden-Baden 1995. − Götz Neuneck/Reinhard Mutz (eds), Vorbeugende Rüstungskontrolle – Ziele und Aufgaben unter besonderer Berücksichtigung verfahrensmäßiger und in- stitutioneller Umsetzung im Rahmen internationaler Rüstungsregime, Baden- Baden 2000. − Götz Neuneck/Christian Mölling (eds), Die Zukunft der Rüstungskontrolle, Baden-Baden 2005. − Wolfgang Zellner/Hans-Joachim Schmidt/Götz Neuneck (eds), Die Zukunft konventioneller Rüstungskontrolle in Europa, Baden-Baden 2009.

When else if not now was a chink open that issue as early as 1990 and up to the com- offered the chance to replace the bloc-like plete construction plan in 1995. The aim security structure of the continent with a was to eradicate war as a form for inter- security system for Europe as a whole, an- and transnational relationships, at least in chored in international law and legitimat- part of the world. While the resonance in ed democratically according to the princi- professional circles was considerable, the ples of a regional system of collective secu- political sphere rejected the offer of dis- rity. Under the title “Security models for cussions – and this was not necessarily to the 21st century”, the IFSH applied some its advantage as the longstanding tangles effort to drafting the first sketches of the of war in the Balkans were to demonstrate.

8 IFSH

... are followed by disappointments ment, Arms Control and Risk Technolo- after the epochal turnaround gies (IFAR) at IFSH under the leadership of Götz Neuneck. On the one hand, the re- Only part of the expectations and hopes searchers at Hamburg are in contact with that were tied to the epochal international colleagues and decision-makers around political turnaround of 1989/90 have been the globe to discuss the political prereq- fulfilled. One of the greatest disappoint- uisites and consequences of the Obama ments was that the so-called peace divi- initiative; on the other, their project work dend, that is, the easing of national bud- concentrates on research questions that gets from the excessively high financial ex- require to be clarified in advance if the penditures for external security, did not political impetus is not to peter out once materialize. Military expenditures only more: Which effects on nuclear disarma- fell slightly to the middle of the 1990s; ment in Europe are a result of military since then, they have begun to rise again imbalances between NATO and Russia? and in 2009, the latest year for which sta- To what extent can the reduction of tac- tistics are available, reached 1,531 billion tical nuclear weapons in Europe, includ- dollars for armed forces and equipment, ing Germany, take on a pacemaker role? the highest level worldwide ever. Irrespec- Does NATO’s decision to set up a common tive of the necessity to save on military missile defence system in Europe promote budgets, a further rise is to be expected in or detract from the goal of disarmament? the short term. In 2010 more money was spent on military purposes than in 2009, The ultimate goal of eliminating and in 2011 even more will be spent. With the tools of war is not a share of the world population of roughly disarmament but peace 15 per cent, the states politically ascribed to the Western Hemisphere account for Disarmament or arms control – this con- more than 70 per cent of the global arma- troversy is still found in peace research as ment efforts. These dimensions illustrate well. At the heights of the Cold War, the how premature it would be to view disar- concept of arms control saw itself con- mament and arms control as matters of fronted with the accusation that it was declining significance. hindering – or even preventing – disar- The “Global Zero” speech of US Presi- mament: “One main reason for the lack of dent Obama on 5 April 2009 at Hradca- progress in the direction of nuclear disar- ny Castle in Prague lent the whole range mament is the decision of the politicians of topics a vehement momentum. It is at the beginning of the Sixties to abandon not a world without weapons that has the attempts at direct negotiations on gen- moved onto the centre stage of political eral and complete disarmament and in- programmes but a world without nucle- stead to work towards partial measures ar weapons. This stimulus has now had a aimed at arms control” (SIPRI, Rüstung strong effect on the activities of the Inter- und Abrüstung im Atomzeitalter, Ham- disciplinary Research Group on Disarma- burg 1977, p. 331). Quite apart from the

9 IFSH fact that the assertion in this form can nei- ent nations with equal rights as their com- ther be confirmed nor refuted, there are mon requirement for existence and their hardly any empirical points of reference common obligation. that support it. While it is true that all the Good will and committed rhetoric are negotiations on arms control with a view not sufficient for the pursuit of such an to the goal of disarmament proceeded ambitious concept. Just as important are for a long time without results, this was the transcending of inner-societal resist- even much more so the case for the clas- ance and the concentration on goals that sical disarmament conferences. Whether can be carried through politically. This total disarmament really did represent includes the willingness to take the first that end goal, that concrete utopia which step before the last in order to get things steered diplomatic efforts towards success moving instead of dwelling on what can- may equally be doubted. The final goal of not be achieved in the near future: “The disarmament policy cannot be disarma- time and the energy spent on negotiating ment; the final goal of negotiations on partial measures are time and energy de- the equipment of war must be peace. And flected from negotiations on real disarma- here it is obvious that this does not mean ment” (ibid., p. 333). The opposite holds the type of peace that, as has been proved, true: It is the task of academic analysis to leads to radical disarmament – the dic- uncover the requirements and conditions tated peace of the winner after the mili- of conducive strategies and to convey their tary defeat of his opponent. It can only be urgency to the public in an effective way. a question of the peace seen by independ- Reinhard Mutz

Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Mikhail Gorbachev with Egon Bahr during his visit to IFSH in 1992 (Photo: Margret Johannsen)

10 IFSH European Security Policy – 40 Years a Topic at the IFSH Since its founding in 1971, the IFSH can look back at almost unbroken continuity in ad- dressing the basic questions of European security and peace policy as almost no other research institution in Germany. In some phases, the concepts developed were somewhat utopian and visionary, in others realistic and pragmatic – and yet always they not only took account of the dangers of a particular period but also of its opportunities. In gen- eral, four stages can be differentiated in the IFSH’s study of European security, the first three of which were strongly influenced by the personalities of the director at the time – Count Wolf von Baudissin, Egon Bahr and Dieter S. Lutz – while the fourth stage, on the other hand, was steered by research programmes. Cooperative arms control (KRSt) gress in the political field dependent upon Lieutenant General (retd.) Count Wolf military stability. In the words of Dieter S. von Baudissin, the Founding Director of Lutz, the third director of IFSH from 1994 IFSH, held office till 1984. That a high- to 2003, cooperative arms control was a ranking officer presided over a peace re- concept aimed more “at the stabilisation search institute was, at that time, even of the deterrence system than at its disso- more unusual than it would be today. Just lution” (Lutz 1997, p. 36). as unusual for the time were the topics that Count Baudissin introduced to IFSH. On Common security the one hand the concept of “leadership This all changed with the concept of “com- development and civic education with- mon security” (Gemeinsame Sicherheit) in the armed forces (Innere Führung)” which the second Director of the IFSH, which was generally met with great hos- Egon Bahr (1984 to 1994) introduced to tility; the other idea was the notion of stra- the Institute. Bahr was a member of the tegic stability organised together by East famous Palme Commission which pub- and West by means of “cooperative arms lished the “Palme Report” (Palme Re- control” (kooperative Rüstungssteuerung, port, Report of the Independent Commis- KRSt). This was intended to prevent an in- sion on Disarmament and Security Issues, stable system of deterrence based on the Common Security, A Programme for Dis- maintenance of second-strike capability armament London 1982) in 1982. This re- from spiralling into nuclear war – either port basically says: “It is therefore of par- by accident, by unauthorized act, or by amount importance to replace the doc- misperception. In addition, cooperative trine of mutual deterrence. Our alterna- arms control was of outstanding im- tive is common security. There can be no portance for the easing of political con- hope of victory in a nuclear war, the two frontation in Europe: the entanglement of sides would be united in suffering and de- political and military elements made pro- struction. They can survive only together.

11 IFSH

They must achieve security not against the implement politically via the SPD bod- adversary but together with him. Interna- ies and the German Federal Parliament. tional security must rest on a commitment However, this was consultancy in the to joint survival rather than on a threat of narrowest sense of the word and – what mutual destruction” (ibid.). seems problematic today – was mainly Between 1986 and 1991 the researchers addressed to one political party. at IFSH attempted to fill the relatively In the years 1987 to 1991, the IFSH elab- general term “common security” with orated on a number of further aspects of substance. Fundamental to this was the common security: for instance, Volume paper of Reinhard Mutz “Gemeinsame II of 1987 focused among other things Sicherheit. Grundzüge einer Alternative on its legal, economic and psychological zum Abschreckungsfrieden” (Common aspects. Volume III is entirely dedicated security. A general outline of an alter- to discussion of so-called structural in- native to peace by deterrence) of 1986 in ability to attack, at that time the central which he further differentiated the aims, concept of at least the German “alterna- means and supporting institutions of this tive defence strategies” scene. This line of new approach. The results of the further thought is representatively supported by discussions can be found in six volumes no less than 27 authors in Volume III (al- (“Blaue Bände”, Nomos publishers, series: though there is no female author among “Militär, Rüstung, Sicherheit“) published them). Furthermore a substantial lack of together by Egon Bahr and Dieter S. Lutz. internationality is apparent; the discus- This began with clarification of termi- sion primarily takes place among Ger- nology, such as “security partnership” man nationals, quite in contrast to the and “common security” and the location Palme Commission, in which no country of common security in the coordinate was represented twice. Volume IV (1989) system of other central security policy then moves on from structural inability to terms such as “deterrence”, “arms con- attack to structural incapacity to launch trol”, “unilateralism” or “neutrality” (see an attack and hereby uncovers a second Bahr/Lutz (eds) 1986). In this very first shortcoming of the debate, namely a cer- volume, Lutz already gave a comprehen- tain inclination to scholasticism. Band V sive description of the reception of this (1990), completed in the middle of 1989 – new world of thought by the SPD, espe- finally – includes a series of international cially in their security policy commis- contributions to the debate. In summa- sion and the working group “New strate- ry, it can be stated that, despite certain gies” set up in 1982 and headed by Egon deficits, the concept of common security, Bahr (Lutz 1986). With this, a pattern quite predominantly fostered in Germa- was established that was definitive for ny by the IFSH, was one factor essentially the term of office of Egon Bahr as Direc- affecting the German security policy de- tor of IFSH but especially for the period bate in the years up to 1990 and shaped up to 1990: concepts were developed at the programme of the large opposition the IFSH which Bahr then attempted to party SPD substantially.

12 IFSH

References: - Egon Bahr/Dieter S. Lutz (eds), Gemeinsame Sicherheit, Vol. I-VI, Baden-Baden 1986-1990/91. - Unsere Gemeinsame Zukunft – Die Europäische Sicherheitsgemeinschaft (ESG). Teil I des Symposiums über die Perspektiven Europäischer und Globaler Friedens- und Sicherheitspolitik im Rahmen der Veranstaltungen der Freien und Hansestadt zum 50. Jahrestag der Luftangriffe auf Hamburg, Baden-Baden 1994/95. - Unsere Gemeinsame Zukunft – Globale Herausforderungen, Teil II des Sym- posiums über die Perspektiven Europäischer und Globaler Friedens- und Sicherheit- spolitik im Rahmen der Veranstaltungen der Freien und Hansestadt zum 50. Jahre- stag der Luftangriffe auf Hamburg, Baden-Baden 1994/95. - IFSH (ed.), OSZE-Jahrbuch 2009, Baden-Baden 2010. - Ulrich Kühn, Medvedev’s Proposals for a New European Security Order: A Starting Point or the End of the Story? in: Connections, The Quarterly Journal 9:2 (2010), pp. 1-16. - Dieter S. Lutz, Sicherheitspartnerschaft und/oder Gemeinsame Sicherheit? Zur Entstehung und Entwicklung der Begriffe und ihrer Inhalte, in: Egon Bahr/Dieter S. Lutz (eds), Gemeinsame Sicherheit. Idee und Konzept, Vol. I: Zu den Ausgangsüber- legungen, Grundlagen und Strukturmerkmalen Gemeinsamer Sicherheit, Baden- Baden 1986. - Arbeitsschwerpunkt I, Die Suche nach Alternativen: Vom Abschreckungssys- tem zur Kollektiven Sicherheit, in: Das Institut für Friedensforschung und Sicher- heitspolitik an der Universität Hamburg (IFSH), ed. aus Anlaß des 25-jährigen Bestehens des IFSH von Susanne Bund und Anna Kreikemeyer, pp. 35-40. - Reinhard Mutz, Gemeinsame Sicherheit. Grundzüge einer Alternative zum Ab- schreckungsfrieden, Hamburg 1986 (Hamburger Beiträge zur Friedensforschung und Sicherheitspolitik, No. 1). - Wolf Graf von Baudissin/Dieter S. Lutz, Kooperative Rüstungssteuerung in Eu- ropa, Hamburg 1979 (IFSH-Forschungsberichte, No. 11). - Institut für Friedensforschung und Sicherheitspolitik an der Universität Hamburg (IFSH), Die Europäische Sicherheitsgemeinschaft: Das Sicherheitsmodell für das 21. Jahrhundert, Bonn 1995. - Wolfgang Zellner, in Consultation with Alyson Bailes, Victor-Yves Ghebali, Ter- rence Hopmann, Andrei Zagorski, and experts at the Centre for OSCE Research, Managing Change in Europe. Evaluating the OSCE and Its Future Role: Competen- cies, Capabilities, and Missions, Hamburg 2005 (CORE Working Paper 13). - Wolfgang Zellner, in consultation with Pál Dunay, Victor-Yves Ghebali, Terrence Hopmann, Sinikukka Saari, Andrei Zagorski, and experts at the Centre for OSCE Research, Identifying the Cutting Edge: The Future Impact of the OSCE, Hamburg 2008 (CORE Working Paper No. 17).

13 IFSH The European security community realising a security community. Hence it The events of 1989/1990 immediately is not surprising that the point of contact raised the question of what this epochal with the concept of the “pluralistic security rupture would mean for (European) se- community” of Karl Deutsch, which would curity relationships. Egon Bahr’s answer seem obvious at least with regard to termi- to this was the following: “At the IFSH we nology, was – as far as the author knows have asked ourselves what concept should – never mentioned. For Karl Deutsch “the take the place of common security based existence of a pluralistic security commu- on the East-West conflict. We arrived at nity would be tested operationally by the the notion of collective security – strangely absence of systematic advance preparations enough the old idea of the United Nations, for warfare in terms of significant amounts afflicted with the power of veto, the ene- of manpower and resources”1. This means my of collectivity. [...] The consequence of that the members of a security communi- these deliberations was a security commu- ty do not arm against each other because nity in Europe, not afflicted by the power they are so similar from a normative stand- of veto“ (Bahr 1994/95, pp. 19-20). Dieter point that any kind of preparations for war S. Lutz says something similar: “When it is against each other would seem obsolete. thought through consequently, “common Deutsch and others had already shown this security” thus leads to a system of collective for the states of the North Atlantic area at security in the long term. In other words: the end of the 1950s2. But this also makes collective security is already inherent in it clear that the European security com- the logic of the transitory concept of com- munity of IFSH and the pluralistic secu- mon security” (Lutz 1997, p. 37). Accord- rity community of Karl Deutsch have lit- ing to Lutz, the “European security com- tle to do with each other, indeed that they munity” (Europäische Sicherheitsgemein- originate from completely different premis- schaft, ESG) should “specifically stand the es: While, in the final analysis, the Europe- test in the event of conflict” (ibid.). To this an security community wishes to provide extent the European security community regulations for an international decision- concept focuses – perhaps best fleshed out making process about the possible use of in the IFSH study “Die Europäische Sicher- the military, in the concept of Deutsch war, heitsgemeinschaft: Das Sicherheitsmod- and the preparation for it, become obsolete ell für das 21. Jahrhundert (IFSH 1995)” in that the normative prerequisites for this – strongly on the regulation of inter-state have ceased to be applicable. decision-making processes, also and in the last consequence specifically as regards the 1 Deutsch, Karl W., Political Community at the Interna- use of military force. Although itself pri- tional Level. Problems of Definition and Measurement, marily motivated in a prescriptive way, 1970, p. 41. the European security community con- 2 Deutsch, Karl W. et al., Political Community and the North Atlantic Area. International Organization in the cept hardly touches on the normative, in- Light of Historical Experience, New York 1957, reprinted trasocietal and interstate prerequisites for 1969.

14 IFSH

Up to the early 2000s, the European secu- volved – Alyson Bailes, Pál Dunay, Victor- rity community was something of a trade- Yves Ghebali, Terrence Hopman, Sinikuk- mark of the IFSH. However the real effect ka Saari and Andrei Zagorski. Members of of the concept was fairly minor; unlike the Centre for OSCE Research (CORE) at common security, the European security IFSH also took part in the so-called Corfu community did not influence the securi- Process of the OSCE, a series of discussions ty policy discussion in Germany or the de- on European security issues from 2009 to velopment of a party position to any great 2010. This work has been extended, among extent, let alone at the international level. other things, via a series of workshops with the Polish Institute of International Affairs Conclusions (PISM) and the Moscow State Institute of With that, the discussion at IFSH in the International Relations (MGIMO) together 1980s and 1990s about topics of European with the heads of the Permanent Mis- security was to be found under two main sions of Germany, Poland and Russia to headings: “common security” and “the the OSCE. European security community”. After the In retrospect one could say that at IFSH year 2000 however, the attention given to in the 1970s one began to address ques- this field of topics was more sporadic, more tions of European security with the relative- compartmentalized and more strongly fo- ly pragmatic concept of “cooperative arms cussed on the OSCE. Furthermore the dis- control”. In the 1980s and 1990s there then cussion was promoted less by individual followed two normatively motivated large- personalities but was based on the terms scale projects: common security, and the of reference of research programmes as European security community, of which well as on external contracts. In 2005 und the former was distinctly more successful 2007, in preparation for Finland taking than the latter. The current phase can be over the chairmanship of the OSCE, two seen as a return to a policy-orientated ap- reports were compiled for the Finnish For- proach. What can be said in general is this: eign Ministry: “Managing Change in Eu- during its 40-year history, the IFSH has al- rope” (Zellner et al. 2005) and “Identify- ways, and mostly intensively, dealt with the ing the Cutting Edge: The Future Impact of basic questions of European and partially the OSCE” (Zellner et al. 2007) in which a global security. number of well-known researchers were in- Wolfgang Zellner

15 IFSH Leadership Development and Civic Education in the German Armed Forces – A Traditional Subject of Research at IFSH The academic examination of the topic of “leadership development and civic educa- tion” has a long tradition at IFSH. It was in fact there from the very beginning: Professor Count Wolf von Baudissin, Lieutenant General (retd.), the Founding Director of IFSH, was once himself significantly involved in the concept of leadership development and civic education as the “father of leadership development and civic education” during the start-up phase of the Federal German Armed Forces. A decisive reason for this – for those days – completely new concept based on the guiding principle of the “citizen in uniform” were the catastrophic results stemming from the structural contradictions between the military and its socio-political context – a contradiction that had characterized German history over a long period of time. The basic intent of leadership development and civic education was ultimately to overcome this contradiction through the realization of national and social values and norms in the armed forces as well. Leadership development and civic only through substantial improvements in the education and training, informa- education in transition tion and motivation of the soldiers could In large parts of the armed forces, how- a higher military efficiency be achieved – ever, this idea tended to be rejected, or at which was generally seen as necessary spe- least met with incomprehension. Above all cifically at that time. As a result, leadership in the early years, the “traditionalists”, for development and civic education were re- whom the profession of soldier was a pro- duced in the German Armed Forces and fession sui generis, held the upper hand their political milieu to an up-to-date lead- as opposed to the reformers who saw it as ership and motivation concept, even by a profession like any other and as part of their supporters. democratic society as a whole. Von Baud- Yet even in this form, which lagged be- issin himself came to the conclusion at the hind the original intention, the reforms end of the 1960s that the realization of the were only of limited success. Already un- concept of leadership development and der Schmidt’s successor, leadership devel- civic education had failed. opment and civic education experienced A change for the better seemed on the another downturn, one which accelerated horizon during the term-in-office of the after the renewed change of government at first Social Democrat Federal Minister of the beginning of the 1980s. The acceptance Defence, Helmut Schmidt. Certainly the crisis that the Armed Forces became entan- reforms introduced at the time resulted in gled in during the second half of that dec- no little measure from the recognition that ade was due not least to this development. 16 IFSH

Participation of the military in IFSH portant to what extent the concept of lead- 1976-2011 ership development and civic education in Major in General Staff Heinrich Buch, 1976/77 the German Armed Forces was compati- Major in General Staff Erhard Rosenkranz, ble with the partially completely different 1977/78 ideas of allied armies, where harmonisa- Major in General Staff Ernst Lutz, 1979/80 tion was appropriate, and how unwanted Major in General Staff Justus Gräbner, 1980/81 levelling out processes could be avoided. Major in General Staff Heinz-Jürgen Beuter, On the other hand, the gradually devel- 1982 Major in General Staff Heinz-H. Meyer von oping change in the German Armed Forces Thun, 1982 to becoming “an army in action”: the pre- Major in General Staff Bernd Oldewurtel, 1983 vious reformers and convinced advocates Major Franz H. U. Borkenhagen, 1983/84 of leadership development and civic edu- Major in General Staff Dieter Schuster, 1983/84 cation and of the guiding principle of the Major in General Staff Bernd Pröll, 1985 “soldier for peace” were put further on the Frigate captain von Hanneken, 1986 Frigate captain Jörg Owen, 1987 defensive because of the radically changed Major in General Staff Ludger Dünne, 1987/88 circumstances. Major in General Staff Arnold Teicht, 1988 Finally, the transition from a generally Major Roland Kaestner, 1989-1991 compulsory military service to a volunteer Frigate captain Wolfgang Anders, 1991/92 army now also in Germany: in the public Major in General Staff Jörg Barandat, 1992/93 debate on the future form of military ser- Major in General Staff Peter-Michael Zenk, vice, the socio-political aspects very rightly 1993/94 Lieutenant-colonel in General Staff ranked high. Dr Jürgen Groß, 1994-2006 Lieutenant-colonel in General Staff Leadership development and civic Dr Armin Wagner, 2006-2009 Lieutenant-colonel in General Staff education as an institutionalised Dr Johann Schmid, 2010/11 topic of research at IFSH

After the profound upheavals in Europe These developments – ones that can only of the years 1989/91, not only the German be mentioned briefly here – were also security policy and the armed forces in taken into account at IFSH in an institu- general were met by new challenges, but es- tional respect: pecially the concept of leadership develop- – Since the 1970s the IFSH had enjoyed the ment and civic education. Here the follow- privilege of being able to count a delegat- ing aspects were of particular importance: ed officer from the German Armed Forc- On the one hand a new quality of inte- es among its personnel – a rare excep- gration of military leadership structures tion where civil research institutes are within the North Atlantic Treaty Organi- concerned. Over many years, this ar- zation (which had been extended to include rangement of having the “military com- the states of Eastern Europe) and the (like- ponent” at IFSH formed an independent wise expanded) European Union as well: duty station of the Armed Forces imme- With that, the questions became more im- diately subordinated to the Ministry of 17 IFSH

Participants in the Count Baudissin International Fellowship Programme of IFSH (1996–2011) 1. Lieutenant-colonel Jerzy M. Niepsuj, Defence Ministry of the Republic of Poland (1996) 2. Colonel in General Staff Pawel Seydak, Defence Ministry of the Republic of Poland (1996) 3. Colonel in General Staff Alexandr I Buzhan, Defence Ministry of the Republic of Be- larus (1997) 4. Colonel in General Staff Wassilij Kustschow, Defence Ministry of Ukraine (1997) 5. Professor Felix Angelstok, National Defence Academy, Republic of Estonia (1997/98) 6. Colonel in General Staff Lubomir Bulik, Defence Ministry of the Slovak Republic (1998) 7. Major Augustin Vaduva, Defence Ministry of Romania (1998) 8. Colonel in General Staff Nicolaij Chodajkowskij, Defence Ministry of Ukraine (1998) 9. Colonel in General Staff Jaromir Kafka, Defence Ministry of the Czech Republic, (1998/09) 10. Dr Emil Mintchev, Envoy of the Bulgarian Embassy in Germany (1998/1999) 11. Major Cristian Scarlat, Defence Ministry of Romania (1998/1999) 12. Colonel Dr Michail G. Ljoschin, Defence Ministry of the Russian Federation (1999) 13. Colonel in General Staff Štefan Mecar, Defence Ministry of the Slovak Republic (1999/2000) 14. Dr Maria Szabo, National Defence University, Republic of Hungary (2000) 15. Dr Todor Borissov Kobourov, Defence Ministry of the Republic of Bulgaria (2000) 16. Colonel in General Staff Geno Tchipilski, General Staff of the Bulgarian Armed Forces (2000) 17. Colonel in General Staff Alexandr Tkachenko, Defence Ministry of Ukraine, (2000/2001) 18. Peter Wolf, National Defence University, Republic of Hungary (2001) 19. Colonel Miroslav Martoch, Defence Ministry of the Czech Republic (2001) 20. David Aphrasidze, Foreign Policy Research and Analysis Center at the MFA of Georgia (2001) 21. Levente Gajdosci, National Defence Institute, Republic of Hungary (2002) 22. Andreas Saumets, National Defence Academy, Republic of Estonia (2003/04) 23. Stanimira Tschoubatarova, Defence Ministry of the Republic of Bulgaria (2004) 24. Colonel Michail Wlassov, Defence Ministry of Ukraine (2005/06) 25. Colonel Mircea Popa, Defence Ministry of Romania (2005/6) 26. Lieutenant-colonel Zoran Stojkovski, Defence Ministry of Macedonia (2008/09) 27. Colonel Tomislav Galic, Defence Ministry of the Republic of Croatia (2009/10) 28. Major Emir Huskanovic, Defence Ministry of Bosnia-Herzegovina (2010/11)

18 IFSH

Defence which could thus pass on exper- Main research areas in the field tise and recommendations of the IFSH of leadership development and directly to the appropriate departments. civic education – In 1995 the “Count Baudissin Interna- tional Fellowship Programme” was set Gradually, in the said units, a generally up and implemented via funds from more narrow definition of the key points the Volkswagen Foundation and later has evolved within the topic as a whole. the German Armed Forces Associa- What appeared particularly pressing was tion. Within the framework of this pro- an examination of the question of whether gramme, which is headed by Dr Hans- parliamentary control of armed forces, Georg Ehrhart, officers primarily from which under the catchphrase “army in a de- the states of Eastern Europe are to be mocracy” had generally been seen as suf- made familiar with the principles of em- ficiently ensured, had not lost some of its bedding armed forces into a democratic- actual effectivity through increasing op- pluralistic society and the rule of law – erations abroad, and what consequences within the context of European security. should possibly be drawn from this. – Furthermore the then director, Pro- In addition it was seen as necessary to fessor Dieter S. Lutz, initiated the ex- examine the structural anchorage of lead- pert commission “European Security ership development and civic education and the Future of the German Armed in the armed forces in particular as this Forces” made up of researchers, politi- was, after all, the prerequisite for the es- cians and the military in Autumn 1999. tablishment of democratic elements with This commission, whose work was origi- the armed forces. The insufficient “democ- nally only planned to last one year, has in racy in the army” had always been regarded the meantime become a permanent in- as the true deficit within the overall issue. stitution – corresponding to the ongo- Above all, though, the Institute took the ing transformation process of the Ger- lead early on in the debate on conscription man Armed Forces. Leadership develop- and dedicated itself within this framework ment and civic education is one of the to the socio-political aspects; as a result, a focal points of its work. The director of change in the form of military service in the IFSH is always chairman of the com- Germany would certainly have no ill effect mission. on leadership development and civic edu- – Finally, in 2006, the research group cation but rather, on the contrary, would “Democratisation of Armed Forces open up new opportunities for these. (DemoS)” was set up at IFSH. Here re- Finally, in view of the reality of deploy- searchers who have previously worked ment in violent conflict, the IFSH deals for many years in institutions within and with von Baudissin’s classic question of outside the Armed Forces come together how leadership development and civic ed- to work. The research group is headed by ucation and the change in the way wars are Dr Jürgen Groß. conducted interact.

19 IFSH

References - Hans-Georg Ehrhart, Innere Führung und der Wandel des Kriegsbildes, in: Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte 48/2009, pp. 23-29. - Detlef Bald/Hans-Günter Fröhling/Jürgen Groß/Claus v. Rosen (eds), Zurück- gestutzt, sinnentleert, unverstanden: Die Innere Führung der Bundeswehr, Baden- Baden 2008. - Detlef Bald, Die Bundeswehr, Eine kritische Geschichte 1955-2005, München 2005. - Jürgen Groß, Demokratische Streitkräfte, Baden-Baden 2005. - Kommission “Europäische Sicherheit und Zukunft der Bundeswehr“ am IFSH, Demokratie hört nicht am Kasernentor auf. Die Innere Führung in der Bundeswehr muss strukturell verbessert werden, in: Sicherheit und Frieden (S+F) 1/2004, pp. 45-47. - Hans-Georg Ehrhart (ed.), Militär und Gesellschaft im Kontext europäischer Sicher- heit. Wie modern ist das Denken Graf Baudissins im 21. Jahrhundert? Baden-Baden 2001. - Jürgen Groß/Dieter S. Lutz (eds), Wehrpflicht ausgedient, Baden-Baden 1998.

The Future eradicated in any case, is more likely to be Continual processes of change in a demo- successful the larger the number of inde- cratic-pluralistic society make the further pendent institutions there are analysing the development of leadership and civic edu- existing deficits in this sector and looking cation in the German Armed Forces a per- for new and even unconventional solutions. manent task, even in the future; leader- For this reason, the IFSH will continue to ship development and civic education will attempt to make a constructive contribu- never be “finished”. The minimisation of tion in the future as well. the area of tension between democracy and the military, which can never be completely Hans-Georg Ehrhart/Jürgen Groß

Count Wolf von Baudissin during a discussion event in 1977 (Source: Baudissin Dokumentationszentrum)

20 IFSH Consultancy at the IFSH At the beginning of this year in Berlin, at a ceremony of the Max Planck Society, For- mer Federal Chancellor Helmut Schmidt referred both to the “debt of politics“ as well as the “obligation of academic circles to deliver” and their joint responsibility for the further development of humanity in the 21st century. Along with the questions of global warming, globalisation of the economy, regulation of the financial markets, energy and resource issues and the problem of feeding the world, the ex-chancellor also mentioned as the problems of humanity the increasing arms race worldwide, the ever-accumulat- ing power of nuclear destruction, the problem of dual-use technologies, and the refine- ment of conventional weapons. These are core topics at the IFSH, ones that continue to constitute unsolved problems even in the 21st century. Already in its Founding Statute it is stipulated that the IFSH is to dedicate itself to “providing advice to national and international, state and non-state organisations on questions of peace and security pol- icy”. The Institute has fulfilled this mandate throughout the 40 years of its existence – providing consultancy has continuously been an integral part of the work of the IFSH.

Scientifically-based consultancy must ing peace and to international security by be well prepared from a methodologi- means of scientifically based methods and cal point of view, interdisciplinary, ac- data takes first place, with the responsi- cepting of dialogue and, above all, pa- bility to enlarge epistemological and the- tient. Addressees and clients – ministries oretical scientific structures only in sec- and international or non-state organisa- ond place. tions – are demanding; they want precise analyses and concise recommendations. Expertise Texts in which one’s own tentativeness is Consultancy can take many forms. The hidden by linguistic complexity are not most common is doubtless the compila- sought after. tion of short or fairly long studies or re- At the same time, however, the fol- ports such as those continuously produced lowing is also true: good consultancy is by the IFSH. For example, the Centre for only possible if a solid, issue-orientated OSCE-Research (CORE) at IFSH regularly research base exists. In other words, the compiles expert opinions for the OSCE- IFSH can only offer advice on topics that department of the Federal Foreign Office it also actually researches. This observa- (Auswärtiges Amt, AA) but also for oth- tion is likewise fundamental to the rela- er foreign offices. The Interdisciplinary tionship between the contractee and the Research Group on Disarmament, Arms contractor as regards (paid) consultancy. Control and Risk Technologies (IFAR) A solid research base is indispensible if op- at IFSH also frequently works on expert portunistic adaptation to the expectations reports for the Foreign Office in the field of the contractee is to be avoided. The wish of current arms control issues. Among to contribute to questions of consolidat- other clients are, for example, the Office

21 IFSH of Technology Assessment at the German Publications Bundestag (TAB); the DLR, Germany’s A second area concerns academic publica- national research centre for aeronautics tions with immediate practical and advi- and space; and the European Parliament. sory relevance. Here the most important Recently a large-scale study on missile de- activity is the participation of the IFSH in fence was drawn up on behalf of the Ham- the annual “Peace Report” (Friedensgut- burg Academy of the Sciences, the results achten) that is published by the five lead- of which were presented and discussed ing peace research institutes in Germany internationally. The Centre for European and presented to the Federal Press Con- Peace and Security Studies (ZEUS) has ference and relevant parliamentary com- compiled studies among other things for mittees but also in Brussels. A further ex- the OECD, the European Parliament, and ample is the “OSCE Yearbook” which has the Development and Peace Foundation been published in English, German and (SEF). Russian since 1995. However the “Securi- ty Handbook” published by Hans J Giess- Research projects mann is also among them. Moreover the with consultancy components journal “Security and Peace (S+F)”, aimed at enhancing the dialogue between scien- Together with studies compiled for politi- tific circles and practitioners in the fields cal actors, many of the scientific projects of peace research and security policy, also carried out at the IFSH aspire to promot- originates at IFSH. In addition to this the ing political discussion. An example is the “Policy Paper” which is addressed to the project “Piracy and Maritime Terrorism broader public is being circulated as “In- as a Challenge for Maritime Trade Secu- formation on Peace Research and Securi- rity: Indicators, Perceptions and Options ty Policy from Hamburg”, for instance on for Action” (PiraT) that is currently be- piracy off the coast of Somalia, the Mid- ing worked on at ZEUS together with a dle East conflict, or the war in the Cau- number of research partners and practi- casus. tioners. While PiraT is primarily a large- Along with these regular publication se- scale academic project, its approach and ries, numerous other individual publica- associated partners – among others, the tions of IFSH aim at keeping political ac- Association of German Shipowners, the tors informed. One example is the book on Federal Police, and the insurance indus- the future of the Treaty on Conventional try – are strongly orientated to practical Armed Forces in Europe (CFE), edited by application. Correspondingly, the project, Wolfgang Zellner, Hans-Joachim Schmidt which is financed by the Federal Ministry and Götz Neuneck, which was compiled of Education and Research (BMBF) with- in preparation for a large-scale confer- in the framework of the security research ence and presented to the public by the programme of the government, contains a then Minister of State at the Foreign Of- clearly defined consultancy mandate. fice, Gernot Erler.

22 IFSH

Conferences and workshops hearings of parliament (such as those on the topics of Afghanistan, NATO strate- A third field of consultancy is the organ- gies, piracy, arms control, and the deploy- isation of conferences and workshops. ment of the German armed forces in Con- These may be events initiated by IFSH go), of political parties (such as on the fu- offering practitioners a forum for discus- ture of European security or the reform of sion; but they may also be those hosted the armed forces) or of the European Par- together with, or at the behest of, exter- liament. The direct form of transfer also nal contractees. Only a few individual includes IFSH’s membership in a great examples can be mentioned here. Both many advisory committees and expert IFAR as well as CORE regularly con- commissions. The participation of IFSH duct workshops with the relevant de- researchers in delegations of the German partments of the German Foreign Office. Government – for instance, the Non-Pro- Also with the support of the Foreign Of- liferation Treaty Review Conferences in fice, the Pugwash Conference on Science 2005 and 2010 – makes it possible to pass and World Affairs took place in Berlin at on expertise in policy advice directly. The the beginning of July 2011. Over the past indirect transfer to interested circles of years, ZEUS has conducted international the public takes place via numerous in- workshops on Afghanistan in coopera- terviews in the press, radio and television. tion with NATO, Canadian partners and the German Armed Forces Staff College. Education and training Both CORE as well as ZEUS have organ- A fifth area of consultancy is that of educa- ised major conferences jointly with the tion and training. The IFSH runs targeted Protestant Academy Loccum and these practice-orientated, non-academic train- were attended not only by politicians but ing courses closely linked to its research also by representatives of social groups, expertise. The most continuous train- from both at home and abroad. A “small” ing project at IFSH is the Count Baudis- form of workshop are the events in Berlin, sin International Fellowship Programme to which members of parliament, minis- which has been conducted by ZEUS since try officials and other interested parties 1996. Since 2007, CORE has been devel- are invited to the Representation of Ham- oping multi-week training courses for the burg in Berlin. The presentation of impor- diplomats of countries taking over the tant IFSH studies or the discussion of cur- OSCE chairmanship. Such training pro- rent conflicts offer appropriate occasions grammes were carried out in 2007 and for this. 2008 for groups from Kazakhstan and in 2009 for a mixed group from Lithua- Individual advice nia and Kazakhstan. Along with this, the A fourth area of consultancy concerns the staff of IFSH were also involved in a se- transfer of informed expertise by word of ries of summer courses and similar events, mouth either directly or indirectly. IFSH’s frequently located at the interface of aca- expertise is propagated directly at the demic teaching and consultancy. 23 IFSH

The setting up of institutions Consultancy requires humility and pa- tience. A criterion of success cannot be Sixthly, and lastly, the setting up of insti- that the institution being given the advice tutions should be mentioned, an area in immediately adopts the recommendations which IFSH is only active from time to submitted as their own; on the contrary, time. The most important example is the much has been gained if they are taken participation of CORE in the establish- note of and flow into social discourse. ment of the OSCE Academy in Bishkek, Thus the implementation of scientifically Kyrgyzstan. As of 2002, CORE was sig- based knowledge and suggestions can take nificantly involved in designing and set- some time and depends on who in the po- ting up this institute on behalf of the For- litical establishment takes them up, and eign Office. This ranged from the prepa- how. Even if it is often not clear what value ration of a basic concept via the draft of a their words have, the researchers at IFSH MA study course to questions of fundrais- experience again and again that their rec- ing and choice of personnel. After only a ommendations are absorbed by political few years, the Academy was able to func- circles, recently, for instance, the demand tion on its own. CORE is no longer active for the withdrawal of US American tacti- there in an operative way but continues cal nuclear weapons from Europe. to maintain a very good cooperative re- lationship. Hans-Georg Ehrhart, Götz Neuneck Wolfgang Zellner

The foundation of CORE in 2000 at the Town Hall in Hamburg. From left to right: Dieter S. Lutz, Michael Otto, Ortwin Runde, Krista Sager, Federal President Johannes Rau and Mrs Christina Rau (Photo: Margret Johannsen)

24 IFSH The Research Programme of the IFSH Trans-nationalization of Risks of Violence as a Challenge to European Peace and Security Policy The staff of IFSH have been working since 2008 on the issues developed in the course of its research programme “Trans-nationalization of risks of violence as a challenge to European peace and security policy”. Here two central issues play a special role: first- ly, the analysis of transnational social risks of violence that are increasingly gaining in importance; secondly, the programme examines how international organisations can contain these risks using suitable strategies and instruments.

Transnational risks of violence sations effective and efficient in the sense as a challenge of accomplishment of objectives and prob- lem-solving? Which approaches and cri- Among transnational risks of violence teria are appropriate for the evaluation of one finds transborder ethnical conflicts; strategies and instruments? organised crime such as drug dealing, Here, the following considerations are money laundering and trafficking in -hu decisive: These risks of violence have al- man beings; and terrorism/piracy. These tered the challenges faced by European directly endanger peace in Europe when peace and security policy. Individual they become violent, but can also have an nation-states are increasingly unable to indirect effect when they interfere with meet them using only their own means European interests worldwide, such as and under their own responsibility. Deal- those of energy and trade. Risks of vio- ing with them requires transborder coop- lence take on an especially great security- eration and coordination, that is, the de- policy significance when they are accom- velopment and design not only of effec- panied by the threat or use of violence tive forms of international security policy especially against vulnerable facilities of governance but also of ones compatible to highly technical societies. peace. The IFSH examines – with the help The way of dealing with risks of violence of the concept of “security governance” – is examined at IFSH on the basis of three how these aspirations can be taken into research questions: With what strategies account. and instruments and in what fields do in- ternational organisations in particular, Research projects: Terrorism, piracy such as the European Union (EU) and the Organization for Security and Co-opera- and attempts to combat them tion in Europe (OSCE), attempt to fence in Major topics of the practical research work existing and expected transnational risks of the Institute are transnational terror- of violence? To what extent are the corre- ism and piracy. The research is directed sponding actions of international organi- not only to the stocktaking and analysis of

25 IFSH these risks of violence but also to the eval- cles with a platform in the problem area uation of the measures adopted to combat of security of maritime trade. Indicators them. The focus on transnational terror- for the registration of risk perceptions are ism and piracy as regards content is not developed, as well as working towards the least reflected in the third-party funded development of a common interpreta- projects based at IFSH. These projects are tion of risk. The project group strives to- financed by the EU, the German Research wards a comprehensive approach on the Foundation (DFG), and the Federal Min- basis of the security governance concept istry of Education and Research (BMBF). which links political science risk analyses The project “A New Agenda for Euro- and technological security solutions to le- pean Security Economics (EUSECON)”, gal and economic approaches. The aim is supported by the EU, in which IFSH is in- to develop non-military options for ac- volved within a consortium headed by the tion to strengthen the security of mari- German Institute for Economic Research time trade. (DIW), studies various economic aspects Another project that is likewise fi- of security and security precautions in the nanced by the BMBF is the joint project area of combating terrorism and organ- “Terrorism and Radicalization – Indica- ised crime. Here economic aspects have tors for Radicalization and the Impact hardly played a role up to now. of External Factors (TERAS-INDEX). It The DFG project “Justification with deals with the consequences of foreign the same Arguments? – Analyzing Ar- and security policy action on the part of guments in Favour of Restricting Hu- the Federal Republic of Germany. What is man and Civil Rights under the Pretext asked is whether, and to what extent, Ger- of Combating Terrorism in the USA, EU many’s involvement in conflicts outside its and Russia” examines governments’ per- borders has repercussions on Islamist rad- suasive and justification arguments for the icalisation processes at home. Indicators limitation of human and civilian rights are worked out that can point to Islamist when combating terrorism. The aim is to radicalisation processes in Germany and assess whether the arguments which are which open windows of opportunity to invoked by governments for the imple- counteract these. mentation of “extraordinary” measures Outside of these projects, a number of have converged over time. This could wa- further questions are examined in rela- ter down the worldwide validity of human tion to terrorism, for instance, what role and civil rights. the EU and the OSCE play in combating The BMBF-financed joint project “Pira- of terrorism or in what way measures to- cy and Maritime Terrorism as a Challenge wards arms control can contribute to pre- for Maritime Trade Security – Indicators, venting the means of mass destruction Perceptions and Options for Action (Pi- reaching terrorist groups and how the re- raT)” provides representatives from the sults of attacks with “dirty bombs” can be business world, politics and academic cir- overcome.

26 IFSH

Literatur – Michael Brzoska/Axel Krohn (eds), Overcoming Armed Violence in a Complex World, Opladen/Farmington Hills 2009. − Hans-Georg Ehrhart/Martin Kahl (eds), Security Governance in und für Europa – Konzepte, Akteure, Missionen, Baden-Baden 2010. − Martin Kahl (ed.), The Transnationalisation of Risks of Violence, Baden-Baden 2011. − Kerstin Petretto, Somalia: Ein sicherer Hafen für Piraten und Terroristen?, in: Josef Braml/Thomas Risse/Eberhard Sandscheider (eds), Einsatz für den Frieden. Sicher- heit und Entwicklung in Räumen begrenzter Staatlichkeit. Jahrbuch Internationale Politik, Band 28, München 2010, pp. 162-167. − Matenia Sirseloudi, Radikalisierungsprozesse in der Diaspora, in: Radikalisierung von europäischen Muslimen: Zwei Erklärungsansätze. Aus Politik und Zeit- geschichte (APuZ) 44/2010, pp. 39-43.

Research concept: nation of the actions of (more or less) au- Security governance tonomous state and non-state actors in ar- eas relevant to security. The goal of the co- From a conceptional viewpoint and ordination is to ensure the security of the within this research programme, the actors involved and/or of third parties on staff of IFSH are attempting to develop the basis of common norms, values, and/ a framework for modern policy analysis or interests. The focus lies on the princi- using the overall concept of security gov- ples, structures, mechanisms, instruments ernance in which state and non-state ac- and effects of this coordination of action tors can be viewed together. The concept and on the question of whether these new accommodates for the trend that numer- forms of policy put actors in a better po- ous and often entangled levels of action sition to react to the new challenges and and actors make it increasingly more dif- changed conditions in a flexible and effec- ficult to counter peace and security poli- tive way or not. cy challenges alone. In practice, complex In analysing governance, it is of espe- structures of supranational governance cial importance for the IFSH that peace, in involving different types of actors and re- respect to the forms of conflict most fre- lying increasingly on coordination within quently seen today, can only be brought network structures have already evolved about and maintained if sustainable, co- as a reaction. The governance approach operative, non-violent relations can be es- attempts to grasp and analyse these new tablished between the different types of forms of governance. actor at the various different levels (sub- At IFSH, security governance is under- state, state, international). The challenge stood in the wider meaning of the term is to further develop and refine the con- as a non-hierarchical concept of coordi- cept of governance in connection with in-

27 IFSH sights from other cultural studies, the hu- ences as to how peace policy challenges manities and social sciences. In the sense can be overcome jointly by all the actors of a practical peace-oriented science, such involved. an approach provides points of refer- Martin Kahl

Workshop “Ways out of violence” in February 2011 at IFSH

28 IFSH Internship, Study, Doctorates – The Promotion of Junior Researchers at the IFSH

Excellent research, like that carried out at the IFSH, also depends on the promotion of junior researchers. This was already set out for the IFSH in its Statute. The IFSH was to devote itself to “promoting new generations of researchers through teaching in coop- eration with the University of Hamburg and other suitable educational institutions”. Many of the researchers now active at the IFSH have themselves taken advantage of this form of support. Without this close common development, the IFSH would not be in the same strong position it is today. Essentially the promotion of junior researchers at IFSH is based on four instruments: doctoral students receive extensive support; interns gain an intensive insight into the practicalities of peace research; student assistants and trainees contribute with their work to the success of IFSH; and the students of the “Master of Peace and Security Stud- ies” and other courses at the University of Hamburg are given an excellent training. The IFSH attempts to ensure a high proportion of women in all four groups.

Student assistants and junior Michael Brzoska. Support for doctoral researchers students was given a boost in 2002 when the German Foundation for Peace Re- The Institute has been engaging student as- search (DSF) agreed to support the IFSH sistants who take on a wide variety of tasks Doctoral Programme over a period of five for a long time now. This enables them to years with scholarships and travel/non- gain insight into the practical aspects of monetary resources. Over the last years, scientific research at a research institute roughly 20 doctoral candidates have been even during their studies and to accumu- supported on average per year. These can- late important professional experience didates received scholarships among oth- in the field of peace research. Projects -fi ers from various political foundations or nanced by third-party funds for instance, the German Academic Exchange Service also provide junior researchers with a first (DAAD) or were involved in projects fi- practical field of activity. nanced by third parties. At the IFSH they do not only find a stimulating and open Doctoral students working environment but direct guidance From the very beginning the IFSH devoted from the IFSH’s experienced researchers. itself to supporting doctoral students. Af- With their work, these doctoral students ter individual support in the early stages, leave their mark on the profile of the IFSH the IFSH Doctoral Programme was set and are, in that, indispensable. Roughly up in 1999 for all those working on their 50 doctorates have been completed since doctorate at IFSH. Up to 2006 this was 1993. Apart from Germany, they came headed by Erwin Müller and as of 2007 and come from such differing countries as

29 IFSH

Georgia, Russia, Kazakhstan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Kosovo, France and the People’s Republic of China and spent either part or the whole of their doctoral period at IFSH. Interns Since 1990, more than 360 interns from at home and abroad have completed an in- ternship of at least six weeks at the IFSH. They are an important help in all areas of work at the IFSH. An internship at the IFSH means participation in research and an intensive exchange of ideas. The de- mand for internships at the IFSH is high and unfortunately not all wishes can be work in the fields of peace research and met. The IFSH is recommended not only security policy. by former interns but also by lecturers as a Thanks to the financial stimulus from place to undertake an internship (for pre- the German Foundation for Peace Re- requisites for application, see: http://www. search (DFS) for the first five years, it was ifsh.de/IFSH_english/studium/mps.htm). possible to start up the course of study as the first of its kind in Germany in the The “Master of Peace and Security Winter Term 2002/03. In 2006, the MPS Studies“ degree course was initially accredited to 2011; the prep- The degree course “Master of Peace and arations for re-accreditation have already Security Studies – MPS” at the IFSH has begun. constituted a milestone in the promotion The content of the degree course re- of junior researchers since 2002. The MPS volves around disciplinary, transdiscipli- can boast an impressive success story and nary, interdisciplinary and practically- has clearly made its mark on the IFSH based approaches along with analysis of both internally and to the outside world. peace research and security policy. In the The IFSH runs this degree course in coop- first semester, these topics are taught and eration with the University of Hamburg dealt with in six modules: and – by now – 16 cooperation partners • international peace and security pol- (see box). IFSH is in charge of the study icy, path and academic coordination. Behind the considerable effort put into organising • international law of peace and armed the course and the seminars lies the firm conflict, intention of preparing academics well for • the sciences and peace, their activities in research and practical • ethics and peace,

30 IFSH

• economic globalisation and conflict, nia, Tadzhikistan, Ukraine, the United • an interdisciplinary cross-sectional Kingdom, the USA, Uzbekistan, and Ven- module. ezuela. Those graduating from this course gain Here students benefit from small study access to fields of activity relevant to peace groups. Excursions offer further insights policy both in research circles and in prac- (usually to Berlin, Vienna, Brussels or tice. Almost a third undertake their doc- Strasbourg and South-Eastern Europe). torates in a spectrum of topics ranging Graduates taking part in the course can from the evaluation of international op- participate among other things in the erations in Afghanistan to climate change building up of the “Academic Network and security. About 70 per cent of grad- South-Eastern Europe”, funded by the uates manage to integrate themselves DAAD. quickly into thematically relevant fields One strength of the degree course is of work. They are now working at univer- the transferring of the experiences gained sities and research institutes, for the gov- through practical research into teaching: ernment or parliament, for international the Cooperation Network Peace Research organisations (e.g. OSCE, EU, UN, NATO) and Security Policy (Kooperationsver- or NGOs (e.g. Doctors Without Borders), bund Friedensforschung und Sicherheit- local reconciliation projects (as in Ire- spolitik, KoFrieS) provides lecturers avail- land, Israel or Congo), for industry or the able for teaching during the first semester media. They are valuable contacts for the and houses students during their research IFSH and its students and give talks at the phase in the second semester. Institute from time to time reporting on The MPS students have a marked effect their work in the field or their research. on the everyday life of the Institute with Information on the requirements for ap- their keenness to learn, their expectations plication can be found on our website at and their dedication. MPS is an interna- http://www.ifsh.de/IFSH_english/ studi- tional course, taught and with examina- um/mps.htm. tions in German and English. By 2011 it Along with the MPS study course, the had been attended by students from the University of Hamburg and the IFSH have following countries: Albania, Argentina, also been cooperating on the European Austria, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, Bosnia Master’s degree course “Human Rights and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Chile, and Democratisation” (EMA) since 2002. the People’s Republic of China, Croa- The IFSH carries out the administrative tia, Germany, Finland, France, Georgia, duties for the university as well as the Greece, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, teaching and tutoring responsibilities in Japan, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Latvia, Lux- the topical field “Democratisation/OSCE”. embourg, Macedonia, Moldova, Mon- Moreover the IFSH has been involved in tenegro, the Netherlands, Palestine, Po- the subsidiary study course “Eastern Eu- land, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Sweden, ropean Studies” at the University of Ham- Switzerland, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Slove- burg since 1997.

31 IFSH

Cooperation Network Peace Research and Security Policy (Kooperationsverbund Friedensforschung und Sicherheitspolitik, KoFrieS) – The IFSH with its three working areas: Centre for European Peace and Security Stud- ies (ZEUS), Centre for OSCE-Research (CORE) and the Interdisciplinary Research Group on Disarmament, Arms Control and Risk Technologies (IFAR) – MPS Alumni and Friends Association – Four faculties of the University of Hamburg (business, economics and social sci- ences; humanities; mathematics, informatics and natural sciences; law) – Berghof Conflict Research (BCR), Berlin – Institute for International Law of Peace and Armed Conflict, Ruhr University Bo- chum (IFHV) – Center for International Peace Operations (ZIF), Berlin – Peace Research Institute Frankfurt (HSFK) – German Armed Forces Staff College (FüAk), Hamburg – Institute for Development and Peace (INEF) at the University of Duisburg-Essen – Institute for Theology and Peace, Hamburg – Bonn International Center for Conversion (BICC) – European Centre for Minority Issues (ECMI), Flensburg – Protestant Institute for Interdisciplinary Research (FEST), Heidelberg – German Institute of Global and Area Studies, Hamburg (GIGA); – International Institute for Politics and Economics, Haus Rissen, Hamburg – Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker–Centre for Science and Peace Research (ZNF), Hamburg – Institute for Political Science at the Helmut Schmidt University – University of the Federal Armed Forces, Hamburg Statistical data of the students*

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total -03 -04 -05 -06 -07 -08 -09 -10 -11 Total number of graduates 22 26 20 21 24 26 25 28 - 192 Quota of women among graduates 55 58 50 67 58 62 60 64 72 61 Quota of foreign nationals among 27 58 55 52 42 42 36 54 40 45 graduates * These data were compiled by Eckhard Schlopsna. All data from the academic year 2010-11 refer to students and not to course graduates. 32 IFSH

Good support for young researchers is contribute effectively to a consequent se- not only in the well-understood interest curity policy compatible with peace. The of the Institute itself; promoting the next IFSH must and will continue its efforts in generation of researchers is the prerequi- this respect. site for solid research and only this can Patricia Schneider

MPS students on the Berlin excursion with Federal President Christian Wulff in October 2010

33 IFSH IFSH – 40 Years of Public Relations Work How does one project something as abstract, as difficult to measure as peace research to the outside? One cannot even offer “peace” but often only small mosaic pieces indicating how things could be done a little less violently, or insights into the reasons why people have resorted to the use of weapons once again somewhere in the world. Interest in the expertise of IFSH has in- any more now so the Institute can close.” deed been somewhat cyclical over the last Such and similar remarks were frequently 40 years: While during the Cold War in to be heard in 1990 under the prevailing the face of nuclear deterrence, two high- euphoria of the time. Peace seemed with- ly armed blocs, efforts under these condi- in grasp; peace research was now super- tions to maintain a minimum of securi- fluous. ty, and the definitely controversial debate about the right path to reach this goal, The media there had been times when the young dis- The rude – and swift – awakening came cipline “peace research” had been in de- with the Gulf War and the bloody disin- mand publicly (for example, the Peace tegration of Yugoslavia. Movement at the time of the debate on the At the beginning of the 1990s the IFSH NATO-double-track decision at the end of was “in business” again. One of the para- the 1970s and the beginning of the 1980s doxes of the trade is that public demand liked to base itself on peace research), the for explanations and clarification from popularity of the discipline initially reced- peace researchers does not boom when ed considerably after the end of the East- things are relatively quiet but when war West confrontation. “We don’t need you and violence make new ground. These

Interviews of IFSH staff 9/11 600 Kosovo Iraq 500 Afghanistan 400 300 200 100 0 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012

34 IFSH swings in demand from the media for kans from 1991 to 1995, the war in Kos- IFSH’s expertise that, among others, the ovo in 1999, and 9/11 have created, illus- Iraq war, the violent conflicts in the Bal- trate this.

Selected publications Dieter S. Lutz, Weltkrieg wider Willen? Die Nuklearwaffen in und für Europa. Ein Bei- trag zur Diskussion um den Nachrüstungsbeschluß, Reinbek bei Hamburg 1981. Wolf Graf Baudissin/Dieter S. Lutz (eds), Kooperative Rüstungssteuerung. Sicherheit- spolitik und Strategische Stabilität, Baden-Baden 1981. Wolf Graf Baudissin/Dieter S. Lutz (eds), Konflikte, Krisen, Kriegsverhütung. Fragen, Analysen, Perspektiven, Baden-Baden 1981. Dieter S. Lutz (ed.), Kollektive Sicherheit in und für Europa – Eine Alternative? Bei- träge zur Utopie und Umsetzung einer neuen Friedens- und Sicherheitsprogramma- tik - Pro und Contra, Baden-Baden 1985. Egon Bahr/Dieter S. Lutz (eds), Gemeinsame Sicherheit Bd. I: Idee und Konzept. Zu den Ausgangsüberlegungen, Grundlagen und Strukturmerkmalen Gemeinsamer Si- cherheit, Baden-Baden 1986. Institut für Friedensforschung und Sicherheitspolitik an der Universität Ham- burg (IFSH), Die Europäische Sicherheitsgemeinschaft. Das Sicherheitsmodell für das 21. Jahrhundert, Bonn 1995. Dieter S. Lutz (ed.), Der Krieg im Kosovo und das Versagen der Politik. Beiträge aus dem IFSH, Baden-Baden 2000. Götz Neuneck/Reinhard Mutz (eds), Vorbeugende Rüstungskontrolle - Ziele und Aufgaben unter besonderer Berücksichtigung verfahrensmäßiger und institutionel- ler Umsetzung im Rahmen internationaler Rüstungsregime, Baden-Baden 2000. Michael Brzoska/Axel Krohn (eds), Overcoming Armed Violence in a Complex World, Opladen/Farmington Hills 2009. Michael Brzoska/George Lopez (eds), Putting Teeth in the Tiger: Improving the Ef- fectiveness of Arms Embargoes, Bingley 2009. Friedensgutachten, published by IFSH, HSFK, FEST, BICC, INEF, Münster/Berlin (has appeared annually since 1987). Institut für Friedensforschung und Sicherheitspolitik an der Universität Ham- burg/IFSH (ed.), OSZE-Jahrbuch. Jahrbuch zur Organisation für Sicherheit und Frieden (OSZE), Baden-Baden (has appeared annually since 1995).

35 IFSH

Publications All of the Institute’s own publications are distributed by email and are available The provision of expertise for the media – for downloading free of charge via our in form of background information, own homepage (http://www.ifsh.de/IFSH_eng- papers or as an interview partner – only lish/publikationen/pub_start.htm). Under represents a part of the PR work of the In- the heading “Statements and Opinions” stitute however: wide scope is given to the (http://www.ifsh.de/IFSH_php/akt_stel- publication of research results. lungnahmen_eng.php) are short commen- The Statute of IFSH specifically includes taries on current events. Regular informa- “stocktaking of and ongoing orientation tion on conferences, lectures, new publica- on security and peace policy topics in lec- tions and public events can be found un- tures, newspaper and journal articles, con- der the heading “News”. tributions to radio and television, and via own publication media” in the tasks to be Communication und guests undertaken by the Institute. There have been more than 4,500 publi- However the results of the Institute’s work cations at IFSH since it was set up in 1971: are not only presented in written form: monographs, contributions to academic from the very beginning the Institute has books and journals, reports, policy pa- also made an effort to communicate the pers, brochures and online publications. results of its research work to both pro- The Institute sustains two series, com- fessional circles and the interested pub- piled in-house: the “Hamburger Beiträge” lic within the framework of conferences, and the “Hamburger Informationen”, and lectures, and discussion fora and groups. a newsletter, “IFSH aktuell”, which ap- Here one ought to mention the IFSH Spon- pears every two months. In addition to soring Association which has supported this, the IFSH has been a joint publisher the promotion of junior researchers and of the annual “Peace Report” (Friedens- events at the Institute since the associa- gutachten) since its first issue in 1987; tion was founded in 1997. part of the contributions published there- Year after year the IFSH receives a large in regularly come from IFSH. The OSCE number of visitors from both at home and Yearbook has been appearing since 1995 abroad. The Institute is especially proud of in German, English and Russian and is the visit of two Nobel Peace Prize Laure- similarly published and edited by IFSH. ates: in 1990 the former President of Cos- Along with this the editing of the journal ta Rica, Oscar Arias Sanchez, visited the “S+F. Sicherheit und Frieden/Security and Institute and gave a talk on the Central Peace”, of the Nomos publishing house American Peace Plan that he had created. takes place at the IFSH. Michael Brzoska The former President of the Soviet Un- is the editor of the academic book series ion, Mikhail Gorbachev, visited the IFSH “Demokratie, Sicherheit, Frieden” (De- in 1992 for a working meeting. Further mocracy, Security, Peace), likewise pub- highlights were the visits of three Fed- lished by Nomos. eral Presidents who accepted the invita-

36 IFSH tion of the Institute to give the main ad- Prospects for the future dress within the framework of large-scale In over 40 years, the Institute has worked events: in December 1993, Dr Richard von on a wide palette of topics within the Weizsäcker spoke on the occasion of the framework of its statute, among them arms symposium “Our Common Future”; Pro- control and disarmament; leadership de- fessor Roman Herzog gave a lecture on velopment and civic education within the “Peace Policy and International Jurisdic- armed forces; common and collective se- tion” at the Town Hall of Hamburg in 1996 curity; civilisation of conflict; and contain- within the framework of the celebrations ment of transnational risks of violence. De- for the 25-year anniversary of the found- spite all changes over the last decades the ing of the IFSH; and Federal President Jo- said topics remain up-to-date. It is not to hannes Rau opened the Centre for OSCE be expected that the roughly 50 employees Research (CORE) in 2000. of the Institute will be out-of-work in the near future. Susanne Bund

A lecture by former Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany Helmut Schmidt at the University of Ham- burg within the framework of the IFSH lecture series “Science and Practice in Dialogue” in 1997 (Photo: Margret Johannsen)

37 IFSH IFSH Chronology

1971 Founding of the IFSH. Count Wolf von Baudissin becomes the first director. 1975 Constitutive meeting of the Advisory Board. 1976 First dialogue conference of IFSH with members of parliament of all fractions, academics, representatives of the planning staff of the German Foreign Office and the Federal Ministry of Defence and journalists. Subject: “The problems of the mutual links of Western security policy and economic cooperation after the CSCE”. 1979 The first issue of the series “Militär, Rüstung, Sicherheit” (The military, arma- ments, security) (since 1992 “Demokratie, Sicherheit, Frieden” (Democracy, Se- curity, Peace) ) is published at the Nomos publishing house, Baden-Baden. 1981 The IFSH hosts the 37th Pugwash Symposium on confidence-building measures. 1983 Dieter S. Lutz founds the quarterly journal “S+F. Sicherheit und Frieden/Securi- ty and Peace”. 1984 Egon Bahr becomes Director of the IFSH. 1987 The “Peace Report” (Friedensgutachten) appears for the first time, [editors: Egon Bahr (IFSH), Gert Krell (HSFK) and Klaus von Schubert (FEST).] 1989 “Hamburger Generalstreffen”. Representatives of the Federal German Armed Forces and the National People’s Army (GDR) come together for the first time at IFSH to exchange views. 1989 East-West Workshop on Common Security in Hamburg, Berlin and Dresden. 1990 The Nobel Peace Prize Laureate and former President of Costa Rica, Oscar Arias Sanchez, visits the IFSH. 1992 Nobel Peace Prize Laureate Mikhail Gorbachev visits the IFSH. 1993 The IFSH hosts the International Symposium “Our Common Future – 1943- 1993-2043”. Federal President Richard von Weizsäcker opens the conference at the Town Hall in Hamburg by giving a ceremonial address. 1994 Dieter S. Lutz becomes Director of the IFSH. 1995 Symposium “20 Years after Helsinki – The OSCE and European Security Policy in Transition”. The OSCE yearbook appears for the first time.

38 IFSH

1996 Federal President Roman Herzog gives a lecture at the Hamburg Town Hall on the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the IFSH. 1996 The Count Baudissin International Fellowship Programme takes up its work with the financial support of the Volkswagen Foundation. 2000 The Centre for OSCE Research (CORE) is set up in a ceremonial address by the Federal President Johannes Rau followed by an international conference at the Town Hall in Hamburg. 2002 The MA study course “Peace and Security Studies” commences. 2002 The IFSH adopts the work programme “Civilisation of conflict”. 2003 The Centre for European Peace and Security Studies (ZEUS) and the Interdisci- plinary Research Group on Arms Control, Disarmament and Risk Technologies (IFAR) are set up. 2006 Michael Brzoska becomes Director. 2006 The Centre for Science and Peace Research (ZNF), supported by six faculties of the University of Hamburg and the IFSH, commences its work. 2006 The IFSH and the Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences of the University of Hamburg conclude a cooperation contract with the East China Normal University in Shanghai. 2007 The IFSH along with three further institutes move into the building “Beim Schlump 83” near the university. The building is ceremonially opened by the First Mayor Ole von Beust. 2007 The IFSH is a partner in the excellence cluster “Integrated Climate System Anal- ysis and Prediction” of the University of Hamburg in the research field climate change and security. 2008 The IFSH adopts a new work programme “Trans-nationalization of risks of vio- lence as a challenge to European peace and security policy”. 2009 The IFSH and the University of Hamburg negotiate a cooperation agreement.

39 IFSH The Authors

Professor Michael Brzoska, Academic Director of the IFSH Susanne Bund, Public Relations Officer at the IFSH Dr Hans-Georg Ehrhart, Head of ZEUS at the IFSH Dr Jürgen Groß, Military Component 1994-2006 Dr Martin Kahl, Senior Researcher at the IFSH Dr Reinhard Mutz, Acting Director of the IFSH 2003-2006 Professor Götz Neuneck, Deputy-Director of the IFSH Dr Patricia Schneider, Senior Researcher at the IFSH Dr Wolfgang Zellner, Deputy-Director of the IFSH

The staff of IFSH, July 2011

40