DOCSLIB.ORG

Georgia 2008, Ukraine 2014: Is Moldova Next?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Georgia 2008, Ukraine 2014: Is Moldova Next? 113th CONGRESS Printed for the use of the 2d Session Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe GEORGIA 2008, UKRAINE 2014: IS MOLDOVA NEXT? MAY 6, 2014 Briefing of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe Washington: 2015 VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:09 Sep 02, 2015 Jkt 095593 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 3190 Sfmt 3190 E:\HR\OC\A593.XXX A593 SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING g:\graphics\CSCE.eps Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe 234 Ford House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 202–225–1901 [email protected] http://www.csce.gov Legislative Branch Commissioners SENATE HOUSE BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, MARYLAND, CHRISTOPHER SMITH, NEW JERSEY, Chairman Co-Chairman SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, RHODE ISLAND JOSEPH PITTS, PENNSYLVANIA TOM UDALL, NEW MEXICO ROBERT ADERHOLT, ALABAMA JEANNE SHAHEEN, NEW HAMPSHIRE PHIL GINGREY, GEORGIA RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, CONNECTICUT MICHAEL BURGESS, TEXAS ROGER WICKER, MISSISSIPPI ALCEE HASTINGS, FLORIDA SAXBY CHAMBLISS, GEORGIA LOUISE MCINTOSH SLAUGHTER, JOHN BOOZMAN, ARKANSAS NEW YORK MIKE MCINTYRE, NORTH CAROLINA STEVE COHEN, TENNESSEE (II) VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:09 Sep 02, 2015 Jkt 095593 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 3190 Sfmt 3190 E:\HR\OC\A593.XXX A593 SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING ABOUT THE ORGANIZATION FOR SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE The Helsinki process, formally titled the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, traces its origin to the signing of the Helsinki Final Act in Finland on August 1, 1975, by the leaders of 33 European countries, the United States and Canada. As of January 1, 1995, the Helsinki process was renamed the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). The membership of the OSCE has expanded to 56 partici- pating States, reflecting the breakup of the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia, and Yugoslavia. The OSCE Secretariat is in Vienna, Austria, where weekly meetings of the partici- pating States’ permanent representatives are held. In addition, specialized seminars and meetings are convened in various locations. Periodic consultations are held among Senior Officials, Ministers and Heads of State or Government. Although the OSCE continues to engage in standard setting in the fields of military security, economic and environmental cooperation, and human rights and humanitarian concerns, the Organization is primarily focused on initiatives designed to prevent, manage and resolve conflict within and among the participating States. The Organization deploys numerous missions and field activities located in Southeastern and Eastern Europe, the Caucasus, and Central Asia. The website of the OSCE is: <www.osce.org>. ABOUT THE COMMISSION ON SECURITY AND COOPERATION IN EUROPE The Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, also known as the Helsinki Commission, is a U.S. Government agency created in 1976 to monitor and encourage compliance by the participating States with their OSCE commitments, with a particular emphasis on human rights. The Commission consists of nine members from the United States Senate, nine mem- bers from the House of Representatives, and one member each from the Departments of State, Defense and Commerce. The positions of Chair and Co-Chair rotate between the Senate and House every two years, when a new Congress convenes. A professional staff assists the Commissioners in their work. In fulfilling its mandate, the Commission gathers and disseminates relevant informa- tion to the U.S. Congress and the public by convening hearings, issuing reports that reflect the views of Members of the Commission and/or its staff, and providing details about the activities of the Helsinki process and developments in OSCE participating States. The Commission also contributes to the formulation and execution of U.S. policy regarding the OSCE, including through Member and staff participation on U.S. Delega- tions to OSCE meetings. Members of the Commission have regular contact with parliamentarians, government officials, representatives of non-governmental organiza- tions, and private individuals from participating States. The website of the Commission is: <www.csce.gov>. (III) VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:09 Sep 02, 2015 Jkt 095593 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 3190 Sfmt 3190 E:\HR\OC\A593.XXX A593 SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING GEORGIA 2008, UKRAINE 2014: IS MOLDOVA NEXT? —————— MAY 6, 2014 WITNESSES Page Eugen Carpov, Deputy Prime Minister of Moldova, Minister for Reintegration ..................... 2 Paul Goble, Specialist on Ethnic and Religious questions in Eurasia, Editor of ‘‘Window on Eurasia’’ ................................................................................................................................ 6 Stephen Blank, Senior Fellow, American Foreign Policy Council ............................................ 10 PARTICIPANT David Killion, Chief of Staff, Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe ............... 1 (IV) VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:09 Sep 02, 2015 Jkt 095593 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 3190 Sfmt 3190 E:\HR\OC\A593.XXX A593 SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING GEORGIA 2008, UKRAINE 2014: IS MOLDOVA NEXT? —————— May 6, 2014 Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe Washington, DC The briefing was held from 12:03 to 1:34 p.m. EDT in 268, North Congressional Meet- ing Room, Capitol Visitor Center, Washington D.C., David Killion, presiding. Mr. KILLION. Ladies and gentlemen, if we could get started today with this important briefing. Good afternoon. I’m Ambassador David Killion. I’m the chief of staff of the Hel- sinki Commission and this is my first event as chief of staff, so it’s very special to me. I think this is an incredibly timely event. I want to welcome our speakers as well as our audience to this important briefing to examine Russia’s intention toward Moldova and Transnistria, its secessionist region, in the face of growing violence and instability in southeastern Ukraine. This briefing is occurring at an urgent time, as violence in Odessa, which borders Moldova, continues to escalate, aided and abetted by Russia. In fact, we heard some infor- mation indicating over the weekend that many of the individuals arrested for violently attacking peaceful demonstrators for Ukrainian unity in Odessa were actually Russian nationalists and residents of Transnistria. At the same time, Ukrainian authorities re- ported that arms found in the building where over 30 of the individuals instigating vio- lence and secession were tragically killed last Friday also originated from Transnistria and Russia. Equally concerning is the continuing lawlessness and violence across the region that’s being perpetrated against state institutions and Ukrainian citizens who do not want to see their country Balkanized, occupied or controlled by Russia. Fighting continues in Slovyansk, where pro-Russian secessionists launched violent attacks upon supporters of Ukrainian unity, occupied government buildings and held OSCE military observers hos- tage for over a week. Pro-Russian thugs shot down two Ukrainian military helicopters in Slovyansk last week, resulting in the death and injury of several military officers. Only yesterday, other casualties were added as fighting persisted between the military and pro- Russian insurgents. The destabilizing events in Odessa are occurring a little over a hundred miles from Transnistria, where Russia maintains military forces and weapons against the wishes of the Moldovan government. Along with political and economic coercion, Russia has used this military presence to impede a peaceful and lawful settlement of Transnistria for over 20 years. (1) VerDate Sep 11 2014 02:09 Sep 02, 2015 Jkt 095593 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 3191 Sfmt 3191 E:\HR\OC\A593.XXX A593 SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING Today, the presence of Russian armed forces on Moldovan territory, on Ukraine’s bor- ders and in occupied Crimea violate the sovereignty and territorial integrity of both coun- tries and aim to prevent their integration into Europe and hinder their economic and democratic development. Russia’s actions violate every core principle of the OSCE and the United Nations, as well as Russia’s obligation to guarantee Ukraine’s sovereignty under the Budapest Memorandum. We look forward to this opportunity to discuss Russia’s intentions in Moldova and Transnistria, and what the ongoing insecurity and conflict in the region portends for coun- tries in the southern Caucasus and beyond. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Human Rights and Labor Thomas Melia was not able to join with us, so we will first hear today from our very distinguished guest, Moldova’s deputy prime minister for re- integration, Mr. Eugen Carpov. Mr. Carpov has held the office of deputy prime minister of the government of Moldova since 2011. He has an extensive background in foreign affairs and has held positions in both the public and private sectors. From 2002 until 2005 he served as the Moldovan ambassador to Poland, before becoming the head of the Moldovan Mission to the European Union in 2005, a position he held until 2007. Following this, he became the chief of the International Cooperation Department of ASCOM Company from 2007 to 2008, and subse- quently was the deputy general manager of the Komet Group Corporation from 2009 to 2011. We will then hear from Mr. Paul Goble, a longtime specialist on ethnic and religious matters in Eurasia. Paul has had a distinguished career. He has served as the director of research and publications at the Azerbaijan Diplomatic Academy and as vice dean for the social sciences and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Media Policy in a Pandemic: Lessons from Moldova, Ukraine and Latvia
    This policy brief series is part of the Media Enabling Democracy, Inclusion and Accountability in Moldova (MEDIA-M) project November 2020 | No 14 Media Policy in a Pandemic: Lessons from Moldova, Ukraine and Latvia Anastasia Nani, Lolita Buka, Gina Lentine Introduction Since the outbreak of the global coronavirus pandemic in March 2020, governments around the world have struggled to protect citizens from both the pathogen itself and its multifaceted impact on society. The regulatory framework for independent media has emerged as a central arena of this struggle, as governments strove to balance national health priorities and an “infodemic” of disinformation with the need to keep citizens informed and uphold fundamental media freedoms. In Moldova, Ukraine and Latvia, government approaches to regulating media during the pandemic grappled with similar vulnerabilities, including the lack of a cohesive national informational space in multilingual societies, high levels of disinformation, and social and economic legacies of Soviet influence. Despite these common challenges, each government adopted a distinct approach to addressing media-related issues under the pandemic that has contributed to markedly different results – both in terms of adherence to citizens’ democratic rights and freedoms and to overall societal health outcomes. This brief argues that the approach of each government and society to media policy, including its adherence to fundamental media freedoms, is a key factor in determining the overall effectiveness of the country’s pandemic response. The brief compares government policies relating to media during the pandemic, considers how these policies impacted media and the effectiveness of the country’s coronavirus response, and presents actionable recommendations for Moldova and other countries in the region to develop more effective media policy in times of crisis.
    [Show full text]
  • Contextualizing Immigrant Inter-Wave Dynamics and the Consequences for Migration Processes
    NORFACE MIGRATION Discussion Paper No. 2011-24 Contextualizing immigrant inter-wave dynamics and the consequences for migration processes Agnieszka Kubal and Rianne Dekker 2 www.norface-migration.org Abstract What drives international migration? Theories of migration networks, migration culture, migration systems and cumulative causation suggest that once a critical threshold level of migrants have settled, migration tends to stimulate the creation of social and economic structures that make the process of migration self-perpetuating (cf. Massey et al. 1987; de Haas 2010). One important aspect of the theory is that the more migrants from a particular locality settle in one place, their presence, assistance and established structures in the destination country act as incentives for others to follow in their footsteps, which emphasizes the instrumental role of pioneers’ agency in influencing others to follow suit. A historical perspective on the migration from Ukraine to the United Kingdom and the Netherlands challenges this assumption. While substantial numbers of migrants have settled in those destinations, migration, especially in the last 20 years, has not developed into large, self-sustaining migration systems (in comparison to the dynamic migration linkages between Ukraine and Southern European countries such as Portugal, Italy and Greece). Trying to understand why migration has not taken off, we argue that the role of settled pioneer migrants and their community structures in assisting others to follow in their footsteps should not be taken for granted. We argue that the role of pioneers is much more ambiguous and complex, and the relevant question about ‘bridgeheads’ and ‘gatekeepers’ (cf. Böcker 1994) should not be that of ‘either/or’ but ‘how much’, ‘to what extent’ or ‘under what conditions’.
    [Show full text]
  • Russia's Influence and Presence in Latvia
    DEFENCE, FOREIGN POLICY AND SECURITY RUSSIA‘S INFLUENCE AND PRESENCE IN LATVIA ARTURS BIKOVS - ILVIJA BRUGE - ANDRIS SPRUDS www.europeanreform.org @europeanreform A Brussels-based free market, euro-realist think-tank and publisher, established in 2010 under the patronage of Baroness Thatcher. We have satellite offices in London, Rome and Warsaw. New Direction - The Foundation for European Reform is registered in Belgium as a non-for-profit organisation (ASBL) and is partly funded by the European Parliament. REGISTERED OFFICE: Rue du Trône, 4, 1000 Bruxelles, Belgium. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Naweed Khan. www.europeanreform.org @europeanreform The European Parliament and New Direction assume no responsibility for the opinions expressed in this publication. Sole liability rests with the author. Russia‘s influence and presence in Latvia Arturs Bikovs - Ilvija Bruge - Andris Spruds AUTHORS TABLE OF CONTENTS EDITORIAL 7 INTRODUCTION 9 Arturs Bikovs 1 OVERVIEW OF RUSSIAN-LATVIAN RELATIONS - HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND LEGACY 10 2 ATTITUDES TO RUSSIA IN LATVIA’S SOCIETY 14 3 RUSSIA’S COMPATRIOT POLICY IN LATVIA - CULTURAL AND RELIGIOUS TIES 17 Ilvija Bruge 4 ECONOMIC RELATIONS - TRAJECTORIES OF TRADE AND INVESTMENT 22 5 RUSSIA’S FACTOR IN POLITICAL AND BUSINESS LINKS 26 CONCLUSIONS 30 ANNEX 1 RUSSIA AS A THREAT TO THE STATES BEING IN THE ZONE OF INFLUENCE 31 Andris Spruds ANNEX 2 POPULATION AND LANGUAGES IN THE LATVIA, INCLUDING RUSSIAN 32 MINORITY AND RUSSIAN LANGUAGE ANNEX 3 PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS 34 4 New Direction - The Foundation for European Reform www.europeanreform.org @europeanreform 5 Russia‘s influence and presence in Latvia Arturs Bikovs - Ilvija Bruge - Andris Spruds EDITORIAL its former ‘soviet republics’ and its attempts to undermine European unity through energy interests, political funding, and media (dis)information.
    [Show full text]
  • Georgia: Background and U.S. Policy
    Georgia: Background and U.S. Policy Updated June 10, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R45307 SUMMARY R45307 Georgia: Background and U.S. Policy June 10, 2021 Georgia is one of the United States’ closest partners among the post-Soviet states that gained their independence after the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991. With a Cory Welt history of strong economic aid and security cooperation, the United States has deepened Specialist in Russian and its strategic partnership with Georgia since Russia’s 2008 invasion of Georgia and 2014 European Affairs invasion of Ukraine. U.S. policy expressly supports Georgia’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders, and Georgia is a leading recipient of U.S. aid in Europe and Eurasia. Many observers consider Georgia to have a “hybrid” political system, containing both democratic and nondemocratic elements. The center-left Georgian Dream-Democratic Georgia (GD) party has governed Georgia since 2012. Controversy over the October 2020 parliamentary elections, an opposition boycott of parliament, and the February 2021 arrest of opposition leader Nika Melia led to heightened political tensions. European Union (EU) efforts to mediate Georgia’s political crisis led to a negotiated agreement in April 2021 that included opposition parties’ entry into parliament and Melia’s release. Although Georgia faces high rates of poverty and underemployment, its economy entered a period of relatively strong growth in 2017. In 2020, due to the impact of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, Georgia’s gross domestic product (GDP) declined by an estimated 6%. Georgia’s GDP is expected to grow 3.5% to 4% in 2021.
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Economy of Georgia's Rose Revolution
    East European Democratization The Political Economy of Georgia’s Rose Revolution by Vladimer Papava Vladimer Papava ([email protected]) is a Senior Fellow at the Georgian Foundation for Strategic and International Studies. He was a Minister of Economy of the Republic of Georgia (1994–2000) and Fulbright Fellow at the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute of the Nitze School at The Johns Hopkins University’s SAIS (2005–06). Abstract: The Rose Revolution opened a new chapter in the history of modern Georgia. The post-revolution government achieved a number of successes in areas such as dramatically increasing state budget revenues, fighting corrup- tion, and setting up effective cooperative relationships with the international financial institutions. But it made some mistakes, too, in building a demo- cratic state in general and in its economic policy in particular. Its relationship with Russia and its excessive exposure to Russian investments is particularly troubling. The country’s policies need to be fine-tuned in order to protect its democracy and promote further economic growth. he Georgian people’s Rose Revolution of November 2003 strove to achieve a democratic society, improve human rights and living T conditions, reduce corruption, and enhance the national economy.1 Accordingly, the Revolution and its heroes, led by Mikhail Saakashvili, received the support of the Bush administration, the EU, and its member states. Three years later, the euphoria that followed the Revolution, both within and outside the country, has gradually been replaced by more realistic assessments of the results of the post-revolution policies to date. The sobering up from being drunk on revolution occurred somewhat sooner within Georgia 1 For more on the revolution, see Neal Ascherson, ‘‘After the Revolution,’’ London Review of Books, Mar.
    [Show full text]
  • Download File
    1 CONTENTS 4 Acknowledgements 5 Abbreviations 6 Glossary 8 Executive summary 11 Introduction 16 1. Socioeconomic profile of families with children in the Republic of Moldova before COVID19 30 2. Economic impact of COVID19 on families with children in the Republic of Moldova 48 3. Coping mechanisms adopted by families with children in the Republic of Moldova 58 4. Impact of the COVID19 crisis on children in the Republic of Moldova 86 5. Conclusions and recommendations 98 Appendix 1. Bibliography 99 Appendix 2. International policy benchmarking 105 Appendix 3. Ethical considerations 106 Endnotes Acknowledgements Abbreviations Category Temporary This assessment of the impact of coronavirus Andrea Cuzyova, Deputy Resident Represen­ COVID19 coronavirus disease disease (COVID 19) on remittances and coping tative at the United Nations Development Pro­ mechanisms of families with children in the gramme (UNDP) Moldova and Lars Johann GDP gross domestic product Republic of Moldova was conducted and drafted Lonnback, IOM Moldova Chief of Mission. Their by Rodolphe Baudeau, Alizée Boutard and Anas­ inputs were particularly valuable to the concep­ HORECA hotels, restaurants and catering­related professions Highly dependent on economic resilience tasia Durbailova of ALTAI Consulting, under the tualization of this assessment. IOM International Organization for Migration supervision of and with contributions from Xavier or recovery R Sire, Social and Economic Policy Specialist In addition to the appreciation owed to research IT information technology at the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) participants, sincere thanks go to the staff Moldova. It also benefited from revisions and members of the National Bureau of Statistics MDL Moldovan leu of the Republic of Moldova, in particular Aure lia inputs from several other colleagues: Elena MSMEs micro, small and medium­sized enterprises Laur, Child Rights Monitoring Specialist, and Ilija Spătaru, Deputy General Director.
    [Show full text]
  • Citizenship Education Guidelines on European Integration in Schools
    Citizenship Education Guidelines on European Integration in Schools Children’s Identity and Citizenship in Europe CiCe Jean Monnet Network, 2017 CONTENTS SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 1a) The citizenship education guidelines 1b) The CiCe Jean Monnet Network SECTION 2: GUIDELINES FOR SCHOOLS Guideline 1: The inclusion of minority groups Guideline 2: Identities and European citizenship Guideline 3: Intercultural dialogue SECTION 4: BIBLIOGRAPHY SECTION 5: AUTHORS and CONTRIBUTORS SECTION 6: ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 1a) The Citizenship Education Guidelines The contemporary world appears to be in a perpetual state of flux; changing continuously. Increasing globalization, the flow of goods, money, information and people across borders, is an important factor defining this change. Constant population mobility and the apparent collapse of the power of the nation-state and a commensurate retreat of the welfare state, affect changes in terms of both social composition and development. Add to this, concern over low levels of participation by young people in traditional democratic institutions, anxiety over rightwing and Islamic extremism and associated terrorist attacks, which help to inform an ongoing policy agenda in which the EU has advocated active citizenship and participatory democracy that take into account political, demographic and economic contexts. Of particular focus in this guide are educational practices that aim to enhance capacity to participate in a plural European society. Europe’s population is changing decisively which, in turn, necessitates and results in a transformation of Europe’s educational processes. Although similar challenges are faced across Europe, there is no single European education system, and educational responses while reflecting European guidance (EU, Council of Europe) and policy, are determined at state level.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Armenia's Future Is in Europe
    #ElectricYerevan: Why Armenia’s Future is in Europe © 2015 IAI by Nona Mikhelidze ABSTRACT Armenia’s electricity price hike and more broadly its deteriorating economic circumstances have triggered mass ISSN 2280-4341 | ISBN 978-88-98650-46-0 protests in Yerevan. But there is more to “Electric Armenia” than economics. Because of the security concerns related to the unresolved Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Yerevan was forced into a military alliance with Russia. Moscow did not limit this alliance to security issues, but used the alliance to ensure Armenia’s full-fledged political and economic dependence on the Kremlin. In order to accommodate Russian interests, Armenia’s governance style has become increasingly top down. This notwithstanding a burgeoning civil society, which is mature enough to stand up in defence of democratic values. New forms of active citizenship are emerging in Armenia, as youth movements raise their voice in Baghramyan Avenue. The current demonstrations may not cause a breakthrough and immediate U-turn in Armenia’s domestic and foreign policy priorities, but a value system clash between Armenia and Russia is in the making, exacerbating the ongoing clash in EU-Russia relations. Armenia | Civil society | Democracy | Energy | Russia | European Union keywords IAI WORKING PAPERS 15 | 22 - JULY 2015 15 | 22 - JULY IAI WORKING PAPERS #ElectricYerevan: Why Armenia’s Future is in Europe #ElectricYerevan: Why Armenia’s Future is in Europe by Nona Mikhelidze* © 2015 IAI Introduction “Free and independent Armenia. We are the decision makers.” With this slogan and a demand to reverse the latest decision to increase electricity prices, thousands of Armenians (mostly youth) are protesting in the capital city of Yerevan.
    [Show full text]
  • A New Wave of Censorship: Distributed Attacks on Expression and Press Freedom
    A New Wave of Censorship: Distributed Attacks on Expression and Press Freedom DANIEL ARNAUDO May 2018 A New Wave of Censorship: Distributed Attacks on Expression and Press Freedom ABOUT CIMA MAY 2018 The Center for International Media Assistance (CIMA), at the National Endowment for Democracy, works to strengthen the support, raise the visibility, Contents and improve the effectiveness of independent media development throughout the world. The New Forms of Censorship by Distributed center provides information, builds networks, Attacks on Expression and Press Freedom . 1 conducts research, and highlights the indispensable role independent media play in the creation and The Dictator’s Digital Dilemma Reexamined . 4 development of sustainable democracies. An The New Tools for Democratic Disruption . 6 important aspect of CIMA’s work is to research ways to attract additional US private sector interest in and State Sponsored Trolling: Russia’s Efforts to support for international media development. Overload Ukraine’s Media Ecosystem . 8 CIMA convenes working groups, discussions, and Domestic Trolling: Shaping the Public Dialogue in Turkey . 12 panels on a variety of topics in the field of media Automated Bot Networks: Filipino Bots development and assistance. The center also issues and the Social News Network Response . 15 reports and recommendations based on working group discussions and other investigations. These Throttling Discourse: The Stifled Arab Spring in Bahrain . 17 reports aim to provide policymakers, as well as Strategic Distraction and Social Surveillance: donors and practitioners, with ideas for bolstering China’s New Tactics to Constrain News and Information . 19 the effectiveness of media assistance. Conclusion: Toward a Collective Response .
    [Show full text]
  • 0 the Kazakh New Wave: Overcoming Socialist
    0 THE KAZAKH NEW WAVE: OVERCOMING SOCIALIST REALISM IN THE AGE OF NEW WAVES Danel Akhmetova HST499 – History Capstone May 5, 2020 1 Introduction In 1988, Murat Auezov, the editor-in-chief at Kazakhfilm national film studio proposed its structural reformation.1 From now on, the studio was to be divided into two creative associations, Miras (“heritage”) and Alem (“world”, “universe”), that in the next few years would become home to a number of key films of the decade, later collectively known as the Kazakh New Wave.2 The former division devoted its attention to the questions of Kazakh national culture through historical, ethnographic, and folkloric films, while the latter demonstrated strong commitment to their official motto of “knowledge of the world in its motion” and encouraged production of films of modern, cosmopolitan, and all-round character.3 Even though the Alem and Miras associations had gradually disappeared, the emergence of these divisions at Kazakhfilm in the second half of the 1980s reveals a lasting dilemma about priorities in the Kazakh cinema industry.4 What themes should the Kazakh filmmakers tackle – national or universal ones? The Kazakh New Wave films that were made at those two studios were neither entirely national nor completely cosmopolitan. Murat Auezov understood the impossibility of resolving this dilemma by the emerging directors of the Kazakh New Wave. He believed that the most essential prerequisite for the success of contemporary local filmmaking was a combination of both national and transnational factors.
    [Show full text]
  • Georgia's Rose Revolution: a Participant's Perspective
    UNITED STATES InsTITUTE OF PEACE www.usip.org SPECIAL REPORT 1200 17th Street NW • Washington, DC 20036 • 202.457.1700 • fax 202.429.6063 ABOUT THE REPORT Georgia’s Rose Revolution of 2003, the first bloodless change Giorgi Kandelaki of power in the Caucasus, occurred largely unpredicted by analysts and policymakers. Both Georgian and western observers feared and predicted yet another wave of bloodshed in this troubled former Soviet nation. Yet the enthusiasm, hard work, and nonviolent discipline of initially small groups sparked what many now call “Europe’s fourth wave of Georgia’s Rose liberation.” “I did not think to pay serious attention to these young people running around with flags and drawing graffiti on the streets,” deposed President Eduard Shevardnadze said Revolution shortly after the revolution. “I was wrong,” he added. Author Giorgi Kandelaki was elected in 2001 to Tbilisi State University’s first student self-government, which pursued a A Participant’s Perspective high-profile campaign against corruption and for reform in higher education. In April 2003 he co-founded the youth movement, Kmara (Enough), which played an instrumental role in Georgia’s November 2003 Rose Revolution. More recently he Summary has trained young activists to organize for nonviolent change in Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Moldova, and, most recently, Belarus, • Efforts to resist calling the 2003 events in Georgia a “revolution” were misplaced. where he and a colleague were detained for eleven days. Since Although the turmoil was marked by a lack of violence, a critical mass of people did June 2005 he has been an adviser in the administration of come out to move the country away from the rampant corruption of the Shevardnadze President Mikheil Saakashvili of Georgia.
    [Show full text]
  • Polina Gagarina Lullaby
    Polina gagarina lullaby Continue The pattern below (East Slavic names) is considered for merger. See the templates for discussion to help reach consensus. This name uses East Slavic naming customs; the patronizing is Sergeyevna, and Gagarin's last name. Polina Gagarina in 2015 The name of Polina Sergeevna Gagarina (1987-03-27) March 27, 1987 (33 years) Moscow, FSSP of Russia, USSRGenresPopoculation (s) Singer actress InstrumentsClarinetYears active2003-presentLabels. NovaMusic, Velvet Music, First Musical Publishing, pɐˈljinə sjɪrˈɡjejɪvnə ɡɐˈɡarjɪnə website www.gagarina.com Polina Gagarina (born 27 Polina Sergeyyevna Gagarin in March 1987) is a Russian singer, songwriter and actress. She represented Russia in the Eurovision Song Contest 2015 with the song A Million Voices, where she finished second with 303 points. At the same time, she became the first second finisher, exceeding 300 points. Gagarina also participated in the Chinese reality competition Singer in 2019, where she was one of the finalists. Gagarin was born in Moscow in his early life, but spent most of her youth in Greece. Her mother was a ballerina. Gagarina's father died in 1993, and her mother decided to move the family back to Russia, but they soon returned to Greece and settled in Athens. After graduating, she moved to Saratov to live with her grandmother. He is fluent in Russian, Greek and English. Career 2003-07: Poprosi u oblakov In 2003 Gagarina participated in the second season of Star Factory, a Russian reality TV competition. She performed several songs by Maxim Fadeev and won the show, but after the victory refused to work with Fadeev.
    [Show full text]