DOCSLIB.ORG

Andrei Sakharov and His Legacy Today Edward Lucas 5

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Andrei Sakharov and His Legacy Today Edward Lucas 5 Sakharov Centennial 1921-2021 EXHIBITION Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov – PERSON OF THE ERA GUIDE BOOK Person of the Era 1 028 Guidebook_A5.indd 1 26-04-2021 10:19 Table of Contents Foreword 3 The importance of Andrei Sakharov and His Legacy Today Edward Lucas 5 Smuggling Samizdat: The extraordinary tale how Sakharov’s essay reached the West Robert van Voren 8 The 1968 essay “Thoughts on Peace, Progress and Intellectual Freedom” Introduction Arkady Ostrovsky 11 Thoughts on Peace, Progress and Intellectual Freedom (an abbreviated version) 14 Background of the Exhibition 23 Sakharov Today 25 QR Codes 28 Copyright © Andrei Sakharov Research Center, Kaunas Photos by Sergei Gavrishkevich, Yuri Rost, Alamy, Nkrita, private collections 2 Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov 028 Guidebook_A5.indd 2 26-04-2021 10:19 Foreword to the Guidebook “Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov - Person of an Era” Exhibition “Sakharov Centennial 1921 - 2021” In February 1989, on the occasion of the award of the first Sakharov prize, the then President of the European Parliament, Lord Plumb, explained the meaning of the newly created prize and of its name. The award, he said, is intended to pay tribute to those individuals who defend freedom of thought and, for the European Parliament, Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov embodies this fight. The same holds true today, in the year of his centenary. The story of Andrei Sakharov’s struggle for freedom continues to hum- ble and inspire us today. In 1968, in a famous essay partially reproduced in this guidebook, Andrei Sakharov courageously expressed the view that intellectual freedom is essential. In the following decades, he dedicated his life to defending the right to freedom of thought. Co-inventor of the Soviet hydrogen bomb, he called into question the consequences of the nuclear arms race, which he came to consider as a form of global suicide. Faced with the repressive and brutal Soviet regime, Andrei Sakharov had the courage to take a stand against it. Officially persecuted for years in the Soviet Union and forced into exile, he had the strength to continue the peaceful struggle for the advancement of human rights and individual freedoms. Andrei Sakharov was one of the driving forces of the dissident movements fighting for individual freedoms and democracy in the Soviet Union and in the Eastern European countries. His firm attachment to the importance of freedom of thought for a society, as well as his courageous acts have shaped the history of our continent, contributing to its pacification and making Europe’s reunification possible. Today, in a world where authoritarian regimes and populist forces undermine the fundamental freedoms and question the principle of human rights, the moral symbol represented by Andrei Sakharov constitutes a source of inspiration for all those that fight for democratic principles. For more than 30 years, the European Parliament contributes to keeping this symbol alive by awarding the Sakharov prize for Freedom of Thought. An important part of the European Parliament’s activities in support of human rights and democracy, the prize pays tribute all those who relentlessly fight for these values worldwide. Person of the Era 3 028 Guidebook_A5.indd 3 26-04-2021 10:19 A perfect illustration of this forceful fight are the laureates of the 2020 Sakharov Prize - the Belarussian Democratic Opposition. Along with all the other Sakharov laureates, they taught us all what it means to never give up when it comes to defending your rights and freedoms and to fighting for a better, fairer society. A lesson that is both humbling and inspiring, just as Andrei Sakharov’s struggle for freedom and human rights was. David Maria Sassoli, President European Parliament 028 Guidebook_A5.indd 4 26-04-2021 10:19 The Importance of Andrei Sakharov and His Legacy Today Edward Lucas The world in which Andrei Dmitrievich made his mark can seem distant. Most people reading this excellent and timely publication will have little first-hand knowledge of Sakharov’s life and works. In today’s globalised world, where we worry about climate change and pandemics rather than ideological struggles, the defining issues of the past age can seem like exotic but ancient history. The technological breakthrough of splitting the atom; the resulting development of weapons that could end life on the planet; a world sharply divided into Soviet and Western blocks, the astonishing courage of dis- sidents faced with the ruthless repression of Soviet life, and then the evil empire’s sudden, largely unforeseen collapse — these were the landmarks of Sakharov’s life. But blow off the dust, and they are just as relevant today. Start with technology, for Sakharov was a physicist before he was any- thing else. We are now on the brink of a technological leap as great as the breakthroughs in nuclear physics that marked Sakharov’s career. Hurtling towards us are advances in artificial intelligence, quantum computing and life sciences that present our species, and the planet it inhabits, with colossal opportunities and dangers. For that we need Sakharov’s perspective on the uses of our inventive powers. Technology must serve civilisation, not the other way round. It was the dangers of the arms race that first drew Sakharov to public life. These dangers have not gone away: indeed, the prospect of escalating capabilities in autonomous weapons are a terrifying reprise of the world of doomsday devices, dead hands, and Dr Strangelove. Person of the Era 5 028 Guidebook_A5.indd 5 26-04-2021 10:19 If Sakharov could make his leap from the privileged heart of the Soviet establishment to the perilous margins of Soviet society, we can believe that others may do the same in other times and places. Sakharov’s courage stretched the bounds of the possible then, and of our imagination now. We cannot know if Chinese Sakharovs are right now examining their consciences in the laboratories and research establishments of the Chinese party state. But history shows us that there is indeed something about physics that fosters moral courage. Physicists have been among the most outspoken critics of the party-state in the past. The late Fang Lizhi was one such dissident in the 1980s. Another, Liangying Xu, received the American Physical Society’s Sakharov prize in 2008. More will come. Sakharov’s message crossed an east-west gulf that no longer exists. But even in today’s seemingly globalised and interconnected world, we have seen the way in which the “Great Firewall of China” has cut off that country from the free internet that the rest of the world uses. Carbon paper, typewriters, and shortwave radio – technology that once seemed utterly obsolescent – are coming back into fashion. The all-pervading digital scrutiny of the Chinese party-state’s surveillance machine can capture biometric data, crack electronic communications, and attack digital devices anywhere in the world. But it still cannot penetrate a message written by hand on a folded piece of paper, or prevent you tuning into a radio broadcast bounced off the ionosphere. Sakharov, confined without a telephone in Gorki, would appreciate the way in which the wheel of history has turned. Sakharov’s powerful criticism of the Soviet regime was matched by an unflinching eye for the West’s faults, in particular for racial injustice in the United States. That could not be more topical today. Our greatest weakness in the free world is not what our enemies do to us. It is what we do to ourselves: the greed and complacency of our decision-makers, the festering economic, social, and racial divisions in our societies. Nobody made us do this. Sakharov’s stereoscopic vision was the antithesis of the black-and-white simplicities of cold war propaganda. It is easy to be discouraged. The Chinese and Russian regimes seem to withstand the puny sanctions and criticism that we muster. China in particular has a daunting combination of economic clout, military heft, technological prowess, and decisive leadership. The “hybrid” arsenal (which Sakharov would have instantly recognised under its old name of “active measures”) allows our adversaries to rampage through our societies and public institutions. 6 Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov 028 Guidebook_A5.indd 6 26-04-2021 10:19 Yet we should remember how much more daunting things seemed for Sakharov — and indeed for the Lithuanians and other captive nations living under Soviet rule in the 1960s. It seemed Quixotic to believe that the courage of a sole, frail, cerebral figure, armed only with words and thoughts, could dent the fortunes of a totalitarian superpower. Yet it did. His Nobel Peace Prize in 1975 infuriated and demoralised the Soviet leadership (as we now know from Politburo minutes). They refused to let Sakharov attend the ceremony. He went to Vilnius instead, to attend the trial of his fellow-dissident and friend, Sergei Kovalyev. Just 15 years later, Lithuania declared the restoration of its independence – something that would have seemed inconceivable at the time. It is also important to remember Sakharov’s unwavering moral compass. Many believed that Mikhail Gorbachev epitomized reform in the Soviet Union. Those who stood in his way were troublemakers. That accusation was frequently levelled against the Baltic states. Yet Sakharov thought the slogan “don’t hamper Gorbachev’s efforts” was dangerous: for the Kremlin leader, and for the Soviet Union. In the closing minutes of the June 1989 session of the Congress of People’s Deputies, Sakharov’s final words before Gorbachev (not for the last time) switched off his microphone were to demand the withdrawal of the Soviet ambassador from Beijing in protest at the crushing of the pro-democracy protests there. It is fitting that so many heroes of the resistance against the Chinese party-state’s repression and aggression have received the Sakharov prize awarded annually by the European Parliament: the democracy activists Wei Jingsheng and Hu Jia and most recently Ilham Tohti, a peaceful advocate of Uyghur culture, now languishing in jail.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Case for Democracy: the Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny A
    The Case for Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny a... http://www.carnegiecouncil.org/resources/transcripts/5066.html/:pf_print... The Case for Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror Natan Sharansky , Joanne J. Myers November 9, 2004 Introduction Remarks Questions and Answers Introduction The Case for JOANNE MYERS: Good morning. I'm Joanne Myers, Director of Merrill House Programs, and Democracy: The Power of Freedom on behalf of the Carnegie Council I would like to say how extremely honored we are to have to Overcome with us this morning Natan Sharansky on the occasion of his recently published book, The Case Tyranny and Terror for Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror. In reflecting on the challenges facing democracy in the 21st century, Margaret Thatcher once wrote, "It is always true that the world that is can best be understood by those conversant with the world that was. None are more conversant with the realities of the Cold War, or more adept at drawing out its lessons for today, than those who saw it—not just lived through it, but actually saw it for what it was—from the inside." It is with this in mind that we extend a very special welcome to our speaker this morning, Natan Sharansky. From Gulag to guru, Mr. Sharansky's life has personified the struggle for human rights and the ongoing pursuit of dignity for all mankind. Our guest today is a former Soviet dissident and political prisoner who has spent his life championing democracy.
    [Show full text]
  • Building Bridges Thoughts About the Other Russia
    Andrei Sakharov Research Center Vytautas Magnus University Building Bridges Thoughts about the other Russia Second Leonidas Donskis Memorial Conference With Vyacheslav Bakhmin, Yevgeni Gindilis, Mikhail Shishkin and Andrew Wood Conference report Organizers Introduction Robert van Voren For more than forty years I have been involved in Soviet – and Russian – affairs and gradually I started to understand the subject of my interest a bit more. But part of that is that I understand there is no way you can understand Russia. You need to stop thinking logically because there is no logic. You need to learn to feel it, you love it and you hate it, and that combination is shared by many if not most Russians themselves. The difference however is that, for a Russian, it is acceptable to make fun of his country, to an extent that many other nationals would not about their homeland. Self-mockery is exceptionally well developed in Russia. But as a foreigner you are always an outsider, and you have to watch your tongue because any critical remark can have a serious backlash. Best is to laugh along when Russians make fun of themselves. So gradually, when I was hiring staff for my foundation, I would carefully listen to their views. If they would start telling me extensively how much they loved Russia, its culture, its people, the hospitality, without anything else, they would not be hired. The moment they would start telling me that they had this morbid conflicting feeling inside of loving and hating the country, a combination of two extremes, I knew I had a good candidate in front of me.
    [Show full text]
  • After Stalin: the Decline and Fall of the Soviet Union (Weeks 1-12) | University of Kent
    10/01/21 After Stalin: The Decline and Fall of the Soviet Union (Weeks 1-12) | University of Kent After Stalin: The Decline and Fall of the View Online Soviet Union (Weeks 1-12) 435 items Operation Typhoon: Hitler's march on Moscow, October 1941 - Stahel, David, 2013 Book Introductory Bibliography (12 items) Conscience, dissent and reform in Soviet Russia - Boobbyer, Philip, 2005 Book Soviet communism from reform to collapse - Daniels, Robert V., 1995 Book The rise of Russia and the fall of the Soviet empire - Dunlop, John B., 1995 Book Russia and the idea of the West: Gorbachev, intellectuals, and the end of the Cold War - English, Robert D., 2000 Book Last of the empires: a history of the Soviet Union, 1945-1991 - Keep, John L. H., 1996 Book The Soviet tragedy: a history of socialism in Russia, 1917-1991 - Malia, Martin E., 1994 Book Russia's Cold War: from the October Revolution to the fall of the wall - Haslam, Jonathan, c2011 Book Rulers and victims: the Russians in the Soviet Union - Hosking, Geoffrey A., 2006 Book The shadow of war: Russia and the USSR, 1941 to the present - Lovell, Stephen, 2010 Book Lenin's tomb: the last days of the Soviet Empire - Remnick, David, 1994 Book Twentieth century Russia - Treadgold, Donald W., 1995 Book Zhivago's children: the last Russian intelligentsia - Zubok, V. M., 2009 1/34 10/01/21 After Stalin: The Decline and Fall of the Soviet Union (Weeks 1-12) | University of Kent Book Collections of documents (9 items) The Soviet political poster, 1917-1980: From the USSR Lenin Library Collection - Baburina, Nina, 1986 Book The Soviet system: from crisis to collapse - Dallin, Alexander, Lapidus, Gail Warshofsky, 1995 Book A documentary history of communism - Daniels, Robert Vincent, 1985 Book The great patriotic war of the Soviet Union, 1941-45: a documentary reader - Hill, Alexander, 2009 Book Revelations from the Russian archives: documents in English translation - Koenker, Diane, Bachman, Ronald D., Library of Congress, 1997 Book Sedition: everyday resistance in the Soviet Union under Khrushchev and Brezhnev - Kozlov, V.
    [Show full text]
  • Exorcising Stalin's Ghost
    TURNING BACK TOTALITARIANISM: Exorcising Stalin’s Ghost Matthew R. Newton The Evergreen State College N e w t o n | 1 "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." --George Orwell The death of Joseph Stalin left the Soviet Union in a state of dynastic confusion, and the most repressive elements of the society he established remained. After Nikita Khrushchev secured power in the mid-1950s, he embarked on a campaign to vanquish these elements. While boldly denouncing Stalin’s cult of personality and individual authority in his ‘Secret Speech’ of 1956, he failed to address the problems of a system that allowed Stalin to take power and empowered legions of Stalin-enablers. Khrushchev’s problem was complex in that he wanted to appease the entire Communist Party of the Soviet Union in 1956 and yet legitimize his position of power. The level of embeddedness of Stalinism in the Soviet Union was the biggest obstacle for Khrushchev. Characterized with the “permanent” infrastructure of the Soviet Union, Stalin’s autocratic rule was intertwined with virtually all aspects of Soviet life. These aspects can be broken down into four elements: Stalin’s status as an absolute champion of Communism, and his cult of personality; the enormous amount of propaganda in all forms that underlined Stalin as the “protector” of the Soviet Union during threat and impact of foreign war, and the censorship of any content that was not aligned with this mindset; the necessity and place of the Gulag prison camp in the Soviet economy, and how it sustained itself; and the transformation of Soviet society into something horrifically uniform and populated with citizens whom were universally fearful of arrest and arbitrary repression.
    [Show full text]
  • Boris Pasternak - Poems
    Classic Poetry Series Boris Pasternak - poems - Publication Date: 2012 Publisher: Poemhunter.com - The World's Poetry Archive Boris Pasternak(10 February 1890 - 30 May 1960) Boris Leonidovich Pasternak was a Russian language poet, novelist, and literary translator. In his native Russia, Pasternak's anthology My Sister Life, is one of the most influential collections ever published in the Russian language. Furthermore, Pasternak's theatrical translations of Goethe, Schiller, Pedro Calderón de la Barca, and William Shakespeare remain deeply popular with Russian audiences. Outside Russia, Pasternak is best known for authoring Doctor Zhivago, a novel which spans the last years of Czarist Russia and the earliest days of the Soviet Union. Banned in the USSR, Doctor Zhivago was smuggled to Milan and published in 1957. Pasternak was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature the following year, an event which both humiliated and enraged the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. In the midst of a massive campaign against him by both the KGB and the Union of Soviet Writers, Pasternak reluctantly agreed to decline the Prize. In his resignation letter to the Nobel Committee, Pasternak stated the reaction of the Soviet State was the only reason for his decision. By the time of his death from lung cancer in 1960, the campaign against Pasternak had severely damaged the international credibility of the U.S.S.R. He remains a major figure in Russian literature to this day. Furthermore, tactics pioneered by Pasternak were later continued, expanded, and refined by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and other Soviet dissidents. <b>Early Life</b> Pasternak was born in Moscow on 10 February, (Gregorian), 1890 (Julian 29 January) into a wealthy Russian Jewish family which had been received into the Russian Orthodox Church.
    [Show full text]
  • Courts and Politics in Post Stalin Russia, Report #3. the Brezhnev
    TITLE: ARBITRARY JUSTICE: COURTS AND POLITICS IN POST- STALIN RUSSIA. Report #3. THE BREZHNEV PERIOD AUTHOR: YURI FEOFANOV and DONALD BARRY THE NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR SOVIET AND EAST EUROPEAN RESEARCH TITLE VIII PROGRAM 1755 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 NCSEER NOTE This is the third in a series of Council Reports which, in all, will contain a book, by the same authors and probably with the same title, forthcoming, M. E. Sharpe. This Report contains Part II: an introductory essay, The Brezhnev Period by Donald Barry; and Chapter Three, The Siniavskii-Daniel Case by Yuri Feofanov. Subsequent Reports in the series, numbered sequentially, will contain the remaining Parts III - VII, and will carry the same main title and the subtitle of the Part contained. PROJECT INFORMATION:1 CONTRACTOR: Lehigh University PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Donald Barry COUNCIL CONTRACT NUMBER: 808-02 DATE: October 4, 1995 COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Individual researchers retain the copyright on work products derived from research funded by Council Contract. The Council and the U.S. Government have the right to duplicate written reports and other materials submitted under Council Contract and to distribute such copies within the Council and U.S. Government for their own use, and to draw upon such reports and materials for their own studies; but the Council and U.S. Government do not have the right to distribute, or make such reports and materials available, outside the Council or U.S. Government without the written consent of the authors, except as may be required under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act 5 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Modernism and Andrei Amalrik's Nose! Nose? No-Se!
    Fall 1992 89 Dark Images of Dissidence: Modernism and Andrei Amalrik's Nose! Nose? No-se! Nancy Kindelan I Critics describe the dissident drama of Andrei Amalrik (1938-1980), especially Nose! Nose? No-se! (1968), as following the Russian tradition of the absurd, grotesque, and satire. Amalrik's adaptation of Gogol's short story, "The Nose" (1936), and his reading of Ionesco, Beckett, and the futuristic plays of Khlebnikov, link Amalrik to prior and modern perceptions of absurdist literary and dramatic techniques. In the absurdist world, reality is depicted as disjointed and disoriented, complete with characters who cannot communicate, fear authority and define life in isolation. Although it appears that Amalrik's play and the absurdist's world are similar, there is evidence that this play's intricate form allows for multiple interpretations. In Twentieth-Century Drama, Harold Segel notes that while there is a connection between Amalrik's plays and the absurdist and grotesque drama, "the complexity of his plays sets him apart." Particularly, he states that the "strange configurations of character and incident often make interpretation a matter of intuition or impression" (396). Nose! Nose? No-se! has received some literary and dramatic attention; however, little consideration has been afforded to how this play's "complexity," and the "strange configurations of character and incident" have combined to shape Amalrik's dramatic form. Russian dramatic criticism specifies that German expressionism played a minor role in the development of their drama; however, while there are no significant Russian expressionistic playwrights, Amalrik's play contains significant components of this form. More Nancy Kindelan is an Assistant Professor in the Theatre Department at Northeastern University.
    [Show full text]
  • Can the Soviet System Accommodate the “Democratic Movement”?
    Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Master's Theses Graduate College 8-1974 Systemic Adaptation: Can the Soviet System Accommodate the “Democratic Movement”? Phillip A. Petersen Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses Part of the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Petersen, Phillip A., "Systemic Adaptation: Can the Soviet System Accommodate the “Democratic Movement”?" (1974). Master's Theses. 2588. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses/2588 This Masters Thesis-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SYSTEMIC ADAPTATION: CAN THE SOVIET SYSTEM ACCOMMODATE THE "DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT"? by Phillip A. Petersen A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of The Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the Degree of Master of Arts Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan August 1974 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to begin by thanking Dr. Craig N. Andrews of Wayne State University for introducing me to the phenomenon of dissent in the Soviet Union. As for the project itself, Dr. John Gorgone of Western Michigan University not only suggested the approach to the phenomenon, but also had a fundamental role in shaping the perspective from which observations were made. The success of the research phase of the project is due, in great part, to the encouragement and assistance of Lt. Col. Carlton Willis of the Army Security Agency Training Center and School.
    [Show full text]
  • Irwin T. and Shirley Holtzman Collection
    http://oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/kt5x0nd340 No online items Register of the Irwin T. and Shirley Holtzman collection Finding aid prepared by Olga Verhovskoy Dunlop and David Jacobs Hoover Institution Archives 434 Galvez Mall Stanford University Stanford, CA, 94305-6003 (650) 723-3563 [email protected] © 2007 Register of the Irwin T. and 98074 1 Shirley Holtzman collection Title: Irwin T. and Shirley Holtzman collection Date (inclusive): 1899-2010 Collection Number: 98074 Contributing Institution: Hoover Institution Archives Language of Material: English Physical Description: 157 manuscript boxes, 9 oversize boxes, 1 card file box, 32 cubic foot boxes(111.4 linear feet) Abstract: Printed matter, writings, letters, photographs, and miscellany, relating to the Russian writers Isaak Babel', Boris Pasternak and Joseph Brodsky. Consists primarily of printed matter by and about Pasternak, Brodsky and Babel'. Physical location: Hoover Institution Archives Creator: Holtzman, Irwin T creator: Holtzman, Shirley. Access Box 8 restricted; use copies available in Box 4. Box/Folder 22 : 8-15 closed; use copies available in Box/Folder 20 : 1-7. The remainder of the collection is open for research; materials must be requested at least two business days in advance of intended use. Publication Rights For copyright status, please contact the Hoover Institution Archives Preferred Citation [Identification of item], Irwin T. and Shirley Holtzman collection, [Box no., Folder no. or title], Hoover Institution Archives Acquisition Information Acquired by the Hoover Institution Archives in 1998, with subsequent increments received through 2004. Additional increments are expected. An increment was added in 2011. Accruals Materials may have been added to the collection since this finding aid was prepared.
    [Show full text]
  • "China, the Fun House Mirror: Soviet Reactions to The
    UC Berkeley Recent Work Title China, the Fun House Mirror: Soviet Reactions to the Chinese Cultural Revolution, 1966- 1969 Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0fs1526m Author McGuire, Elizabeth Publication Date 2001-05-01 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California University of California, Berkeley CHINA, THE FUN HOUSE MIRROR: SOVIET REACTIONS TO THE CHINESE CULTURAL REVOLUTION, 1966-1969 Elizabeth McGuire Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies Working Paper Series This PDF document preserves the page numbering of the printed version for accuracy of citation. When viewed with Acrobat Reader, the printed page numbers will not correspond with the electronic numbering. The Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies (BPS) is a leading center for graduate training on the Soviet Union and its successor states in the United States. Founded in 1983 as part of a nationwide effort to reinvigorate the field, BPSs mission has been to train a new cohort of scholars and professionals in both cross-disciplinary social science methodology and theory as well as the history, languages, and cultures of the former Soviet Union; to carry out an innovative program of scholarly research and publication on the Soviet Union and its successor states; and to undertake an active public outreach program for the local community, other national and international academic centers, and the U.S. and other governments. Berkeley Program in Soviet and Post-Soviet Studies University of California, Berkeley Institute of Slavic, East European, and Eurasian Studies 260 Stephens Hall #2304 Berkeley, California 94720-2304 Tel: (510) 643-6737 [email protected] http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~bsp/ CHINA, THE FUN HOUSE MIRROR: SOVIET REACTIONS TO THE CHINESE CULTURAL REVOLUTION, 1966-1969 Elizabeth McGuire Spring 2001 Elizabeth McGuire is a Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Yelena Bonner—A Commanding Voice for Human Rights & Heroic Figure for Karabagh Armenians Passes Away
    ZORYAN INSTITUTE OF CANADA, INC. PRESS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Patil Halajian DATE: June 23, 2011 Tel: 416-250-9807 Yelena Bonner—a Commanding Voice for Human Rights & Heroic Figure for Karabagh Armenians Passes Away Armenians mourn the loss of Yelena Bonner, a great humanist, and a leading combatant against the injustices of the Soviet era. She will forever remain relevant and inspirational to people worldwide, and to Armenians particularly, because of her forceful advocacy on behalf of the people of Karabagh. Yelena Bonner, the wife of Andrei Sakharov, the Soviet Union's most prominent dissident scientist, and developer of Russia‟s first hydrogen bomb, was co-founder the Moscow Helsinki Group in the 1970s. By relentlessly challenging state oppression, it quickly became the most active rights group in the entire movement. The organization‟s mission was to publicize Soviet violations of the Helsinki Accord signed in 1975, recognizing Soviet hegemony in photo by Mikhail Lemkhin return for assurance of fundamental freedoms and human rights guarantees. Throughout her lifetime, Ms. Bonner lent her voice to many causes. She spoke very passionately on the human rights violations committed by Azerbaijan in Karabagh and virtually from the onset of the national liberation movement there, she defended the right of the Armenian nation to self-determination. She did so from the highest platforms, calling international attention to the issue. Among her public appearances was a lecture on “Nationalities in the Soviet Union: Possible Solutions within the Framework of a Revised Constitution,” which she made under the auspices of the Zoryan Institute and the Amnesty International Group of Harvard Law School in 1990.
    [Show full text]
  • The Extraordinary Recent History of Holocaust Studies in Lithuania
    PROOF ONLY The Extraordinary Recent History of Holocaust Studies in Lithuania by Dovid Katz (Vilnius) Proof of a paper whose final version of record appeared in Dapim: Studies on the Holocaust, vol. 31:3 (Dec. 2017), pp. 285-295. The final version of record is available only from the publishers, Taylor and Francis: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23256249.2017.1395530 The Extraordinary Recent History of Holocaust Studies in Lithuania Dovid Katz Department of Philosophy and Cultural Studies, Faculty of Creative Industries, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Vilnius, Lithuania ABSTRACT KEYWORDS The paper argues that the recent history of Holocaust Studies in Holocaust in Lithuania; Lithuania is characterized by major provision (for research, Prague Declaration (2008); teaching and publishing) coming from state-sponsored agencies, Green House (Vilnius); particularly a state commission on both Nazi and Soviet crimes. Double Genocide Problematically, the commission is itself simultaneously active in revising the narrative per se of the Holocaust, principally according to the ‘Double Genocide’ theories of the 2008 Prague Declaration that insists on ‘equalization’ of Nazi and Soviet crimes. Lithuanian agencies have played a disproportionate role in that declaration, in attempts at legislating some of its components in the European Parliament and other EU bodies, and ‘export’ of the revisionist model to the West. Much international support for solid independent Lithuanian Holocaust researchers and NGOs was cut off as the state commission set out determinedly to dominate the field, which is perceived to have increasing political implications in East-West politics. But this history must not obscure an impressive list of local accomplishments.
    [Show full text]