Evgeny Kiselev, b.1956, educated in Moscow University, Institute of Asian and African Countries, majored in Middle Eastern Studies, history of modern Iran and Farsi language. He started his career by serving in the Soviet Army in Afghanistan in 1979-1981 as Farsi interpreter. He took to television journalism in 1987 and quickly rose to prominence as television reporter and news anchor during the years of Gorbachev's reforms. In 1993 co-founded NTV, the first independent television company in the history of Russia. For many years NTV was setting up the highest standards of modern broadcasting journalism in Russia and was considered the most popular television channel among Russian newly emergent middle class, educated people, liberal intellectuals, supporters of democratic reforms etc. During the 90s and the early 2000s NTV was famous for its bold and outspoken style of reporting on the major issues, including such touchy ones as the war on Chechnya, political intrigue in the Kremlin, high-level corruption in the government and many others. For more than a decade Evgeny Kiselev was hosting "Itogi" (Results) - a weekly show that combined in-depth reports, journalistic investigations, live interviews with leading politicians and newsmakers, opinion and commentary. It was famous for its outspoken criticism of government policy. "Itogi" was the longest-running political show on Russian television and was closed only due to the events that changed Evgeny Kiselev's career. In 2001, following the election of Vladimir Putin to Russia's presidency, the government started to crack down on independent media. NTV was put under the control of the government after a hostile takeover by Gazprom, Russia's gas monopoly, and Evegeny Kiselev, who by that time was general director of NTV, had to leave the company. He was involved in two other major projects aimed at preserving the independent voice of television in Russia, but both television stations were closed by the government. Evgeny Kiselev remains active as an independent columnist and political analyst, he has a popular weekly program on the "Echo of Moscow", the leading Russian radio station, he also lectures at home and abroad.

His new television project - "Vlast" ("Power"), a show that will concentrate again on Russian politics and power struggle that is already starting in Russia on the eve of the next presidential election in 2008, is scheduled to appear in December on RTVi, the last remaining independent Russian station.

Vitali Silitski received his PhD in Political Science from Rutgers University. He worked as an associate professor at the European Humanities University in Minsk, Belarus, a position he was forced to leave in 2003 after publicly criticizing the government of President Alexander Lukashenka. Silitski is currently working on a book titled The Long Road from Tyranny: Post-Communist Authoritarianism and Struggle for Democracy in Serbia and Belarus. Vitali is also a freelance analyst for Freedom House Nations in Transit Report, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and Oxford Analytica. In 2004-2005, he was a Reagan-Fascell Fellow at the National Endowment for Democracy. Vitali will continue as a visiting scholar at CDDRL through early 2007.

Bioterrorism is a growing threat. While the U.S. government has spent considerable sums on programs designed to protect the United States from a biological attack, no clear strategy has been articulated to guide planning and expenditures. This talk will present the outlines of a coherent strategy for coping with bioterrorism that includes diplomacy, deterrence and defense, with the emphasis on defense.

Dean Wilkening directs the Science Program at CISAC. He holds a Ph.D. in physics from Harvard University and spent 13 years at the RAND Corporation prior to coming to Stanford in 1996. His major research interests have been nuclear strategy and policy, arms control, the proliferation of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, ballistic missile defense, and conventional force modernization. His most recent research focuses on ballistic missile defense and biological terrorism. His work on missile defense focuses on the broad strategic and political implications of deploying national and theater missile defenses, in particular, the impact of theater missile defense in Northeast Asia, and the technical feasibility of boost-phase interceptors for national and theater missile defense. His work on biological weapons focuses on understanding the scientific and technical uncertainties associated with predicting the outcome of hypothetical airborne biological weapon attacks, with the aim of devising more effective civil defenses, and a reanalysis of the accidental anthrax release in 1979 from a Russian military compound in Sverdlovsk with the aim of improving our understanding of the human effects of inhalation anthrax.

For many Koreans, their country's "northern regions" are locked in memory and even mystery. Families that once lived in North Korea still think of their lost hometowns with longing and nostalgia. Wherever they have ended up--in South Korea, America, Europe or elsewhere--and in succeeding generations, there remains an unceasing sense of unrequited loss.

It may seem strange, but Westerners who once lived in North Korea--as missionaries, traders, and, oddly enough, refugees--also share something of these sentiments. They think of missionary childhoods, lost stakes in business, Korean friends, and the special physical qualities of the landscape as part of their own emotional experience.

Donald Clark addressed this foreign experience in his book entitled Living Dangerously in Korea: the Western Experience, 1900-1950 (EastBridge, 2003). This lecture is based on materials in the chapters that deal with foreign life in the north, particularly P'yongyang, in the gold mines in the Unsan district, and in the Russian refugee colony on the northeast coast. It is illustrated from family albums of people who lived there in the 1930s.

Josef Joffe is the Marc and Anita Abramowitz Fellow in International Relations at the Hoover Institution and is publisher-editor of the German weekly Die Zeit.

Joffe's areas of interest include U.S. foreign policy, international security policy, European-American relations, Europe and Germany, and the Middle East.

His essays and reviews have appeared in a wide number of publications including the New York Review of Books, Times Literary Supplement, Commentary, New York Times Magazine, New Republic, Weekly Standard, and the Prospect. Additionally, his scholarly work has appeared in many books and in journals such as Foreign Affairs, the National Interest, International Security, and Foreign Policy as well as in professional journals in Germany, Britain, and France.

Joffe is currently an adjunct professor of political science at Stanford, where he was the Payne Distinguished Lecturer in 1999-2000. He also is a distinguished fellow of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford. In 1990-91, he taught at Harvard, where he is also an associate of the Olin Institute for Strategic Studies. He was a visiting lecturer in 2002 at Dartmouth College and in 1998 at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School. He was a professorial lecturer at Johns Hopkins (School of Advanced International Studies) in 1982-1984. He has taught at the University of Munich and the Salzburg Seminar.

His most recent book is Überpower: The Imperial Temptation in American Foreign Policy.

Reared in Berlin, Joffe obtained his Ph.D. degree in government from Harvard.

http://www.hoover.org/bios/joffe

Event Synopsis:

Professor Joffe opens his talk with two movie quotes, "With great power comes great responsibility" from Spiderman, and "If you build it, they will come" from Field of Dreams. Both quotes, he explains, relate to the idea of modern American hegemony. The United States must concern itself with policies and institutions that promote its own interests and those of others, and by doing so will attract international support and cooperation as it did in the "golden age" of American-led institutions such as NATO. This era ended with the fall of the Soviet Union, following which the United States has seen its legitimacy decline lower than ever, even while accumulating unprecedented military power. The void left by the Soviet Union has unbalanced the global power structure and caused other countries to turn against the aggressive policies of the new single hegemon, the United States, in situations like the invasion of Iraq under George W. Bush.  Professor Joffe describes the role that America's "imperial temptation" played in its invasion of Iraq, causing a further decline in America’s global legitimacy, a crumbling of international support, and an unwitting boon to Ahmadinejad's regime in Iran, which Joffe considers to be the real threat and which essentially had its "dirty work" of removing Saddam Hussein from power done for it by the United States. Joffe urges the U.S. to think strategically about how collaboration with other countries can help rebuild mutually beneficial institutions and bolster U.S. legitimacy, rather than approaching its role in the world ideologically, treating other nations with contempt and turning them against the U.S.

A discussion session included such questions as: What has the role of American exceptionalism played in the events of the last decade? Was the outcome of the most recent Iraq war inevitable, or was it a result of bad policies and poor handling by the U.S. government? How can a country go so wrong as the US has (in pursuing the "wrong war, in the wrong country, at wrong time" as Joffe describes)? To what extent has the de-legitimization of the US been caused by its policy toward Israel? What should the U.S. approach now be toward Iran?

Ambassador Eva Nowotny is the official representative of the Republic of Austria in the United States and is responsible for all aspects of the relationship between the two countries. On December 04, 2003 she presented her credentials to President George W. Bush at the White House. She is also Permanent Representative of the Observer Mission of Austria to the Organization of American States (OAS) and Ambassador to the Commonwealth of the Bahamas.

Cosponsored by the Consulate General of Austria, Los Angeles http://www.austria.org

Audio Synopsis:

In this presentation, Ambassador Nowotny offers her thoughts on Austria's recent six month presidency of the European Union, which she points out has fostered an increase in positive attitudes toward the EU on behalf of Austrian citizens. While 2005 was a difficult year for the EU in light of the French and Dutch rejections of the latest treaty and disagreement about enlargement policy especially with respect to Turkey, the Austrian presidency has "reestablished a cooperative climate" and a degree of optimism to the European Union. Several unexpected events early in Austria's presidency presented challenges, including Russia's decision to stop the flow of Gazprom gas to Ukraine, the Maoist uprising in Nepal, and Iran's declaration that it would continue developing nuclear weapons. Austria used these challenges as an opportunity to reinvigorate discussion of foreign policy and negotiate a coherent EU response to international conflicts. 

The ambassador then highlights key issues dominating Austria's presidency. These include the debate over the future of Europe, centering on the constitutional treaty and enlargement; the internal development of the European project, especially fostering economic competitiveness and addressing crime and terrorism; and the role of Europe in the world, where Austria has contributed strongly by helping to resolve conflicts like those in the Balkans, and helping to develop Europe's "neighborhood policy." 

Finally, Ambassador Nowotny emphasizes the importance of the transatlantic relationship, which she feels the US and Europe attach equal weight to. Key areas of cooperation in years to come will include resolving international conflicts and dealing with crises, fostering the transatlantic economic partnership, improving international governance structures, and combatting terrorism.

A discussion session following the presentation raised such questions as: Where are there differences between the interests of Austria and of the European Union? In a post-9/11 world, do we have the institutional structure necessary to deal with new issues such as terrorism, and can we rely on those left over from WWII (NATO, OSCE, etc.)? Does Austria approach Southern and Eastern European countries as one group or does it prefer to deal with them individually?