-

The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) was one of the first multilateral bodies where its members states, including the US, Russia, all other post-Soviet and European countries, agreed that democracy, rule of law, and human rights were an indivisible part of security. In the mid-1990s the star of the OSCE was on the rise: the organization deployed large multi-disciplinary field missions throughout the former Yugoslavia; it was involved in the protection of rights of ethnic minorities in the Baltics; it was designated to lead conflict-resolution efforts in the post-Soviet space. In addition, the OSCE was conducting election observation and democracy-promotion efforts in the region. With time, however, the consensus of the 1990s has eroded and the effectiveness of the organization is increasingly put into question by some of its member states. What can be learned from the OSCE's experiences? Can multilateral organizations effectively promote democracy in absence of consensus among its member states? The presenter will give a practitioner's perspective on these questions.

About the speaker
Dr. Vladimir Shkolnikov
has served as the Head of Democratization Department in the Warsaw-based Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (ODIHR/OSCE) since spring 2004. He is responsible for direction and management of ODIHR's democracy-promotion technical assistance programs in areas of rule of law, parliamentary support, political party development, gender equality, and migration policy development in the former Soviet states and in Southeastern Europe. Prior to assuming his post he held positions of migration adviser and election adviser at the ODIHR. He has traveled extensively, including to most of the conflict areas in the post-Soviet space. Prior to joining the ODIHR he was resident research consultant at the RAND Corporation in Santa Monica, CA. He received his Ph.D. in public policy analysis from the Pardee RAND Graduate School of Policy Studies.

CISAC Conference Room

Vladimir Shkolnikov Head of Democratization Department Speaker Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, OSCE
Conferences
-

During the strategic modernization program that the Soviet Union undertook in the 1970s, it deployed a large number of multiple-warhead ballistic missiles. This deployment raised concerns in the United States about vulnerability of its land-based missile force and was one of the factors that contributed to the military buildup that the United States undertook in the late 1970s-early 1980s. The newly available documents that contain evidence of the Soviet missile programs demonstrate that the "window of vulnerability" did not exist and provide some insight into the Soviet modernization program.

Pavel Podvig joined CISAC as a research associate in 2004. Before that he was a researcher at the Center for Arms Control, Energy and Environmental Studies at the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (MIPT). He worked as a visiting researcher with the Security Studies Program at MIT and with the Program on Science and Global Security at Princeton University, and he taught physics in MIPT's General Physics Department for more than ten years.

Podvig graduated with honors from the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology in 1988, with a degree in physics. In 2004 he received a PhD in political science from the Moscow Institute of World Economy and International Relations.

His research has focused on technical and political issues of missile defense, space security, U.S.-Russian relations, structure and capabilities of the Russian strategic forces, and nuclear nonproliferation. He was the head of the Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces research project and the editor of a book of the same title, which is considered a definitive source of information on Russian strategic forces.

Reuben W. Hills Conference Room

Pavel Podvig Speaker
Seminars
-

The PC business is one of the most aggressive in the world, with operating efficiency a critical factor for success. At the time of the HP/Compaq merger in 2000, both PC businesses were losing money. Now, seven years later, HP has reported a record first quarter for PCs, generating $8.7B in revenue, a 17% year over year growth and delivering 4.7% in operating profit, representing 0.8pt improvement year over year. So, what operating model has HP used to accomplish this turnaround and be ranked #1 in the world today? How are resource deployment decisions made? What are the key supply chain considerations? How does the company manage P&L and balance sheet tensions? How will HP continue to stay ahead?

As Vice President and General Manager for HP's Consumer Desktop PC Business Unit, Richard Walker is responsible for a global business that provides desktop PCs and digital entertainment centers to consumer markets. Immediately prior to his current assignment, Richard was Vice President of Emerging Markets, responsible for developing long term strategic growth plans for HP's targeted list of emerging countries, with an initial focus on Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC). Richard received his bachelor's degree in business from Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, England. He also serves on the advisory boards for R&D Logic, a San Mateo based life sciences company; Pacific Peninsula Group, a Menlo Park property development company, and SPRIE at Stanford University.

Philippines Conference Room

Richard Walker Vice-President & General Manager, Consumer Desktop PCs Speaker Hewlett-Packard
Seminars
Authors
Michael A. McFaul
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
Michael A. McFaul - If the results of the exit polls hold, and there is no reason to expect that they will not, the following trends are clear: The parties that are surging are United Russia, Homeland and LDPR. There are three things which unite those parties: i) they all have support from the Kremlin (two of the three were created by the Kremlin); ii) they are very loyal to President Putin; iii) they are all running on platforms with varying degrees of nationalism (United Russia is the softest with its central "Strong Russia" campaign slogan, while the other two parties advocate a more virulent form of nationalism).
All News button
1
Authors
Michael A. McFaul
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

In the wake of the August 1998 financial meltdown, many predicted that political breakdown would soon follow. Throughout the summer and fall, Russian analysts of all political orientations began to speak openly and often about the specter of Russian fascism should the economic crisis continue. Others, including even Yeltsin, have warned about coup plots aimed at toppling Russia's fragile democracy. The threat of Russian federal dissolution also loomed as a possible nightmare scenario as individual regional leaders began to deal with the economic crisis with little regard for national laws or national interests. In this new political context, challenges to Russian electoral democracy have proliferated. Before August 1998, it was taboo to speak of, let alone advocate, alternatives to elections as the method for selecting political leaders. After August 1998, discussions of alternatives have renewed again.

All News button
1
Authors
Michael A. McFaul
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Like no other international crisis of the last decade, NATO's bombing campaign against Yugoslavia threatens to undermine support for Western-oriented reforms in Russia and isolate Moscow from the West internationally. Siding with Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic and thwarting liberal reforms at home do not serve the long-term interests of Russia as a world power or Russians as a people. In the passion of the moment, however, Russian leaders may be tempted, or feel compelled to take drastic measures to assist Serbia, which, in turn, could precipitate a passionate anti-Russian response in the West. The resulting strain in U.S.-Russia relations would give new meaning to the term "collateral damage."

All News button
1
Authors
Michael A. McFaul
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Only a few weeks ago, Russia was one of the most downtrodden and detested countries in the eyes of Washington's elite. One could not utter the word "Russia" without adding adjectives such as "crime- ridden," "collapsing" or "corrupt." Russia was considered a basket case of a country that had failed at capitalism and democracy and was soon to fail as a state. Russia's reputation in the United States was so bad that Russian businesspeople began courting American public relations firms to help rectify Russia's image.

All News button
1
Authors
Michael A. McFaul
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Two weeks ago, (Boris N.) Yeltsin looked certain to be impeached by the Duma, the lower house of the Russian parliament. His main political rival, then-Prime Minister Yevgeny M. Primakov, was the most popular political figure in Russia and was widely regarded as perhaps the leading presidential candidate. With Primakov solidly allied with the Russian Communist Party, it looked like Yeltsin's worst nightmare--the return of the Communists to the Kremlin--was about to come true. But judging from his bold decision to remove Primakov, Yeltsin is not quite ready to fade from Russia's political scene. Furthermore, if forced to depart, the president vowed to go down fighting.

All News button
1
Subscribe to Russia