Ahtisaari day seminar experiences
Hi everyone! Today I was at a seminar held in honor of Ahtisaari Days (Named after the former president of Finland Martti Ahtisaari who also won a Nobel Peace Prize in 2008 for his outstanding work in international peacekeeping). It was called "New Dynamics in Politics and Business". (If you're Finnish you might have heard about it on the news)
I know that you're most likely bored by now, but I'd like to share my experiences and thoughts, even if just to look at them later myself.
So, we (me and a few classmates, all history students) arrived at the seminar, the invitation specifies it is a high-level seminar, somewhat fancily dressed and not really sure what to expect. I googled the main speakers on the way there, so I would know some years and a few facts about the speakers. Something to give me a little bit of a base to compare to when I hear what the speakers have to say.
After the fancy coffee, we move into the theater-area to be seated ready for the first part of the seminar to begin. First, there are opening words by Martti Ahtisaari. I had never heard him speak, so it was interesting to not only hear his accent when speaking english but also his ideas. After these words, the first speaker, the former Foreign Minister of Italy Emma Bonino was called up on stage.
Emma discussed global politics from the point of view of Europe. It was really eye opening, for me, someone who isn't very knowledgeable concerning current affairs or the European Union. Some of her points were lost on me, my political knowledge not enough to comprehend what she meant but the ones I understood were very interesting. She started by stating the positives of the EU, what we had done so far, but soon moved on to point out that the moments we are living now in the European Union are full of fear and anxiety. She pointed out how the EU doesn't really have organized military co-operation. We have 28 armies and yet they aren't compatible. I think her comparison to railways in Africa built by the Germans and British not being compatible together was very fitting. She discussed this problem of lack of united military power and also lack of unity. She criticized the fact that the Security Council hardly acts anymore, is on the verge of being disintegrated, and yet there is nothing there to replace it. Why destroy something as important as the Security Council without making sure you know what is to come after? Her point, I felt, was very valid. It doesn't make sense to destroy a tool before knowing what tool you're going to use next. There cannot be a point where Europe has nothing it can do to intervene properly in international politics, and frankly neutral (if that is even possible) discussions and attempts at peace (in a non-military fashion especially) are extremely important.
After Emma had spoken, quite a lot and extremely well, we heard from Robert Service, Historian and Professor of History at Oxford University. Service specializes in Russian History, has written biographies of Stalin, Lenin, and Trotsky, and we had heard some of his opinions in class almost a year ago. Service spoke on Russia, the history of Russia and its current politics in relation to the end of the Cold War and the crisis in Ukraine currently happening. It was interesting if not eye-opening to hear the points Service was making. One thing that stayed in my mind afterwards was how he said that authoritarian states usually operate from fearfulness. Authoritarian regimes can fall in a matter of days. Its only a matter of when enough people decide to revolt. He explained, very well I might add, the motivations of Russia now and then, and some of the things that went wrong after the Cold War, that lead to the situation now, of Russia blatantly disregarding international treaties and invading Ukraine.
Service, quite hilariously, also explained his opinion of Putin. The room had several laughs as Service started explaining about how Putin was an angry man, a fearfully strong and dangerous man (politically) and how really he was just old and many of his decisions came from a disturbing base of deep psychological problems. Service also contemplated at one point why Putin had gotten Botox ( that was mostly the source of the laughs, no one was laughing at the psychological problems part understandibly). Even though Service's thoughts on Putin were surely those that stuck in the minds of most, something Service said at the end of the event was oddly sobering. He was asked what he would say to Putin if he had once chance to say one thing. Prefacing his answer with a description of the bullet vest and helmet he'd be wearing in the situation, he stated: "Mr. Putin. Why did you take a cul-de-sac when you could have taken an open road?". This was a very good point. Why destroy reforms with backwards policy, when going forwards would have been easier on the bigger scale? Russia, as Service stated, was and is afraid and unwilling to recognize its mistakes in the past. Apparently some in Russia are still taught that Russia won the Cold War.
The last speaker was probably my favorite, Jacqueline McGlade, Chief Scientist to the United Nations Enviromental Programme. She spoke, exictedly and coherently about the environment and environmental issues in connection with international politics with such optimism and gusto I felt happy the entire time. There was no usual sense of crushing failure as usually felt when listening to someone talking about global warming. McGlade was presenting ideas and solutions that helped me gain optimism. She placed a lot of hope in young people, which I appreciate. I know the "today's hope is young people" saying is getting old, yes, but the way in which she explained it made me believe it. Sure, we might have incredible amounts of unemployment which truly sucks but we can also make a difference by changing our stance. Instead of just turning off the light, living our lives conscious of the world and environment around us.
McGlade also mentioned ice caps and permafrost melting. Instead of looking at if from a "we're going to drown in all the water"-perspective, McGlade elaborated upon something I hadn't really even considered, that being the natural gases like methane that are being released into the air, sometimes very explosively, as the frost melts. This could be potentially very harmful. Especially since these gases are being used for business purposes and sometimes the explosions cannot be controlled. The amount of resources put into collecting and selling these natural gases is staggering, and the technology is not advanced enough to do so safely.
Something all three speakers mentioned was social media. Social media being a way of propaganda-drowning Russians gaining information that hasn't been formatted by pro-Putin TV-channels. Social media being a way of collecting data that governments can use. McGlade even told us of an app that a large number of Russians have been asked to download that measures air quality in an attempt to solve the problem of deaths related to poor air quality. Web 3.0, a way of connecting data to problems in order to solve them was one of the things she mentioned. I'm interested in seeing how this works.
For me, a delight was the feminist undertones (if I can call them that) that were present throughout McGlade's and Bonino's presentations. Bonino mentioned women's rights in Italy and made a point of stating Europe also had founding mothers, not only fathers. McGlade mentioned women's empowerment and equality several times throughout her presentation and it was refreshing for me to see that people in the field of politics believe in this cause. I do not remember who it was, maybe Service, who mentioned that countries that do not treat men and women equally should not be given as much international power and resources. This idea of almost sanctioning countries with blatant inequality was one I am quite keen on.
At the end we heard from Minister of Foreign Affairs Erkki Tuomioja, and heard Martti Ahtisaari's view on how to fix the situation in Syria. As most of the conference had dealt with Ukraine, it was nice to hear a bit about Syria as well even if it isn't as close to us in the center of the European Union.
All in all it was a very good experience, and I kept thinking throughout what it would feel like to listen to people like this speaking of things I am truly passionate about. I did also imagine myself on the stage, speaking to people that respect me and my opinions about something I'm passionate about. Maybe I will get a chance, somewhere in the future, to speak to people about feminism or equality on other levels. Thanks for reading if you got this far, it was a great experience and I'm glad I could share my thoughts with you.
-Becks
I know that you're most likely bored by now, but I'd like to share my experiences and thoughts, even if just to look at them later myself.
So, we (me and a few classmates, all history students) arrived at the seminar, the invitation specifies it is a high-level seminar, somewhat fancily dressed and not really sure what to expect. I googled the main speakers on the way there, so I would know some years and a few facts about the speakers. Something to give me a little bit of a base to compare to when I hear what the speakers have to say.
After the fancy coffee, we move into the theater-area to be seated ready for the first part of the seminar to begin. First, there are opening words by Martti Ahtisaari. I had never heard him speak, so it was interesting to not only hear his accent when speaking english but also his ideas. After these words, the first speaker, the former Foreign Minister of Italy Emma Bonino was called up on stage.
Emma discussed global politics from the point of view of Europe. It was really eye opening, for me, someone who isn't very knowledgeable concerning current affairs or the European Union. Some of her points were lost on me, my political knowledge not enough to comprehend what she meant but the ones I understood were very interesting. She started by stating the positives of the EU, what we had done so far, but soon moved on to point out that the moments we are living now in the European Union are full of fear and anxiety. She pointed out how the EU doesn't really have organized military co-operation. We have 28 armies and yet they aren't compatible. I think her comparison to railways in Africa built by the Germans and British not being compatible together was very fitting. She discussed this problem of lack of united military power and also lack of unity. She criticized the fact that the Security Council hardly acts anymore, is on the verge of being disintegrated, and yet there is nothing there to replace it. Why destroy something as important as the Security Council without making sure you know what is to come after? Her point, I felt, was very valid. It doesn't make sense to destroy a tool before knowing what tool you're going to use next. There cannot be a point where Europe has nothing it can do to intervene properly in international politics, and frankly neutral (if that is even possible) discussions and attempts at peace (in a non-military fashion especially) are extremely important.
After Emma had spoken, quite a lot and extremely well, we heard from Robert Service, Historian and Professor of History at Oxford University. Service specializes in Russian History, has written biographies of Stalin, Lenin, and Trotsky, and we had heard some of his opinions in class almost a year ago. Service spoke on Russia, the history of Russia and its current politics in relation to the end of the Cold War and the crisis in Ukraine currently happening. It was interesting if not eye-opening to hear the points Service was making. One thing that stayed in my mind afterwards was how he said that authoritarian states usually operate from fearfulness. Authoritarian regimes can fall in a matter of days. Its only a matter of when enough people decide to revolt. He explained, very well I might add, the motivations of Russia now and then, and some of the things that went wrong after the Cold War, that lead to the situation now, of Russia blatantly disregarding international treaties and invading Ukraine.
Service, quite hilariously, also explained his opinion of Putin. The room had several laughs as Service started explaining about how Putin was an angry man, a fearfully strong and dangerous man (politically) and how really he was just old and many of his decisions came from a disturbing base of deep psychological problems. Service also contemplated at one point why Putin had gotten Botox ( that was mostly the source of the laughs, no one was laughing at the psychological problems part understandibly). Even though Service's thoughts on Putin were surely those that stuck in the minds of most, something Service said at the end of the event was oddly sobering. He was asked what he would say to Putin if he had once chance to say one thing. Prefacing his answer with a description of the bullet vest and helmet he'd be wearing in the situation, he stated: "Mr. Putin. Why did you take a cul-de-sac when you could have taken an open road?". This was a very good point. Why destroy reforms with backwards policy, when going forwards would have been easier on the bigger scale? Russia, as Service stated, was and is afraid and unwilling to recognize its mistakes in the past. Apparently some in Russia are still taught that Russia won the Cold War.
The last speaker was probably my favorite, Jacqueline McGlade, Chief Scientist to the United Nations Enviromental Programme. She spoke, exictedly and coherently about the environment and environmental issues in connection with international politics with such optimism and gusto I felt happy the entire time. There was no usual sense of crushing failure as usually felt when listening to someone talking about global warming. McGlade was presenting ideas and solutions that helped me gain optimism. She placed a lot of hope in young people, which I appreciate. I know the "today's hope is young people" saying is getting old, yes, but the way in which she explained it made me believe it. Sure, we might have incredible amounts of unemployment which truly sucks but we can also make a difference by changing our stance. Instead of just turning off the light, living our lives conscious of the world and environment around us.
McGlade also mentioned ice caps and permafrost melting. Instead of looking at if from a "we're going to drown in all the water"-perspective, McGlade elaborated upon something I hadn't really even considered, that being the natural gases like methane that are being released into the air, sometimes very explosively, as the frost melts. This could be potentially very harmful. Especially since these gases are being used for business purposes and sometimes the explosions cannot be controlled. The amount of resources put into collecting and selling these natural gases is staggering, and the technology is not advanced enough to do so safely.
Something all three speakers mentioned was social media. Social media being a way of propaganda-drowning Russians gaining information that hasn't been formatted by pro-Putin TV-channels. Social media being a way of collecting data that governments can use. McGlade even told us of an app that a large number of Russians have been asked to download that measures air quality in an attempt to solve the problem of deaths related to poor air quality. Web 3.0, a way of connecting data to problems in order to solve them was one of the things she mentioned. I'm interested in seeing how this works.
For me, a delight was the feminist undertones (if I can call them that) that were present throughout McGlade's and Bonino's presentations. Bonino mentioned women's rights in Italy and made a point of stating Europe also had founding mothers, not only fathers. McGlade mentioned women's empowerment and equality several times throughout her presentation and it was refreshing for me to see that people in the field of politics believe in this cause. I do not remember who it was, maybe Service, who mentioned that countries that do not treat men and women equally should not be given as much international power and resources. This idea of almost sanctioning countries with blatant inequality was one I am quite keen on.
At the end we heard from Minister of Foreign Affairs Erkki Tuomioja, and heard Martti Ahtisaari's view on how to fix the situation in Syria. As most of the conference had dealt with Ukraine, it was nice to hear a bit about Syria as well even if it isn't as close to us in the center of the European Union.
All in all it was a very good experience, and I kept thinking throughout what it would feel like to listen to people like this speaking of things I am truly passionate about. I did also imagine myself on the stage, speaking to people that respect me and my opinions about something I'm passionate about. Maybe I will get a chance, somewhere in the future, to speak to people about feminism or equality on other levels. Thanks for reading if you got this far, it was a great experience and I'm glad I could share my thoughts with you.
-Becks
Comments
Post a Comment