Abstracts 25 anys mur - Universitat Pompeu Fabra

Simposi/Symposium/Simposio
25 Anys de la Caiguda del Mur de Berlín: Una Nova Oportunitat per a
Europa?
25 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall: A New Opportunity for Europe?
25 Años de la Caída del Muro de Berlín: ¿Una Nueva Oportunidad para
Europa?
Barcelona, 19, 20 i 21 de novembre del 2014/Barcelona, 19, 20 and 21 November 2014/Barcelona, 19,
20 y 21 de noviembre de 2014
Organitzat per/Organized by/ Organizado por
Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Institut Universitari d’Història Jaume Vicens i Vives i
Cercle d’Economia
Coordinadors/Coordinators/Coordinadores
Marició Janué
(Institut Universitari d’Història Jaume Vicens i Vives de la Universitat Pompeu Fabra)
Josep M. Martí Font
(Periodista i escriptor)
Institucions col·laboradores i patrocinadors/Collaborating institutions and sponsors/Instituciones
colaboradoras y patrocinadores
Friedrich-Ebert Stiftung
Deutsches Konsulat Barcelona
Gabinet del Rectorat (UPF)
Consell Social (UPF)
Departament d’Humanitats (UPF)
1
Abstracts
Sessió 1/Session 1/Sesión 1:
La caiguda del mur de Berlín i el seu context. Una mirada històrica/The fall of the Berlin Wall
and its context: an historical view/La caída del muro de Berlín y su contexto. Una mirada
histórica
• “Did Communism really collapse?”
José Faraldo, professor de la Universitat Complutense de Madrid
• “La Rusia de Putin. Nostalgias imperiales”
Pilar Bonet, corresponsal d’El País a Moscou
• “German Unification and the so called “Window of Opportunity””
Hans-Jürgen Misselwitz, del Comitè Executiu del Partit Socialdemòcrata
Alemany (SPD) a Berlin
Born 1950, studied Biology and Biophysics; worked at the Academy of
Sciences of the GDR and at Humboldt-University of Berlin. 1981 he had to
leave the university; studied Protestant Theology in East-Berlin until 1986.
1987 to 1988 postgraduate fellow of the World Council of Churches in the
USA; until 1989 in a Lutheran parish in the town Hennigsdorf near Berlin.
Politically active since 1981 in the oppositional Peace movement in EastBerlin.1990 Member of the free elected parliament Volkskammer of the GDR
and deputy foreign minister in the de-Maiziére-Government. Head of the
GDR- Delegation at the Two-plus-Four-Negotiations. 1991 to 1999 Director of
the Brandenburg Center for Civic Education in Potsdam. Since 1999 he works
for the Socialdemocratic Party’s (SPD) Executive Board in Berlin. He is
secretary for its Basic Values Commission.
The fall of the Berlin Wall 25 years ago is now widely considered as the key event that
finished the Cold War. But in the place the amazing fact of open borders in Berlin
confronted international politics with the nearly forgotten “German question”.
To solve this question meant no less than overcoming both, German as well as
European division, because they were linked together and elements of the solution in
the same time. When Chancellor Kohl presented his program for “Overcoming the
th
Division of Germany and Europe” at November 28 , he saw German unity at the end
of a process that required a “new order of peace in Europe” without mentioning NATO
what President Bush immediately did: United Germany must be member of the NATO.
It lasted until February 1990 that German unity was set on the international political
agenda. One reason was the expected economic collapse of the GDR and doubts in a
stable new democratic regime. The ongoing spontaneous reunification “on the
ground” led the US – government decide to speed up the political process for another
reason: the Soviet Union, one of the Allied Powers with responsibilities concerning
Germany, should not come in a position to veto the NATO-option. In order to avoid
this, the agenda of the Two plus Four Talks of the Four Powers and the two German
states were strictly limited to solve problems of the past , not those of the future.
2
The then famous word of an historic “window of opportunity”, seen to be widely open
1989, after 1990 already closed. Instead of the once promised “new order of peace in
Europe“ the existing western institutions and alliances extended to the border of the
former Soviet Union. The question is: How to get the promise of 1989 alive or will
there be a new Wall separating Europe from Russia?
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Sessió 2/Session 2/Sesión 2:
L’Europa que va néixer de la fi de la Guerra Freda/The Europe born of the end of the Cold
War/La Europa que nació del fin de la Guerra Fría
• “Las fronteras son (sólo) líneas sobre el mapa”
Simona Skrabec, presidenta del Comitè de Drets Lingüístics i Traduccions del
PEN Internacional
She lives in Barcelona since 1992. She is the author of the books L’estirp de la
solitud (2003) and L’atzar de la lluita (2005). With Arnau Pons she directed an
extensive project about cultural exchange between Germany and Catalonia
(Grenzen sind Straßen, 2007-2008, 2 vol). She has translated more than
twenty books from Slovenian into Spanish and Catalan, as well the translation
of most important Catalan authors (Moncada, Cabré, Ferrater, Marçal, etc.)
into Slovenian. She is also a regular literary critic with various Barcelona based
newspapers, as well as with the culture magazine L’Avenç and the humanist
journal L’Espill of the University in Valencia. She has also edited the books
Diàlegs sense fronteres (2011), about foreign authors established in Barcelona
and Les distàncies d’Europa (2013), an interdisciplinary quest about Europe’s
future.
En 1989 el mapa político de Europa cambió drásticamente: desde la niebla que cubría
la llamada Europa del Este surgieron una multitud de pequeños estados que parecían
aparecer de la nada, como setas después de la lluvia. Esta impresión forma parte de la
barrera ideológica y de desconocimiento que impuso la Guerra Fría. Durante décadas,
las miradas no llegaban más allá del muro. La historia de aquella otra parte de Europa
no se escribía con mucho detalle. Pero si no la observamos desde la distancia, sino
desde el interior de esta amplia región, la transformación de Europa Central —que ha
tenido que luchar duramente para poder recuperar la neutralidad del mismo término
geográfico que la describe— no es fruto de ninguna improvisación para aprovechar
una coyuntura favorable. Aquel otoño, los hechos se precipitaron porque se habían
venido incubando largamente. El muro de Berlín y todo lo que aquella construcción
representaba cayó porque la voluntad de abrir el telón de acero fue una preocupación
existencial de los habitantes de ese espacio. La desaparición de aquella barrera no se
decidió desde ningún despacho de la alta política. Los veinte y cinco años de la nueva
Europa nos obligan a volver a pensar no tanto las fronteras actuales ni tampoco donde
están o deberían estar las líneas que trazamos sobre el mapa para dividir los países,
culturas, lenguas, realidades. Lo que hay que pensar de nuevo es el mismo concepto
de nación y sopesar las razones que aún nos parecen válidos para marcar las
divisiones.
• “After the fall of the Berlin Wall: new tensions between North and South in
Europe… and new opportunities”
Wolf Lepenies, membre permanent de l’Institut d’Estudis Avançats de Berlín
(Wissenschaftskolleg)
3
Professor of Sociology at the Free University Berlin, Rector of the
Wissenschaftskolleg 1986-2001. For several years member oft he Institute for
Advanced Study Princeton / New Jersey; Chaire Européenne at the Collège de
France 1991/2; Dr. honoris causa Sorbonne (Paris); Officer oft he French
Légion d’Honneur. 2006 Peace Prize of the German Book Trade (Friedenspreis
des Deutschen Buchhandels)
Las tres culturas. La sociología entre la literatura et la ciencia, Mexico 1994;
The Seduction of Culture in German History, Princeton 2006; Qué es un
intelectual europeo?, Barcelona 2008.
There was not much doubt, at least not for a long time, that the fall of the Berlin Wall
would eventually lead tot he re-unification oft he two Germanies. Inner-German
resistance to it was as quickly overcome as the opposition of European leaders like
Margaret Thatcher and François Mitterand. In terms of domestic policy, re-unification
has been a difficult, cumbersome yet finally succesful process. In terms of foreign
policy, re-unification has changed the map of Europe and altered the European
balance of power. For a long time, France and Germany had agreed to a division of
power: On the continent, France would lead politically, Germany would be the
economic leader. After re-unification and with many countries from the East joining
the European Union, this division of power did no longer work: Germany, rather
unwillingly, also became the leading political power. As a reaction, France turned
South and has since the moment of German re-unification tried to establish a new and
ambitious Mediterranean policy, together with the „Southern“ members of the EU. Yet
the original plan for the Mediterranean Union failed, due to the veto oft he German
chancellor. From this moment on, ancient fault lines along the North-South divide
became visible on the continent again. I shall retrace the history of the North-South
conflict in Europe, both before and after re-unification and offer a blueprint for the
future from which the EU as a whole might profit.
• “The current situation: Germany today and how it fits into a Europe in crisis”
Ernst Hillebrand, cap de la unitat d’oficines de l’Europa de l’Est de la fundació
Friedrich Ebert Stiftung
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Sessió 3/Session 3/Sesión 3:
Europa avui. On som?/Europe today: where are we now?/Europa hoy. ¿Dónde estamos?
• “Cultural heritage and memory in Europe”
Dr. Jürgen Luh, de l’Stiftung Preußische Schlösser und Gärten BerlinBrandenburg in Potsdam (Fundació per a Palaus i Jardins Prussians de BerlínBrandemburg de Potsdam)
15 May 1988 – 31 May 1993
Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter, History of
Brandenburg-Prussia, Free University
Berlin, Department of History
1 Nov 1993 – 30 Nov 1996
Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter, History of
Brandenburg-Prussia,
University
of
Potsdam, Department of History
1 Dec 1996 – 30 Nov 1999
Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter, History of
Brandenburg-Prussia
University
of
Potsdam, Department of History
1 Dec 1999 – 15 June 2002
Assistant
Professor,
History
of
Brandenburg-Prussia,
University
of
Potsdam, Department of History
4
16 June 2002 – 31 Dec 2007
Since Jan 2008
Oct 2007 – Dec 2012
Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter, Curator,
Prussian
Palaces
and
Gardens
Foundation/Trust Berlin-Brandenburg
Member of the Head Office of the Prussian
Palaces and Gardens Foundation/Trust
Berlin-Brandenburg,
Responsible
for
Science and Research
Head Scientist and Curator of the
Exhibition “FRIEDERISIKO”
• “Dying of success”
Josep M. Martí Font, periodista i escriptor
Is a journalist and writer. Graduated in Law at the University of Barcelona in
1972. Degree in European Studies from the University of Strasbourg (1971).
Between 1973 and 1979 promoted several new media projects in Barcelona.
Between 1979 and 1984 lived in the United States (New York, San Francisco
and Los Angeles) working on film projects and collaborating with several
publications (Cambio 16, La Vanguardia, El País). In 1984 joined the staff of El
País in Madrid, where was editor of Culture. Between 1989 and 1994 was the
correspondent of El País in Germany and covered de fall of the Berlin Wall and
the German reunification. From 2004 to 2009 headed El País bureau in Paris.
Since 2010 is Professor of International Journalism at the IDEC and is currently
working with various media. Among other publications, is the author of El día
th
que acabó el siglo XX (The Day when the XX Century Ended) (Anagrama,
1999) about the fall of the Berlin Wall, and Después del Muro (Galaxia
Gutenberg, 2014) about Europe and Germany 25 years after the Wall.
The Maastricht Treaty of 1992 sought to consolidate a European Germany and avoid a
German Europe. In 2002, the common currency, the euro, began circulating. 2004 saw
the first major expansion to the East. Former French President Valery Giscard d'Estaing
wrote what purported to be the European Constitution, and in the military a
coordination cell was created in Brussels. A prosperous Europe, with a german
inflation and borrowing costs to minimum levels, seemed to be about to become the
superpower of the XXI century. In 2005, French and Dutch voted no to the "European
Constitution". Some reasons were venal, but others pointed to the democratic deficit:
the EU was trying to export democracy without being democratic herself. The process
froze and Europe entered a period of deconstruction. The expansion, however,
continued. Maybe those who were already inside did not seem to like it, but from the
hell outside everybody wanted to get into fortress Europe. In 2008 came the great
systemic crisis and the whole building was on the verge of collapse. Now Europe can
take the opportunity to grow into a cohesive international power, able to create
stability around, or fall into irrelevance. The Union must get effective tools in global
geopolitics and should be democratized through a decentralized model in which States
lose weight in favor of local communities and citizens. Germany has to take the
initiative, but: has the desire?
• “The limits of German leadership in the European Union”
Fernando Guirao, professor de la Universitat Pompeu Fabra
He is Jean Monnet Professor of European Integration History at the
Department of Economics and Business, UPF, and member of the EU Liaison
Committee of Historians and the Editorial Board of the Journal of European
5
Integration History. Ph.D. in History and Civilization by the European
University Institute, Florence (1993). Main book publications: (with F.M.B.
Lynch) (eds.), Alan S. Milward and a Contemporary European History:
Collected Academic Reviews, London [Routledge] 2015 (forthcoming), 773 pp.
and Alan S. Milward and aCentury of European Change, London [Routledge]
2012, 634 pp.; (with Del Pero, Gavín and Varsori), Democrazie. L’Europa
meridionale e la fine delle dittature, Milan [Mondadori] 2010; and Spain and
the Reconstruction of Western Europe, 1945-57. Challenge and Response,
London [Macmillan] 1998.
The European Union is in crisis because it is unable to manage Europe’s relative
decline, in all respects, within a global context. The hegemonic position attributed to
Germany today derives from the lack of conviction and effectiveness of alternative
socio-economic and political models in other countries aspiring to a position of
European leadership, i.e., France or the United Kingdom, during the last forty years. In
any case, more than German leadership is required to escape this crisis. The history of
European integration serves to understand the rise of Germany as much as the
foundations of the collective way-out to the present European crisis.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
6