 My testing, one, two, three, my testing. Good morning, everyone. Yeah, welcome to Norwich University. Thank you very much for attending the Norwich's fifth Peace and War Summit in person or virtually. My name is Yang Mokoo and Associate Professor of Political Science and Associate Director for Peace and War Center in Norwich. I am truly honored to serve as Executive Director of 2024 Peace and War Summit that addresses the theme of war, memory, and reconciliation. Since 2018, our summit have addressed most significant global issues, including the North Korea's nuclear and missile challenges and US-China rivalry and Russia-Ukraine war. And last year, just we talked about the peace and conflicts in the Middle Eastern regions. So this year, we are gonna address the issue of war, memory, and reconciliation. So our global community has witnessed the outbreak of numerous military conflicts within and between nations, which cause immediate sufferings, such as so many people's death and injuries and economic devastations. These interstate and interstate wars lead to international community to seriously deal with those devastating consequences as viewed in contemporary Russia-Ukraine war and Israeli-Palestinian war. However, our global community tends to give little attention to the long-term negative impact of those consequences, those wars, on the individuals and societies and the international community. So this negative impact includes lingering painful memories and traumas in the people's hearts and minds, or so like a historical antagonism between former adversary ethnic groups and nations. In this context, today's summit will closely address the issue of war, memory, and reconciliation in multiple reasons. So it can help promote our understanding of the persistent and negative impact of past military conflicts on current societies. Without any doubt, the currently ongoing wars, Russia-Ukraine war and Israeli-Palestinian war, many other wars, will leave long-term negative consequences. Therefore, it is necessary for policy makers in all nations to make every effort to prevent the outbreak of wars and to promote peace and reconciliation. Today, from 9 a.m. to 4.30 p.m., our keynote speaker and eight scholars and four students will present their unique insights on the issues, these issues. Tomorrow from 9 to 12.15 p.m., the summit speakers will have enclosed workshops to discuss their research papers. So now, I'm so pleased to introduce our keynote speaker, retired U.S. Marine Corps Colonel, William McClell. Since 2022, he has been serving as Vice President of Student Affairs and Commandant of Cadets and Norwich University. McClell was commissioned into the Marine Corps in 1991 after graduating Summa Cum Laude from Norwich University. As a Marine, McClell developed into a distinguished leader. He commanded 1st Battalion 5th Marines, the 1st Marine Resiment, and the Crisis Response Task Force for U.S. Central Command, as well as serving as an advisor team leader in both Iraq and Afghanistan. He served overseas in multiple operations, including marathon, southern watch, desert thunder, Iraqi freedom, enduring freedom, canjari and inherent resolve. He also graduated with honors from the basic school and previous warfare school and Marine Corps work college, as well as served as a congressional fellow. In his final tours, he served as a director of the Marine Corps Command and Step College, followed by serving as the Marine Corps liaison to the U.S. House of Representatives. His personal awards include Legion of Merit with a V device and four gold stars, the Bronze Star with a V device, the Purple Heart and Combat Action Reborn with one gold star. He holds the rank of Brigade General in the Vermont State Militia. So now I turn it over to Kamadan McClell, fluids of yours. Let us give a round of applause. Good morning, everyone. All right, see if I can do this without messing with the microphones. All right, well, welcome to what I am quite certain is gonna be an enlightening series of presentations. And I think they will be especially meaningful for many of you students. I see several of you sitting up close, some of you hiding in the back. But knowing you and knowing some of your choices of professions, I think you're gonna find this is gonna be more than just an academic pursuit, but this is the beginning of you learning more about your chosen profession and that some of these insights that you'll get over the course of today, I think will affect the way you approach your professional duties for the rest of your life. I wanna say a loud thank you to various colleagues that are gonna be presenting today. I hope you students realize that preparation for a short presentation sometimes can be the results of many months of academic work trying to find the grains of truth in a sea of distraction at times. Their efforts and investment in you, our students are noted and deeply appreciated. So make sure to thank some of those professors when the day is finished, as you're reflecting upon the things that you've learned. You know, when my colleague, Gangmo, asked me to be the keynote for this conference, I was initially reluctant. You know, discussions of war and its aftermath are not things that you're supposed to pick up lightly or treat without due diligence and deep thinking. Just him asking the question brought back some memories, some that I think of regularly and some which I hadn't revisited for quite a while. Contained in some of those memories are fragments of what might by some be called wisdom. And since my whole purpose in coming back here to be your commandant is to pass on the things that I've learned since I was a student to you, the easy answer to Yangmo was yes, I'll do it. And the neat thing was from those memories that his question brought up, this keynote actually almost started to write itself. I just had to organize which piece I might wanna talk about first. One of the memories that Yangmo's ask brought about, it hardly sounds like it's connected to war at all, but it is. So I want you to close your eyes a second and picture a spring day in Southern California. Perfect weather, blue skies, warm, but not hot. I had recently returned from a combat deployment. It was our second in the past three years. And I was beginning my post deployment, 96 hour liberty. For the uninitiated, that's mill speak for a four-day weekend, 96 hours divided by 24, that's four days. So I had a four-day weekend. We would often do that when we returned from deployment, get that initial period at home and then come back to work and work on making sure everyone else is returned properly. So this particular 96 hour LIBO was a Monday and a Friday with a weekend in between. And since Friday was a school day, I thought I'd give my wife Caroline a well-needed break. After all, she'd been running the household while I was off somewhere else. And I thought I'll go pick up my boys from school. I could make up for some lost time. Maybe we'd go somewhere after I picked them up. We'd make a little memory. So I jumped into my truck and the first memory hit me was it was the same truck that the boys and I had scoped out and purchased after my return from a different combat tour a decade earlier. So the truck was a little older, a little worse for wear, but it already brought out memories of me and my family together because we'd picked that truck together. And I was early. I had plenty of time to get to the school. So I was driving slowly through my neighborhood, calmly taking in the sights, people mowing their lawns, walking their dogs, regular life unfolding. And I hadn't experienced that unrushed feeling for probably most of the past three years. I was either in command deploying, on deployment or returning from deployment. So I was really relishing this, this period just a few minutes of completely having no task except for drive my car to go pick up my boys. When I got to the edge of our neighborhood, about four blocks from the house, I hit a T intersection where we were leaving the neighborhood and I had to choose to turn left or right. And it was there that I froze. I froze because it was there that I came to the full realization that I didn't know where the school was. I wasn't capable of making a choice to go left or right because I didn't know where I was going. So I sat there for a moment, come to grips with that. Here's a Marine Colonel in command of 4,000 folks, lost four blocks from his house. In this modern era, the memes almost right themselves, don't they? Then I realized, I've got the answer right here. Got my phone. You may not believe this, but returning from a deployment, you have to get used to carrying a cell phone again because you go seven, eight, nine months, a year of your life without using one. So I grabbed the phone, I unlock it, I pull up Google Maps, and then I freeze again. How do you search Google Maps for something that you don't know the name of? Here's what I did know. I knew where my wife's contact info was in the phone. So I hit that button and I called Caroline, my wife, to get the information that I needed to proceed more than four blocks from my house. We had a quick laugh about it. She went easy on me, but it wasn't all just a funny story because the question I couldn't shake on the rest of the drive was what kind of a dad doesn't know where his kids go to school. To make the memory even a little more complicated after I got the directions and was now driving in the correct basic direction towards the school, I passed over a cross street that I recognized. And it was the same street that led to a different neighborhood. One that my Sergeant Major, Tom Sowers and I had visited six years earlier to visit the parents of a Marine that Tom and I had lost in Afghanistan. Young man named Donald Hogan. His parents, Jim and Carla, were now our close friends, as sometimes happens. And I thought, what would they not give to have a simple problem like not knowing where to go to pick their son up? So I put that memory into context because they would never be able to pick their son up again. They would look at my small problem in a completely different way. This inevitably led to me thinking about the Marines that their son, Donald, who took some heroic actions and he saved many of his colleagues. I always remember how one, a young man named Rocky Hoard, he was badly wounded in the event, but he was saved. And he's badly wounded enough that we had to evacuate him to Germany. He was too unstable to be further evacuated to Bethesda Naval Hospital just outside of D.C. So he had to stay there in Germany for a while. And his very pregnant wife somehow got her way onto an international flight and flew there to see him in Launchstuhl, Germany. A short while later, she gave birth to their son in the very next room in the clinic at Launchstuhl. I thought about the connection between those two events. One family shattered and another saved. This has always led me to thinking about the Navy Cross that Donald had been awarded for the actions that day and how difficult it was to accurately write the summary of action that always accompanies such things. Many of you may know about citations and this is not to be confused with the citation. The citation is the short public description that often gets read at ceremonial events or gets printed on a piece of paper and hung up somewhere. No, the summary of action is a minutely detailed description of the entire event and surrounding actions. It's backed up by eyewitness statements, by interviews, by command logs, maps, photographs. To the outside eyes, that seems like a very straightforward task, gather these things up, put them in order, write them down, send it in. But in reality, that can become a very difficult task. Under the stress as a combat, people encode their memories differently. For some, adrenaline and other chemicals that quickly hit you, they act on the brain to compress time. Sometimes 10 minutes can pass in your memory and it'll seem like two. Entire sequences of actions can go unremembered and biologically unrecorded. For others, a mere few feet away, time can get stretched out and become elongated. Mere minutes can seem to their mind to be dozens of minutes. Some of you might recognize or remember the verse from the Gordon Lightfoot song when he says, does anyone know where the love of God goes when the waves turn the minutes to hours? That's a songwriter's way of telling you about that particular phenomenon. It's not hyperbole, but it's a real phenomenon. You'll also interview people that get tunnel vision and they can recall with uncanny accuracy the most minute details about what is right in front of them. But that superpower is bought by experiencing absolutely nothing that takes place to their immediate left or right. Those memories go unrecorded. They take that attention and they concentrate it down to a singular thing. Others can get auditory exclusion and they don't hear things or maybe more accurately, they don't remember hearing things like a second explosion or their two or were their three. Well, it depends on which statement you read or an aircraft passing very closely overhead. Believe me on the battlefield, you know very well when a jet aircraft passes about 150 feet off the deck. But for some, they don't remember hearing it. Doesn't mean the event didn't happen. But for them, they have to rely on others memories because in their memory bank, it just didn't happen. From a dozen statements, a general timeline and basic flow of events can emerge. But exactitude can be out of reach. It's another casualty of war and conflict. Each person's memory becomes their piece of the truth. And it doesn't always match the exact truth of the person next to them who experienced the event slightly differently, different biology at work, different other memories that need to get encoded into the new memories. So as I sat in that pickup line at what I now knew was Bernice Ayer Middle School, I had some conflicted thoughts. Joy at being home, being able to pick up my boys, anticipation of spending some time with them, combined with grief about remembering young Donald and his family and so many other fine young men lost before their time. Both of those thoughts tempered with hope for the future, especially for the futures of the people that his actions had saved, muddled and complicated with guilt over being in one piece yourself when others were not. And not knowing intrinsically how all of those things are supposed to fit together, we lost the visual, I guess that's because I closed this, but that maybe you could say I was having trouble reconciling a variety of my own memories that day. So I share that somewhat complicated story with you to get you into the mindset to understand at a deeper level some of the presentations that you will hear today. There is no straight line that leads from war to memory to reconciliation because war itself creates folds and side tracks. Those folds and side tracks, they spawn conflicting memories in the people that participated in the same events. And those conflicts of memory, if not understood and recognized as products of war itself, can often stand as obstacles to reconciliation. As one of our great American writers, Tim O'Brien put it, in any war story, but especially a true one, it is difficult to separate what happened from what seemed to happen. It's safe to say that in a true war story, nothing much is ever really true. Here, I think he got to the heart of it. You know, in the reconciliation business, in much of life, truth is often most regarded as fact. We use those two terms interchangeably. But when it's a product of war, truth must sometimes be approached more as individual meaning, of which there can be several derived from a single incident. Those meanings can all be true, while simultaneously differing in some small details. Now, don't mistake what I just said as a support of postmodern relativism. To my mind, that concept has taken far too many liberties and too often becomes a helpful excuse for those who are trying to flee from accountability, either accountability from themselves or from society. But simply a recognition that war can create conflicting memories and you are not going to be able to reconcile those without understanding them as part of the fabric. So for you students, as you take in the presentations, keep this thought in mind. What you're gonna hear are distillations and lessons drawn from the most difficult of environments to discern truth from. When Shakespeare wrote, cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war, he was describing that transition from the controlled environment before war where truth can largely be grounded in the fact realm, to the most chaotic environment the man can invent, where the vagaries of fog and friction, incomplete information, chance, violence and the imperfect human response to these things all thrive and combine. This is where fact can become unmoored and truth can emerge into the meaning realm more than the factual realm. And if you hope to one day engage in the process of reconciliation, you must recognize these realms as different. You have to accept that heroism and cunning viewed from one side of a battle can be viewed as treachery by the other. Bravery can sometimes be remembered as foolhardiness, just as often as brashness can be remembered as courage. Battlefield genius can be interpreted by some as simply luck. The lucky can be remembered as geniuses. One would do well by reading the book The General by Forrester to be reminded that the main character occurs on his appearance with his unit at the decisive point of a battle resulting in a victory. Was the result of him getting his unit lost in a maze of gullies and arriving at the decisive point simply by chance. This resulted in his steady promotion up the chain of command. Or was it chance though? Maybe there was an innate skill that assisted. Maybe he made his own luck. Participants in the battle all might remember it differently and draw conflicting conclusions. Reconciliation rests with the ability to recognize both as true at the same time. Now shifting gears a little bit, another aspect of this conference I'd like to set the stage for involves what I hope happens in the minds of you students as you take in these presentations. Years ago I read a fascinating book by Professor Ed Hirsch from the University of Virginia. It was about cultural literacy. There is a lot of material in the book about how our minds create associations between individual pieces of knowledge forming something like a web of connected pieces of information, he referred to them as scumata. It is his contention that your most connected and integrated web becomes your culture. It's the net that all new information that you take in is strained through and that new information finds at times relevant spots to connect to your existing culture and it finds itself anchored. You find new connections between individual pieces of knowledge and information. All of the new things that you remember become remembered in context and relation to the things that you already know. And that is something that you're going to be doing participating in by attending these presentations. You're gonna be adding new nodes of knowledge, new connections between nodes. You're gonna make your net larger. You're gonna make the spacing between those nodes finer. You're gonna be capable of catching and assessing and assimilating more information. Your cultural literacy will not just cover some of these conflicts of our history, but because you participate in this, they will include some more discerning aspects of conflict and what effect conflict has on society and how societies heal and reconcile from conflict. You might even begin to determine if reconciliation can happen under a given set of circumstances. So for you students, you're probably, many of you getting tired of hearing this last bit of guidance from me, but you know every time I get a chance, you're gonna hear it from me. I charge you, find the connections between these presentations, but not just the presentations. Find the connections that exist between the presentations, the classes that you're taking, or have taken in the past, and the things that you've already experienced firsthand in your lives. I want you to do two things. Appreciate the things that match and reinforce. You're building a strong culture that way, but I also want you to actively look for the inconsistencies. Look for the parts that don't meet squarely at the ends. You have to move beyond just identifying them, however. You got to discuss these disconnects with your fellow students, with your professors, with your mentors wearing a uniform, with your family members, or with me when you see me, because that is what learning is. Both the reinforcement and connection mechanism and looking for the inconsistencies and trying to figure out why they're inconsistent. That's what learning is, and that is why you are here at Norwich. That's what Norwich exists for. So I hope this symposium is fantastic for you. I hope that it does several of those things and gives you a mechanism to advance your learning. And I appreciate being here with you this morning. Semper Fidelis and Norwich Forever. I think we have time for a minute or two for questions. If we've got two questions, I'll entertain them, otherwise I'll stay here for a few minutes. If you've got one of those questions, you would rather ask one on one instead of in a group of people. Here's one brave soul. Good morning. In your experience going overseas, I want to know, when you're interacting with people who have similar experiences to you from other cultures, how do you find common ground and tell stories to each other and also interact in that regard? I think the good question, you're gonna use this one as well and leadership lesson baked into it. Too many times when we're given an important task, we see that as the only story unfolding in a given place in a given time. And there's a tendency to see everyone else as a supporting character in your story. And what you constantly have to remind yourself is everyone is writing the story of their life. And every person you run across that you deal with, whether it's something small or something very large that you're negotiating, they're the main character in their story and you're a bit player. That's easy to say, but you'll find yourself having to remind yourself over and over again of that piece and what you're trying to do is align people to have one line in your story that actually moves your narrative forward. And what you have to do is try to find the common ground. Remembering they're writing a story of their life and you can find the line that if you write it in yours and they write it in theirs, you're both writing the story that's gonna work for both of you. What you've done at that point is just led in a very difficult time. But you can't take the shortcut of just assuming that your goals and desires are gonna magically transfer over to the goals and desires of everyone that you're dealing with. You gotta get to know them a little bit and you find the overlap and then pretty soon they're doing things that advances their story and it just so happens that it meets your goals and desires as well. But that takes work and you get to practice that here. And you'll use it in the Coast Guard, believe me. You're gonna deal with that on a day-to-day basis of people whose story they're trying to write is completely different than yours being in a law enforcement realm like where you're headed. But you'll figure it out and you'll figure out ways that they're gonna, they're gonna tell you the pieces that you need to know your story will move forward and so will theirs. Is that helpful to you? You have a follow-up? No? Okay. Oh, here comes the scholar of Marine Corps history too so I gotta be on my toes. Sir, as someone who has interviewed dozens if not hundreds of veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, I was wondering if you could talk a little bit about reconciliation and maybe if you were yourself have ever done an oral history interview, whether or not that experience doing oral history interviews has been therapeutic and if that can be counted as part of reconciliation. You know, it's interesting and the answer as in so many things, Dave, helpful for some, not helpful for others. Everyone has their own experience with that. Some people thrive on that need to share and others would prefer to self-contain. Both can be avenues for reconciliation. I'll tell you, I first, it was actually outside a war that I first learned some details about the reconciliation business. It was when I was working in the Congress for the first time and those of you that don't know those of us uniform military folks that work as liaisons to Congress, we spend some of our time taking members of Congress overseas to see firsthand the things that they need to see and experience to make better policy decisions on behalf of all of us. And the first trip that I ever took was to South Africa and there were, gosh, I wanna see, say 14 members of Congress on that trip. The two leaders were John Lewis, who many of you might remember from the Civil Rights Movement, we lost John a few years ago, and then a guy named Amo Houghton, he was from upstate New York, he was at the time the richest member of Congress. He made his money in fiber optics. The two of them were the two leaders and we went to South Africa to talk about reconciliation. It was, we met with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission with FW DeClerk, Nelson Mandela. We met with Desmond Tutu, Archbishop, who led the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Justice Goldstone, who tried to, he was the lynchpin of rewriting the South African Supreme Court to take into account the end of apartheid and the changing government. And there was a lot of storytelling inside of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission that was the heart of how they went about trying to reconcile all those years of apartheid. Was, we can't reconcile until we can agree on some version of the Truth. And that was where Archbishop Tutu's strength as a religious leader became very important to gathering both victims and perpetrators together to arrive at a somewhat agreed upon version of what had happened in the past. But I also learned, at that time, there are some elements of nonwar that can seem similar to war when it comes to how people encode their memories. So I remember hearing from those gentlemen and understanding the Truth sometimes is gonna have slightly fuzzy edges on either side based on who you interview of what happened at this date, this place, this time. And I also learned sometimes people are victims one day and they're perpetrators on another day. And it changes how they are as victims the next time. And then it also changes how they act as perpetrators. There's this strange line. Events that happen to us one day clearly affect how we ourselves act the next day. All these things can be drawn from a study of what unfolded in South Africa at the end of apartheid. So that was kind of a long-winded answer, but what I found was there were many people did not participate in the Truth and Reconciliation Commissions because that was the healthiest thing for them personally was not to bring up those memories again. But I saw there were a lot of people that did have some semblance of feeling because they participated. So the answer as usual from me, Dave, is it depends on the individual and it depends on the circumstances. Does that help? Okay, any follow-up to that? Okay, well again I hope today is a memorable one for you and I hope you get a lot out of these speakers and don't be afraid to ask them the tough questions or talk to them afterwards if you have an epiphany tonight when you're trying to fall asleep. You just can't square a couple of things. That's a good thing. You're being kept awake for a reason because your brain says don't put this thing down until you get it encoded a little bit better. So again, Yang Mo, thanks for the invitation. Thank you so much for your insightful keynote speech. I think listening to his keynote, I think he pointed out very important aspects. During today's summit and tomorrow's like workshops with scholars and students, we will address this topic conflicting, right? The conflicting memories. So just one example I can talk about is that just later on I'm gonna address the Japan and Korea relations. But as you might know, the Japan colonized the Korea starting in 1910 and then until 1945. So Japan just brutally ruled Korea and then at the last stage of the World War II, even just the Korea, the Japan forcibly recruited so-called comfortable women who forced them to serve sexually Japanese soldiers for certain period of time. So so many of them died and all those kinds of stuff. But what I'm trying to say is that the recent days of the past seven, eight decades, the Korean interpretations of Japan's colonial rule or brutal actions toward Korean versus Japanese interpretations of Japan's colonial rule of Korea and Japan's war actions toward Korean people, they are sharply different. They are sharply diverging. So that different interpretation of the history can cause huge turmoil and disruptions between those relationships. Even that affects US policy toward the Asia Pacific. US really want South Korea and Japan as allies to check and balance the rising China and the North Korean-Ukrainian missile threats. But in many cases, Japan, South Korea, they cannot go together well because of those historical memories and conflict-turing memories. So I think how to reconcile those conflict-turing memories, how to reconcile just those relationships between those two peoples. That's a really important and intriguing topic. So in today's, the semi-sessions, we are gonna address those topics in American settings, historical settings and European settings and Asian settings. I think even just a long time ago, happening a long time ago, 30 years of war, just Professor Emily Gray is gonna talk about. So hopefully, all of us can important lessons from today's discussions and questions and answers and all those sessions. Thank you again for joining the keynote session for Peace and World Summit in 2024. So next session will begin at 10 a.m. So, see you then. We had a whole, because they had the whole Zouov thing. They, their kind of fixation was on European imperialists, particularly the French and stuff, the Bale students. Power thing for me, I don't know anything. I know your experience with that. I know, yeah. Let's make that again, call one of the Medicare. That's part of the reason why. This is where, where am I gonna get an Uber in Northfield, but I've already been in an Uber. Testing, testing. Good morning everyone. My name is Ahmed Mohamed. I'm a sophomore in the Honors College, majoring in computer security information assurance. And my name is Erin Reynolds. I'm a junior majoring in political science. Thank you for joining us both here in person and those watching online for the first panel this year's Norwich University Peace and War Summit. The purpose of this year's summit is to explore wartime memories and post-conflict reconciliation to understand the lasting impact on citizens, infrastructure and political climates beyond the end of hostilities. Today, we are fortunate enough to have two scholars ready to share their work on the complex historical narratives surrounding significant events in American history and the individuals involved. Professor Zachary Bennett, an expert in early American history and environmental history, joined Norwich University in 2020. He holds a PhD from Rutgers University, an MA from Miami University and a BA from Northern Michigan University. Bennett's research focuses on colonial New England's transformation through its waterways with publications in journals like the New England Quarterly and Early American Studies. Currently, he's working on contested currents, rivers in the remaking of early America and plans to delve into the narrative history of the Anglo-Wabinaki Wars next. Professor Stephen Sodigrim, with a BA from Cornell College and a PhD from the University of Kansas, specializes in American and military history. His acclaimed book, The Army of the Potomac in the Overland and Petersburg campaigns, earned him the prestigious 2018 Colby Award, making him the first to win for Norwich University affiliated author in its history. Each of our presenters will present for 15 minutes, followed by a 10 minute Q and A. There are microphones on both sides of the room at the stairs where we will invite you to ask questions at the end. Once again, we thank all participants for joining us at the Norwich University Peace and War Summit and look forward to the day ahead. Thank you. Good morning, everyone. My presentation is called The Indian in the Mirror, Remembering New England's Colonial Wars. Just a quick point, if you're from my 121 course, there is a paper circulating around, so look for that and sign that if you could. So yes, Remembering New England's Colonial Wars. The point that I'm going to make first off is that we have pretty much utterly forgotten about New England's Colonial Wars. I still remember in fifth grade, there being a kind of like when we were studying American history, a poster of all of America's wars, and it started with the French and Indian War in the 1750s and the Revolution War of 1812, so on and so forth, but actually there were a series of wars that were really important that Americans experienced starting in the 1670s that we have largely forgotten, largely because of the Civil War, which Professor Sodergren will be talking about in a moment. So for example, when you say things to an American like Lexington and Concord or Gettysburg or D-Day, you're probably hopefully aware of what that is. However, things like the Siege of Louisborg, the Battle of Cartagena, the Great Swamp Fight in Rhode Island, these were massive conflicts with very, very serious consequences, but have been forgotten or kind of purged from our national memory because they took place before 1776, but they were really important, and I'm gonna talk about why, and at least one aspect today. So first off, as I said, the American Civil War really flattened our historical memory because it was such a traumatic event that as a result also of the American Civil War, our country became less of a regional nation and much more of a national nation, so things like Memorial Day and Veterans Day, the way in which we, Thanksgiving even, come out of the American Civil War, and a lot of the holidays that preceded it are forgotten. Actually, it was a recently evacuation day in Boston, I believe, which commemorates when the British left Boston in 1775, 76. That's an example of those kind of regional holidays that we've largely forgotten. So the way, and if some of you have looked at my paper that I talk about the memory of these colonial wars is a detail about the Boston Tea Party, which recently we celebrated our 250th anniversary of that event because it occurred on December 16th, 1773. By the way, get ready, there's gonna be a lot of American Revolution stuff in the next couple of years because it's the 250th anniversary of that event, also known as the Semi-Quinn Centennial. Not as catchy as Bicentennial, but still pretty important. So if you know anything about the Boston Tea Party, there is this part of the retelling of the story is that the protesters, the American colonists, dressed up as Indians. And when I was doing research for this, well, first off, when they did a recreation of this event in December in Boston, noticeably there were no Native American costumes at that event, that is probably as a result of the kind of era of political correctness that we're in, also an awareness that dressing up as Native Americans is a form of cultural appropriation. So that's, I mean, I think that was probably a wise thing to sidestep in the commemoration of the event, but nonetheless, it kind of raises the question, why did Americans dress up as Native Americans in 1773? First off, when you look at retellings of the Boston Tea Party, the detail is often not that they dressed up as Indians, but specifically that the Americans dressed up as Mohawks, which are the Native people on the other side of Lake Champlain in New York. And as I was doing research a little bit on the Boston Tea Party and familiarizing myself with the details, first off, in the event itself, it was very quiet and organized, and there's a lot of doubt that the colonists dressed up as Native Americans at all, rather just smudging their faces and perhaps putting a couple turkey feathers in their hats. But nonetheless, in the days after the event, newspaper men picked up on this detail and spread it with great effect, not only in America, but across the ocean into Britain, and there became all of these images of Americans dressed up as Native people. Initially, they were called Narragansetts. Narragansetts are the indigenous people in what is now approximately Rhode Island. So the idea is like, who were they dressed up as? Narragansetts, because that was the largest group near Boston at that time. But ultimately, it was a mistake kind of ginned up by a reporter in Boston and then really picked up in London that settled on Mohawks. And I think the reason why Mohawks were selected is because they were the most feared and infamous warriors in the Northeast at that time. But it's just not true. So, and you can see that in the 19th century, historians, late 19th century, when they're writing the histories of the revolution, they picked up on this Native American detail, and specifically the Mohawk part. And you still see that when people refer to the Boston Tea Party, but that's, it's just not true. And I think why I'm kind of talking about this is it kind of demonstrates that we have entirely forgot about the colonial wars, which I think really inspired those costumes or the context out of which they came. So, again, going back to my original question, what inspired colonists to dress up as Indians on that fateful night in 1773? I didn't have any PowerPoints because I think just in general with this topic, for example, the images of the Boston Tea Party are inaccurate. And what I'm talking about right now, there's not a lot of records or recollections about these kind of specific events. There's a lot of mystery here. And I'm mostly like filling in the blank spots and speculating. So I'm looking forward to your ideas. But Philip Deloria has a book called Plain Indian, which is the authority on this topic of, why do white people dress up as Indians? It's weird, okay? And they've been doing, there's a long history of Americans doing that. And why is that? And the Boston Tea Party is very important in this book. And he says that the inspiration for Americans dressing up as Native Americans comes from across the ocean. Two things in Europe, misrule festivities were basically in a very hierarchical medieval society to deflate the social tension of kind of constantly being talked down to if you're a lower class person, is that there would often be festivals or carnivals which would mock the social hierarchy where peasants would dress up as leading figures and mock them. So some of the names would be the Cardinal of Bad Measure, Duke Kickass, and the Grand Patriarch of Syphilis. And these people would kind of go around town and take it over for the day as a way of kind of poking fun at the elites and deflating that pressure. So there's a tradition of Europeans dressing up in these kind of ridiculous costumes. The other context is poachers. Poachers, especially in English forests, hunting grounds were reserved for aristocrats. And local people would basically break these hunting rules and terrorize people who would try to enforce the law. They would soot their faces black and this which gave them the nickname blacks. So there's also this tradition in Europe of dressing up and resisting local authorities. Deloria argues that although colonists dress up as Indians, Native Americans themselves had no input into the meaning behind it or why they chose that costume. It was a form of appropriation which it certainly was to a large extent. What I'm going to suggest is that if you look at the context of the regional history of New England, I think it's very clear that it's not from Europe that this inspiration comes from and that in an indirect, unintended way, Native Americans actually had a part to play in the meaning behind that costume. So first off, the, so this is not the first time in 1773, the first time that White folks dress up as Native Americans. There were at least four incidents, probably more, that date back to 1734 of colonists dressing up as Indians and they all take place in New Hampshire and Maine. So why, what happened up there? So we have forgotten this, as I've said, but there was a series of five wars over the span of 80 years in New England starting in 1675. These were very bloody conflicts where Maine and parts of New Hampshire were raised by Native Americans, people kidnapped, Europeans kidnapped and killed. Eventually the English prevail over the Wabanakis here, but this was a very bloody conflict. Scholars of historians have recently shown that the hysteria behind the Salem witch trials was actually inspired by these Wabanaki wars. So why, and when we look at these wars that took place in Maine and New Hampshire, like what caused them? Traditionally the answer is land, but that's not really the case. If you look at these conflicts, Wabanakis actually got along with English settlers. What they complained about was the impact of colonialism on their way of life, specifically how they noticed when English people moved in, the hunting grounds were depleted, the fishing went away, that they couldn't share the land with their English neighbors that well. And this is when they explain their reasons for war, they talk about these incursions on their natural rights or their hunting and fishing rights, not necessarily maybe land treaties. Because ultimately that's how indigenous people in New England survived, right? And when colonists moved in, they took away that ability to survive. Another point here is that the English, basically when they responded to these arguments, the official line that you'll find in the archive is the English will say, we have bought the land in the early 1600s and that when the Wabanakis are resisting us, they are actually rebels and thus deserve all this horrible treatment. But when we look at the land deals that took place in the early 1600s, they were shaky at best with people that Native Americans that didn't have the authority to sell the land. And there's actually a lot of records in the treaties that were signed in the early 1700s that the English translators forged the treaties. So basically saying orally, like, yeah, you have all these rights while getting the Indians to sign treaties that said the exact opposite. One of the things I mentioned in my paper is a very famous judge named Samuel Sewell. He's a really interesting guy. He was one of the judges that took part of the Salem Witch Trials and he was the only judge to apologize for his participation in that event. He also wrote one of the first anti-slavery pamphlets in American history, very rare for that time. And he also wrote in 1718 a pamphlet which said after a treaty with the Wabanakis that he looked at, and this is a powerful man in Boston, he said based on the treaty that recently happened or a meeting we had with the Wabanakis, we English refused to create a clear border with them. How can we be peaceful with our Native American neighbors if we refuse to even agree on a border? And he argues that if we really want Native Americans to be our friends, we should actually try to convince them, okay? The point of all this is that in these wars the English kind of acknowledged winkingly throughout these events that it was might not right on their side in this war of conflict contest with the Wabanakis. And I think that gave a lot of English sympathy actually for Native Americans. How many minutes? Five minutes, great. So the other thing too where English people and Native Americans were able to kind of gain sympathy for each other was the wars that took place. Most, especially in New England, the English relied on Native American mercenaries to fight in a lot of these wars because they couldn't get recruits themselves. They also, excuse me, colonial fighting tactics imitated Native American fighting skills which led to ranging, which is really the origins of the US special forces are here in the colonial wars in New England as Americans learned how to fight like Native Americans and they fought alongside them. There's not really records too much about how these people got along, but I think the experience of war without question forged some type of bond or at least acknowledgement of cultural respect between these groups over the span of several decades. So when we look at the first example of white people dressing up as Indians, it's in Exeter, New Hampshire in 1734, what happens? Basically the British are trying to enforce the law. The big, maybe if you grew up around here, you might learn that the big pine trees up here were reserved for the king's navy to be used as mass on their ships. The colonists up here just didn't want to follow that law. They'd rather cut those trees up for themselves and do what they want. So what happened is in 1734, British officials come up here to the sawmills in New Hampshire to enforce this law. And what happens is that they are attacked by a posse of white people dressed up as Indians who basically beat them up and run them out of town. What I, and also there's other events in the 1760s later in Maine, also where these Wabanaki conflicts had happened, where local people dressed up as Indians often would like pieces of wood in their mouth to disguise their voices. I don't know how that worked, but that's what they said. And these people would attack landowners or proprietors who are trying to move in on these settlers territory and basically charge, basically make them pay taxes or fines or these type of things, which they saw as unjust. So as I say, like in the paper, the Indian Mirror, I think one of the inspirations for like why colonists dressed up as Native Americans is because they felt that they were kind of in the same situation as the Wabanaki people they ironically had recently dispossessed. Outside forces, in this case the British Empire, were moving into their territory and telling them what to do or how they should use natural resources. This was precisely the perspective of the Native Americans which they had only recently defeated in war. Ultimately, this is a coincidence. There's no records of this. People don't write these things down, especially when they're doing illegal acts in the 1730s. They don't want records to survive, but I think it's a similarity or coincidence that's worth pausing on. So why does this matter? I mean, basically so the trivia thing that you can leave with today is that the Boston Tea Party was not Mohawks but Wabanakis that inspired the Native American dress at the Boston Tea Party. But in a larger sense why I think this actually really matters is that it kind of speaks to what Philip Deloria and this other scholar named Richard Slotkin say about this phenomenon of white people dressing up as Indians which continues well into the 20th century. They see it as a kind of evidence of a psychological process within Americans to find a unique identity that's separate from Europe or Britain, okay? And when we look for the origins of Americans trying to find a distinct identity, we often go to the American Revolution, we often go to the Boston Tea Party. What I think this episode shows in the experience of these wars is that experience of Americans trying to find an identity for themselves and that struggle which we're still going through with to this day actually starts with the colonial wars before the Revolution up here in northern New England. And furthermore, indirectly Native Americans I think inspired colonists to think about things like natural justice and the rights of individual people in ways that we haven't acknowledged sufficiently before. Great, thank you. It's doing things, there we go. Working on it, there we go. Good morning. As the more than able student moderators already pointed out, I am Professor Steve Sodergren and I wanted to spend my portion of the time this morning talking about some recent research I've done regarding really the legacy of the American Civil War. Now, anybody who pays attention to media at all will know that certainly the Civil War has come up more than once in recent years in this country and I can't think of perhaps a conflict more appropriate to a topic such as war memory and reconciliation than that conflict, the American Civil War. It is something that is still unresolved in the minds of many Americans and it's something that still has us talking about what it meant, what it actually accomplished, even questions such as who really came out the victor in that conflict. And while there's been discussion of monuments, the naming of military bases, how that memory should be cherished or not, my work has kind of focused on something that slipped under the radar a little bit and that is really the first war crimes trial in American history and that war crimes centered on this individual Henry Wurts. Historians have not ignored Henry Wurts but they have really fixated on the end of his life, rather than the beginning. Henry Wurts on November 10th, 1865 was executed in Washington DC having been convicted of multiple counts of violating the customs of war, effectively what we would call war crimes. Why was he executed? You may have never heard of Henry Wurts but once you hear why he was executed you probably will understand in a single word, Andersonville. Henry Wurts was the commandant of Andersonville Prison in Georgia during the American Civil War. This was a Confederate prison camp that was really only created late in the war. It was actually called Camp Sumter, named after Fort Sumter, the great Confederate victory early in the war and over the course of about a year, 40,000 union prisoners of war would go through Andersonville Prison. One third of them would die there. More than 13,000 union soldiers would die primarily of disease at Andersonville Prison. You cannot find numbers like that in any other prison camp during the American Civil War. There was another bad Confederate prison camp in Florence, North Carolina. There were two bad ones of one in Elmira, New York, on the northern side, Camp Douglas in Chicago but the idea that one in three soldiers did not walk out of Andersonville is something really incomparable in Civil War history. What happened was once the truth of Andersonville became known at the end of the Civil War, the North demanded retribution. Now, when we get into the notion of war criminals it's not surprising because at some times certainly the Lincoln assassins of whom four were executed were considered war criminals but Henry Wertz was in a class of his own since he was actually military officer in the Confederate army and thus he was deemed sort of a special class. So let's talk about who he was and unfortunately we don't know all that much of who he was. Information is missing. The stories that are told, the whole stories that he told about himself are often contradictory. What we do know is he was not born in the United States, he was born in Zurich, Switzerland in either 1822 or 1823, this is the problem, we don't know all the details. We do know that in Zurich he married and had two children and worked for his father in a bank in Zurich but in the 1840s he ran afoul of the law. Perhaps because of there was accusations of embezzlement from his father's bank he was imprisoned for several years and ultimately he was exiled from Switzerland. The Swiss kicked him out. And from there he traveled Europe for several years before eventually settling in all places Louisiana where in the 1850s he starts a new life. He marries again, has two more children, two daughters and he ends up practicing medicine in Louisiana near Baton Rouge. There is no evidence that he actually had any medical training though. When the war breaks out he immediately volunteers for the Confederacy. Why is your guess as good as mine? But given his background, given his education he is immediately made an officer. Early in the war he suffers an injury to his arm. His right arm would be effectively useless for the remainder of the war. He said it was a battle wound there's no real indication that that was the case. And as he shifts around through various commands he eventually ends up under the command of General John Winder who was the Confederate officer responsible for all Confederate prisons. And it's Winder who put him in charge of the day-to-day operations of Camp Sumter, Andersonville on March 27th, 1864. While he technically was not in charge of everything at Andersonville he was in charge of the day-to-day operations including security. He instituted some interesting policies there. One of them being the so-called deadline. Soldiers who approached within 20 feet of any prison walls would be shot without warning. And that was a way of maintaining security considering there were very few guards at Andersonville since Confederates just didn't have the manpower for it. As was noted Andersonville led to the starvation and suffering of many, many prisoners of war. And so Henry Warts was what we call a high value target when the war ends and he is captured on May 7th, 1865. He is immediately held responsible for Andersonville even though he wasn't really directly responsible for feeding and clothing the prisoners. That was John Winder. However, unfortunate for Warts, John Winder had suffered a heart attack and died in March of 1865. So effectively Warts is the last man standing responsible for Andersonville. His military trial becomes a public spectacle. After the, this is after the trial of Lincoln assassins. So this is more unfinished business from the Civil War. He is charged with, he's charged with several counts including a charge of conspiracy quote, to injure the health and destroy the lives of soldiers in the military service of the United States in violation of the laws and customs of war. He's charged with the idea that he did not accidentally cause the death of 13,000 men that it was a deliberate policy to starve prisoners of Andersonville. He is also charged with 13 counts of murder in that he directly killed prisoners. It's a problematic trial. I mean, historians tend to focus on this because it's really the first war crime style. It's also, he effectively utilizes a just following orders defense which we will see again in the future of military affairs but you have, it's a military commission. So it's military judges. There are vague and contradictory witnesses, minimal resources and time provided for the defense. It's an inherently problematic trial and really it's no surprise when he is convicted. Not of everything though. He's only convicted of 11 of the 13 murder charges but he is also convicted of the conspiracy charge. He's convicted on October 24th, 1865 and he will be executed on November 10th. So moving forward, what is the legacy of Henry Works? Well, that legacy of Henry Works was almost immediately created by Civil War veterans themselves. Northerners specifically wanted to make clear he was a monster who got what he deserved particularly those who had spent time in Andersonville. Whereas Southerners tried to, in the notion of the lost cause, the idea that the South was in some ways right and was only defeated by mass resources, tried to defend Henry Works and suggest that he was a martyr for the Confederate cause. I wanna start with the Northerners because without a doubt the Northerners are very clear about this. They might have been willing to meet the Confederates halfway on a few things on agreeing to what the memory of the war is. No Northerners ever agreed that Henry Works should get off on this, that he should be forgiven for this. And if you read what they have to say in their memoirs they drag him through the mud repeatedly. So let's look at some of the Northern assessments here. Northerners in their memoirs after the war even those who didn't serve in the prison camps routinely cite him as a monster, a martinet, a coward, a tyrant, or my favorite, a purile scoundrel. They belittle him, they mock him. One prisoner at Andersonville, Massachusetts private Warren Goss notes the day that they arrived and when they first get there and they first see Henry Works who greets them upon entry, Goss says they all laughed at him because his appearance was so silly. He was a ridiculous little man is what Goss says. And then in his memoir, he mocks Henry Works's strong Swiss accent by writing, by God, you Tam Yankees, you won't laugh when you gets into the pulp end. They routinely mock his accent. They all call him German. They don't realize that's not the same as Swiss. It's not that they don't realize, perhaps they don't care. But as time goes on, more and more soldiers. What comes out is a portrayal of him as a little man. As Pennsylvania soldier, as Ripple notes, he was a thinned, wise and specimen of a man resembling in appearance a sky terrier. They also point out that he had a terrible temper. This is actually something Works himself admitted during his trials. That his temper could get out of control. One soldier noted that his commonest language was abusive and blasphemous. Whereas another soldier noted, Works was the most even-tempered man I ever saw in that he was always in a rage. So very clearly, there is very few redeeming qualities painted for Henry Works here. The Andersonville prisoners want to make clear this guy was stupid. He was silly. He should never have been in uniform. They mock him in every way they can. But they also want to make clear, and this is kind of a contradiction when you get down to it, is he's stupid, he's silly, he's ridiculous, but he was a mastermind who killed thousands. And one person who really walks this delicate balancing act is arguably the most famous Andersonville prisoner, John McElroy. In 1879, John McElroy would publish his memoir, Andersonville, a story of rebel prisons. McElroy was a private in an Illinois Calvary unit. He is captured in December of 63, and he's one of the first prisoners at Andersonville Prison. And as time goes on, he will note that he will say things like he was an undersized fidgety man with an insignificant face. He was simply contemptible from whatever point of view he was studied. But he also points out that only words, small insignificant miserable words, the underling, the tool, the servile, the brainless, the fetcher and carry of these men was punished. In other words, he wanted Jefferson Davis to hang for this thing as well. Now Southerners are a little bit different. Southerners, when they talk about words struggle because he's a foreigner, and they don't know that much about him. And pretty much everybody agrees that Andersonville was a bad thing. So instead, they tend to devote time to what aboutism is what we would call it today. Oh, Andersonville was bad, but Northern prisons were worse. And so they call it judicial murder. Jefferson Davis in his memoir talks about words and calls the trial a so-called trial. And words was a foreigner by birth, poor, friendless and wounded. One soldier notes poor words of Andersonville was a saint by the side of some and the higher authority in the Union side. That's pointing to, well Sherman and Grant, they should have hung for their treatment of prisoners in Northern camps. But what really brings this issue to a head is in 1905. In 1905, the Georgia division of the United Daughters of the Confederacy decide that, if I can, there we go, that Henry Wurz deserves a monument. And what they announce is in October of 1905, they will fund a suitable monument that will acknowledge, quote, he was judicially murdered under false charges of cruelty to prisoners. Well, Northerners exploded this. Northerners jumped up and down on the Daughters of the Confederacy, saying that Wurz was a villain, a traitor, he was inhuman. One soldier notes, yes, give him a monument just so we can show that he is burning in hell. Whereas Southerners are a little bit more tepid when it comes to their defense of Wurz. Southerners have a tendency to say, well, yes, but maybe he was innocent, but maybe a monument is not the best thing. One soldier notes that perhaps it was impolitic of the Daughters of the Confederacy to bring up this idea of a monument for him. Or that one author notes, I'm inclined to conservative views on this subject and whether or not to issue a monument. And the fact, and the point of the fact is, is that the South was really mixed on Henry Wurz. In fact, the Daughters of the Confederacy can't find a place to put a monument to him. Richmond says no. Well, you know, they want Henry Wurz's monument up on Monument Avenue with Lee and Davis and Jackson, all of them. Nope. Atlanta says no. Macon Georgia says no. And finally, the only place that will accept it is Andersonville itself, also known as Amicus, America, excuse me, is the local town near Andersonville Prison. And sure enough, on May 12th, 1909, up goes the monument. The inscription on the monument reads, Henry Wurz discharging his duty with such humanity as the harsh circumstances of the times and the policy of the foe permitted, Captain Wurz became at last a victim of misdirected public clamor. A news article about the dedication ceremony says that the monument went up in kind spirit. And that's where it is today. These are my pictures from two years ago. In all the discussion of monuments, Lee, Jackson, Davis, this has never come up despite the fact that it is only about half an hour from Fort Benning now, Fort Moore. More. This is the legacy of Henry Wurz, enshrined in stone, only yards away from the American Military Cemetery where over 13,000 soldiers yet lie buried. So when we think of Wurz, the daughters of the Confederacy wanted us to think of this monument. But really, when it comes to history, people tend to focus on his trial and execution. And maybe that's appropriate. Since nobody would know Henry Wurz if it weren't for Andersonville, nobody would know Henry Wurz if he weren't for his execution. Ultimately, historians have come down on the idea that it was a bias trial. It was an unfortunate trial. It wasn't really a great moment in American legal history. But Wurz was probably guilty of something. As one historian says, it is hardly believable that over 100 witnesses from both armies would perjure themselves. And so at the end of the day, Wurz's legacy has been firmly tied to Andersonville for better or for worse. His legacy is complicated. Northerners were abundantly clear that he was not a good guy and he should not be remembered for being a good guy. Whereas perhaps surprisingly, Southerners were a bit more mixed on it. They tried to defend him, but even Southerners seemed to admit Andersonville was a humanitarian disaster. And at the end of the day, I think one historian said it best, whether intentional or not, Andersonville was a crime against humanity and Wurz was made to pay for it. Thank you very much. If you have any questions for either the panelists, please, there are microphones on either side of the stage. Question for Professor Bennett. So in your research, I know you're talking a lot about the Wabanaki. Given that the Boston Tea Parties in Massachusetts, did your research touch on the Wampanoag at all, especially in King Philip's War and sort of the devastation that that caused to Massachusetts? Are you from Massachusetts? No, from California. Okay, cool. So that speaks to, I think, actually something about on the memory of this period, is that when we're taught about this era in American history, we learn about the Wampanoag because of the pilgrims, so-called pilgrims. And then when we talk about Indian wars, especially in New England, perhaps if you're from Massachusetts or Rhode Island, you learn about King Philip's War. But nothing happens north of the current boundary of Massachusetts. We don't talk about that. That's kind of reflected in the archival records as well, is because the English don't like talking about the wars with the Wabanakis because they often are losing them. And that validates arguments that perhaps God is not on their side and perhaps what they're doing is not totally righteous and good. And actually, so Maine was part of Massachusetts until 1820. And the thing that's interesting as opposed to the memory of it is, but as a scholar who studies this period of time, is that people in Boston were very much attuned to events in Maine and New Hampshire because these wars were constantly going on there in terms of raising soldiers, building fortifications. So there's a major political issue, but it's one that once they kind of win, they're happy to quickly forget. And then after the American Revolution, that becomes like the big event for them. But in the lead up to it, this political context would have been something that they were very, very familiar with. So, yeah. Thank you very much. Oh, short, sorry. So with Europeans and European Americans having like a history of dressing up as other communities and groups to either ridicule them or intimidate others, I was wondering like, did you come across any research or information that kind of showed the effects of those European Americans dressing up as the Wabanakis and how that kind of like affected the community and the views and stigmatizations like around them. Because we kind of see like post civil war with like the ministerial shows and the popularizations of those, how the views of black people were kind of like created around that. So I'm wondering did you come across like any research that kind of like showed how that may have affected perspectives on the Wabanakis? Yeah, so that's a great question. So when we think of the Indian wars or these Indian battles, and I talked about this recently in my survey course, I mean, most of us have probably heard of Little Big Horn with Custer, that's very famous. St. Clair's defeat, which happened in the 1790s where the Indians also defeated, almost destroyed the U.S. Army in Fort Wayne, Indiana. Many of you probably have never heard of that before, right, because that was kind of awkward. But at least so for Americans, the idea of the Native American Other was really shaped by the Buffalo Bill Wild West shows. Also when a national culture was first emerging in the 19th century. So the American idea of the Indian is often very much a plains Native American person like with a teepee and horses and these type of things. Native Americans actually all, it's a big continent, are very diverse in different areas. So you could see in terms of how that impacted the Wabanaki people in the late 19th century when they're trying to make money by selling baskets to tourists and these type of things, they often dress up and adopt plains Native American costumes because that's what they want. Because they understand that's what white people want them to do, even though it's not a reflection of their own practices or culture. Thank you. I have a question for Professor Sodergren. So I was just wondering if in your research you delved into some of the other famous war criminals of the Civil War, people like Champ Ferguson or the other border state guerrillas and how maybe their actions hampered efforts of reconciliation during reconstruction in the border states after the war. Thank you. That's an excellent question because any words are really only the highest, the biggest profile one, but yes, you could Champ Ferguson, William Quantrill, these were people who really cut a swath through the border regions during the Civil War. They were, by a modern definition, really guerrilla operators. And at the same time, Quantrill meets a bloody end. So there really is no trial for him and others are also tried by effectively military commissions as well. I have begun to do some research on that, on the military commissions that were set up to, and they used the word guerrilla to arrest and try guerrillas. But these did occur, they did get some publicity, but in terms, Henry Wurz got the press because it was Andersonville. Andersonville with so many dead really kind of captured the public. And it was the Northern prisoners who were in the press saying, you need to punish this guy, we can't forgive this guy, we have to do that. But going back to the original point, yes, because states like Kentucky and Tennessee, Missouri, where they had really kind of interstate and interstate fighting in many respects, that leads to a difficult reconciliation after the war because it was more neighbor versus neighbor there and they did some terrible things to each other. And it's only recently, I think historians are starting to actually pick that apart in more detail. Hi, great set of presentations. I'm Professor Goldstein, I'm up from Brown University, I'm an Asia specialist, I'll be speaking in the afternoon. But I, a couple of questions for each of you. One, living in Rhode Island there, I'm kind of struck by, as you said, I mean, it's hardly discussed. I mean, you'll see certain things are named after King Philip or something. Nobody even knows that that's a Native American person. And then I, but so my question is, I mean, to your, New England, I don't think has done a good job at reconciling and remembering, you know, I'm familiar with the Pequot Museum. It's one place that seems to at least approach the discussion in a serious way, but I was wondering if you think any New England states are better at this or, and how can we do better? And then I have to ask on the Civil War whether you kind of hinted at this at the end, but our country's been going through a lot of discussion about Civil War monuments. And, you know, I just wonder what your general take on this as a child, I remember looking at these things and being like, what, you know, why is this here? But on the other hand, it's clearly, you know, still an emotive issue. So I wonder how you think we're grappling with it if I could put you on the spot. Thank you, gentlemen. So first, I'll say I taught at Connecticut College for a year, so I live down there as well. And I would just recommend if you're down there, the site of the Great Swamp Fight, which was perhaps several thousand people died in that battle, many more were enslaved. And it's the creepiest historical place I've ever been. You have to walk through a swamp by yourself for a mile to this like ruined monument. So it's kind of really powerful to go to those places even though people don't acknowledge their significance. And I think actually a good way of thinking, thinking, answering your question is right now it's the 300th anniversary of Dumber's War, which was the most important Native American conflict in Northern New England. But there has not been any kind of articles about it. There's actually, if you've been to Battery Park in Burlington, there's a huge statue of a Native American man and it's purportedly named after Greylock, who was the head Wabanaki Sagamore from that conflict. If you ask, who has an amazing story, but if you ask people who is Greylock or why did he matter, I don't really, I don't think many people can answer that question. So I think there's a lot of room for it. And I'm kind of suspicious that at least in Maine, when we commemorate it, it will be the Norwich Walk Massacre. So oftentimes, and I think this is something to challenge for us, is that when we remember this period of time, it's often the most horrible events that are like the most genocidal, which are very important and we should remember, but there's kind of an attitude like, that's all you need to know about Native American history or this period of time. And I think that's actually really unfortunate and missing a huge part of the story. One thing I'll just note about Civil War monuments, because it is an ongoing discussion and I think that it's amazing that we're actually having the discussion and people are saying, oh, well, we're tearing down monuments and things like that, but we're talking about it. And the courts are weighing in on this and they're weighing in on what communities can and can't do in terms of the preservation and history. And these are timeless issues that we need to tackle. To put things back to my research, the Henry Wurz monument is in many ways an outlier because when people defend monuments, they say, well, like it or not, Lee had a lot of accomplishments. Like it or not, Jackson had a lot of, they won battles. They had a tremendous impact on history. The Wurz monument, Wurz didn't accomplish anything and even the monuments seem to acknowledge as that. The monument is there to commemorate what the daughter's confederacy say was an injustice. The monument is to his fate, not to his accomplishments and that puts it in a different whole class. And I mean, I don't think it's so far saying is like, it's effectively like saying, we're gonna put up a monument to remember that somebody was lynched on this spot or something like that. That's what the daughters of the confederacy were going so forth. They weren't necessarily glorifying Wurz as recognizing him as a monument. And I think that's a category of monument that we really haven't addressed in all of our discussions and there might be more of them out there. This is a question for Professor Soderman. I was, I wanted to ask if you believe that the creation of this monument wasn't any way sort of almost intimidation tactic to show how the confederacy was still going to be fighting against the union for a long time and we still kind of see that sort of division today because there has been some evidence that has shown that a lot of monuments and the confederacy has been erected long after the wars have ended in order to intimidate the civil rights movement. So do you think there's any indication that this could be it or if it was just to kind of take a stab at a court that was probably essentially not very reliable? Good question, thank you. Every time a group or a country or a person puts up a monument, they are making an argument about history. They are saying what they think should be remembered, who should be remembered and why it should be remembered. They are staking a claim to the past. So in this case, absolutely, I think the United Daughters of the Confederacy were staking a claim to the past. I don't, unlike some monuments, I don't think this was about civil rights. I think this was about telling quote unquote the truth of history and that is trying to say that look, future generations, when you come here to this monument, realize that whatever happened to this guy, whatever you've heard about it is not true. Here is the truth. He was unjustly convicted and executed and they wanted that enshrined and set in stone for future generations. And there are many other Confederate monuments that do similar things that say that the Confederacy was about this or it wasn't about that and efforts to make clear to the future generations, this is what the past should be. And what we're engaging right now in as a nation is trying to determine whether or not because it's set in stone, does that necessarily mean that is the agreed upon version of the past and what we do about that? So yeah, good question. Unfortunately, that's all the time we have today for this panel. I'm sure those of you with questions still, our presenters will be happy to answer them at another time maybe. But thank you all for coming and the next panel should be at phone call. Thank you. Good job. Are you a television viewer? What is the nicest way I can say this? I was gonna say, I was... Okay. Yeah, I was going to say this. There is... Cheryl, once it gets going. Do you have a lot of images, but I will not. All right. I will not go over. Yes. It's real dumb on live streaming, we're not. If they don't lower the noise, you might ask them to. I don't know. Can, maybe we should ask our... I ask Yang Mo. Yes, Yang Mo, but he's... Oh, look. Oh, there we go. That's good. Okay. Okay. Yeah, I think that. I don't help a lot, because it's... I think it'll be nice to be able to see the images. I don't know. We might get some complaints from Mark about it being dark, but I don't know. As long as we have big hand gestures and look at each other. That's right. Ladies and gentlemen, good morning. Thank you for joining us for the fifth annual Peace and War Center. Welcome to the second session, which is about war, memory, and reconciliation. I am Joshua Smith, pleased to be a moderator for this session. I'm an international studies major. I am Richard Conlin, the other moderator for the session, and I am a studies and war and peace major. In this 11 o'clock session, we'll move from remembering wars for the experiences themselves and on to exploring celebrations of peace and reconciliation catalyzed by war. In this session, we are joined by Dr. Emily Gray, Professor of History, and Dr. Timothy Parker, Associate Professor of History and Theory of Architecture and Art. Professor Gray will lead off her session with her work, Peace and Reconciliation after the Thirty Years War, Augsburg's Peace Festivals and Memorial Art. Dr. Parker will follow with his presentation within the aftermath of war, making space for memory and reconciliation. These presentations will last 15 minutes apiece, and we will dedicate the final 10 minutes of this session to your questions. Thank you. Professor Gray earned her doctorate in history from the University of Pennsylvania in 2004. She's been on the faculty at Norwich University since 2007, becoming Professor of History in 2020. Dr. Gray was awarded the Homer L. Lodge Award for Teaching Excellence from Norwich in 2015. Her historical specialty is Early Modern Europe, specifically the Protestant Reformation in Germany, and she has published with Wrestling with the Reformation in Augsburg, 1530, as part of the Reacting to the Past series, and has two forthcoming publications discussing churches in Augsburg. Today, she's gonna be presenting on the memory of the Thirty Years War in Augsburg through their annual Peace Festival. Thank you. All right, thank you for that introduction, Richard. I'm very pleased to be here. Thank you all for coming. I don't know of any place in history, maybe, that's grappled with the issues of peace and war and reconciliation as long and as consistently as in Augsburg, Germany. For nearly four centuries, since the year 1650, the city of Augsburg in Bavaria, Southern Germany, has celebrated the Peace of Westphalia and the end of the Thirty Years War in annual celebrations every single year on the 8th of August. The Augsburg Hoas Freedance Fest or Great Peace Festival is actually today the only officially recognized municipal holiday in all of Germany, banks close, government offices close, businesses close, citizens get together and enjoy these public celebrations in the city's main square. They eat Friedenstauben, peace doves, these little kind of doughnut kind of things. They call it Trauben and Trauben, doves and grapes because the two rhyme, I guess. People bring food, they share it with their neighbors, speeches are delivered every three years and Augsburg Peace Prize is given out. Most recently in 2023, the Peace Prize was given to journalist Katrin Eigendorf but past winners have included Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet leader and Christian Fuhrer, who was the pastor of the Nikolai Church in Leipzig that started the protests that eventually opened the Berlin Wall. There is also always, aren't they cute, a children's peace festival in a city park the following weekend. Let me tell you just a little bit about Augsburg. It is a medium-sized city in Germany. It's the third largest city in Bavaria, population of about 300,000, but it has a very deep history. It's actually a 2,000-year-old city that was founded by the Romans. Augsburg is named after Caesar Augustus and it was actually among the wealthiest cities in the world in the 1500s. There was a series of important banking families, the Fugre, the Velser, the Hochstetter. Augsburgers controlled a lot of area in the world, including Venezuela for a period of time, but you probably haven't heard of Augsburg if you haven't had a class with me and that's because in the Thirty Years' War, Augsburg was decimated losing about 60% of its population and almost all of its economic clout. So now that makes it a lovely little city to live and work in with some really amazing historical archives. Another thing that's interesting to note about Augsburg, it has been a biconfessional city for more than 500 years, biconfessional meaning that Lutherans and Catholics live together in relative peace even though they haven't always been happy about that. In 1555, you might have heard of the peace of Augsburg. This was an agreement that was reached, happened to be in the city of Augsburg between the Holy Roman Emperor and the various princes of the Holy Roman Empire that came up with the principle of Cuyus regio eus religio, he who rules chooses the religion. So these princes, these cities, they picked one side or another. They picked being Catholic or they picked being Lutheran. Augsburg couldn't pick. And the reason they couldn't is because the wealthy people wanted to stay Catholic. Many of them loaned money to popes and were afraid that the popes and the important Catholic rulers wouldn't pay them back. But most of the people were Lutherans. So they settled into a kind of uneasy dual relationship between Lutherans and Catholics. And it's this tradition actually when it says Augsburg versus Friedenstadt, we are a city of peace. That's kind of the tradition that they're trying to draw upon that for 500 years you've had these different groups living together in relative peace. But it hasn't always been peace and happiness in Augsburg. The Thirty Years' War, which went from 1618 to 1648 was a horrific time in the history of German Central Europe for Augsburg and really for everywhere else. It was mostly fought within the boundaries of the Holy Roman Empire, but the intervention first of the Danish and then of the Swedes, who knew that the Swedes would be so belligerent. They're terrifying, actually. That kind of just took the whole level of destruction of the war up. And soon the Thirty Years' War became a proxy war between Habsburg dynasties of Spain and Austria and the Berman dynasty of France, during which time new military technologies, new uses of gunpowder in particular led to previously unimaginable loss of life. And as many as one million men may have fought in the war, that's only direct combatants, not their wives, their families, various other people who came along and supported these armies, so they were huge. Historians estimate that about 20% of the population of Central Europe died as a direct result of the war, either combat deaths or deaths due to disease and starvation. Compare that to World War I and World War II where about 6% of the population of German Central Europe died, and that's bad. But it's less than a third the impact in terms of the population. The sides in the Thirty Years' War correspond roughly to Protestant and Catholic religious groups. So even though it wasn't officially a war about religion, if you want more details, come take my Thirty Years' War class in the fall, there was definitely a religious inflection to the war, and you saw that when the war actually was going on. So during the Thirty Years' War, both sides burned down churches, prohibited religious practices they didn't agree with. In Augsburg, this was a problem because as I just mentioned, Augsburg has both Lutheran and Catholic churches. This is an example of we've got a Catholic church here and then next to it, the Lutheran church that was destroyed in 1629. And actually, this destruction of churches starts happening in Augsburg in 1628 as soon as Catholic forces become really ascendant in the city. They destroy churches, they start prohibiting religious practices, and then Gustavus Adolphus and the Swedes come in in 1632. They make the Catholics share their churches with the Lutherans, that does not go well, and so they just take the churches away from the Catholics and they give them to the Lutherans. And then Gustavus Adolphus dies in 1634 and everything goes back. And pretty much for a period of time, everyone's just kind of worshiping outside because there's no churches to worship in. The war was a stalemate from about 1635 to 1648. Nobody knew how to end a war on this scale. Nobody knew how to end a war period. So when the piece of Westphalia was finally announced, there was widespread rejoicing. This is one of the broadsheet images that announces the actual decision of the piece of Westphalia. You can see from Vienna to Stockholm, you can see Paris kind of there in the background. All of that is, all of that is there. You've got the ship there that says Fried, which means peace. Everyone was really, really excited about that. Note the date on this, depending on how well you read old Fractur German. It says it's the 25th of the Vine monad. It's the 25th of October when this was announced. And yet, if you remember, in Augsburg, they celebrate the piece on the 8th of August. I'll tell you why they do that in just a minute. But the very first great piece festival that takes place in Augsburg takes place in 1650 and it was organized by Augsburg's Lutherans. And it was really about celebrating their religion and the return of their churches. So we've mentioned already a couple of people, divergent memories of war. Professor Koo mentioned that Koreans and Japanese remember the occupation of Korea very differently. The North and the South in the Civil War, very divergent memories. Well, in Augsburg, we have very divergent memories in that Catholics and Lutherans remember the war very differently and celebrate it very differently. So in the first big Freedance Fest, the big peace festival, there were thousands of people packed into Augsburg's Lutheran churches, under banners that read, through peace comes joy, fresh flowers decking the walls, paintings of the kings of France, Sweden and Austria, all the signatories of the treaty. Pastors gave great sermons that were trumpets. It's always good when there's trumpets, right? Trumpets and drums accompanying the church organs and then they had soldiers outside of the churches and at kind of key points in the sermon, volleys of musket fire, celebratory musket fire. A few days later, the children's festival, children paraded through the streets, dressed like angels, wearing white shirts or aprons with boughs of greenery carried in their arms and re-sund their heads. Meanwhile, Catholics stayed in their homes with their windows closed. So they did not provoke more conflict on a day that was supposed to be about celebrating peace. This was not a celebration, as I'm sure you can see by now, about toleration. This was a celebration of a Lutheran victory. There was that period during the war where Lutherans were afraid that Augsburg was gonna be completely re-catholicized, that all of their churches were gonna be taken away, the peace of West failure returned their churches to them and that's actually why they chose the 8th of August to celebrate this great peace festival. The 8th of August was the day that the Edict of Restitution was put forward in 1629 that took all the Lutheran churches away. So by holding this peace festival on the 8th of August, the Lutherans of Augsburg are saying we won this war, we got all of our churches given back to us. So I wanna look just for the next few minutes that I have at some art from the two periods of time in which the peace festival was celebrated because we can tell a lot about what the peace festival was supposed to do by the kind of art that was created for it. And one of the things that was really important in the peace festival from 1650 all the way to 1789 is that every year they created these images for children. And when you went to the children's peace festival, you got an image like this that was printed for you when you were supposed to take it home and hang it on your wall and remember. And so each one of these kind of captures a moment in time where we're told what the children of Augsburg were told to remember. This one which is from 1736 by Philip Andreas Killian depicts a historical event. This is what it looked like for all of the Lutherans of Augsburg to be gathered together outside because they didn't have any churches to gather in and holding a religious service. And then if you look up above, we have images of all six of Augsburg's Lutheran churches kind of up above. So this is a way of seeing a kind of celebrating, we didn't have our churches, we were about to lose our religion and then we got it back thanks to the piece of Westphalia. This one from 1748, Christoph Friedrich Hermann von Gutenberg shows Augsburg up there. You can tell it's Augsburg because of the Rathaus, very iconic. And it's surrounded by walls and the walls are guarded by angels and the angels have flaming swords. I mean, the image here is pretty clear. At the top you've got the all-seeing eye of God and then you've got text here clarifying the meaning of the image. It says Augsburg's constitution is founded on rock and guarded by angels. Augsburg's constitution was created by the piece of Westphalia. Its constitution made it so that Lutherans and Catholics would share power equally. There were two mayors in the town when Lutheran and Catholic and people, members of the city council. But the thing that's interesting about this is in this image of Augsburg, the only buildings you see other than the Rathaus are Lutheran church buildings. Actually, I'm gonna skip this one. Let me, some of the images were political. This is one from 1764 that celebrates the election of a new Holy Roman emperor, Joseph II. Now, Joseph II was Catholic, but he was known for his toleration and this is kind of, here you've got God at the top again, the eye-seeing all of God is instructing this woman here in the foreground to write things down. She's got these important dates in her tablet there recording key periods of time as it relates to the Thirty Years' War. But also some early 18th century battles in the War of Spanish Succession and that took place near Augsburg and then of course the date that this new emperor takes office. And you can see in the background you've got all of these soldiers kind of surrounding this church in the back and they've also just kind of released their celebratory musket fire. So it's a little, the image is interesting because it's a little scary that you've got all of these soldiers kind of like gathered around the church but I think it's meant to be celebratory. So they stopped creating these Fradens-Gamelda or these peace pictures in 1789 but the peace festival continued on, it continued through the Napoleonic Wars, through Augsburg's incorporation into Bavaria in 1806, Franco-Prussian War, World War I and II. And then after World War II U.S.-occupied Augsburg was trying to find a way, you know, how can we, we need something to celebrate, we need to think about peace, what should we do? They wanted to do something incorporating history. And that's where this idea of this peace festival which really was a celebration of Lutherans I becomes a celebration of toleration and it's really kind of developed into that ever since 1950. And just to show you some images, they no longer are creating peace pictures for children to take home and put on their walls but they do have murals that get commissioned every year on the 8th of August and that will also tell you a little bit about what are we supposed to be remembering here and what are we supposed to be celebrating? So here's a couple of images here, 2018 by Guido Zimmerman which means when everything forms a unit so you've got these people of different races and then I love here in the front you've got like an ape and then you've got a robot. Holding hands as well. But you have them kind of all working together there, that was from 2018. The one on the right is from 2021, similar kind of image. One hand cares for the others is what that means. And this also shows forums kind of belonging to a variety of people and still our ape, I don't know what happened to our, I don't know, there's no robot in there, it's a little bit disappointing. But you can see kind of a very different idea about what peace means by the time we get to the modern day. Just a couple others that I wanna show you, have just a minute. I like this one called Acrobats, not only because it's fun, but because I feel like this actually really demonstrates what it's like to kind of hold all of these things in tension. At the same time, I mean sometimes to have peace requires a certain amount of contortion and a little bit of a balancing act to be able to make it work. Certainly that was the case in trying to maintain peace in the years immediately following the 30 years war. And then this is an interesting one, this is the only mural that incorporates a church. And it's a church that didn't exist at the time of the 30 years war, this is a relatively new church from 1910. You might notice that it looks a lot like Neuschwanstein, those of you who've been to that castle. But anyway, it is meant to kind of put this church in a different context, it's underwater, we've got our coral here and a turtle going by. It is in the neighborhood of Ferset, which is where the US military was headquartered. And after the military left in the early 90s, a lot of migrants moved in there. And so it's kind of become a neighborhood of migrants. And the title of this is Refugees Welcome. So 400 years nearly have passed since the beginning of the 30 years war and Augsburg has celebrated 373 great peace festivals and counting, many things are the same. In both cases, both ancient sort of many years ago and today, children are being taught what it means to be an Augsburger and imbued with a sense of civic pride in their history. Adults are getting together to remember times of war and really celebrate being in a period of peace. But the meaning and significance of this peace festival has changed a lot over time. Now what we have is cultural and religious diversity being celebrated as a strength and a source of pride and not as something that we unfortunately have to live with which is how they felt about it several hundred years ago. The great peace festival today not only is Lutherans but also Catholics, many other types of Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, everybody gets together and celebrates together. So the Augsburgers of 1650 would probably be very confused by the kind of things that were happening today but they are in many ways a logical outgrowth of 400 years of Augsburg largely avoiding conflicts and doing their best to get along with their neighbors and just because the meaning of that has changed over time I think there's still a lot that we can learn from them. I will leave it at that. Professor Gray, thank you very much for your remarks. I'm now pleased to introduce Professor Timothy Parker. Dr. Parker earned his doctorate in architectural history and theory from the University of Texas at Austin in 2010 and has been on the faculty at Norwich since 2012. His teaching and study in the field of architecture is extensive and this is reflected largely in his major publication from the University of Texas. This volume is entitled, sanctioning modernism, architecture and the making of post-war identities. It's incredibly insightful as it delves into the fusion of psychological, philosophical, historical and religious factors among others which influence architecture. Today, Dr. Parker will be presenting within the aftermath of war, making space for memory and reconciliation. Good morning, very happy to be here. Thank you, Emily. Professor Gray for wonderful reflections that I hope mine will complement in some ways. I'm working today as you can see on the context of what architecture might be able to do regarding a goal of reconciliation but I wanna be really clear up front. I'm not one of those architects who thinks architecture can do everything or architects can do everything. There's a famous line buried within the Renaissance treatise, the most important one of the Renaissance on architecture by Alberti where he claims that beauty and architecture is so important it can even help save a building from destruction because approaching combatants might pause before they attack it. Not that kind of suggestion here. Instead, what I want to do is think about how architecture can in fact be more broadly construed than buildings and how they look. But instead, architecture is a central component in creating the built environment, a broader phenomenon wherein we inhabit our daily lives, we go about conflicts, moving through potential reconciliation and everything in between. They are physical remainders and reminders of all the fullness of life. You can't really avoid architecture. With regard to reconciliation in the aftermath of war, one naturally enough thinks of memorials and monuments. But I like to call to mind a pithy observation by the philosopher of art, Arthur Donto, that reminds us just how tricky this can be. He writes, we erect monuments so that we shall always remember and build memorials so that we shall never forget. Not exactly the same thing, but they do share a lot. There are some overlaps and intention. And I think part of the challenges here is the fact that once something is built, it exists in time and will take on meanings that we can't control. So what I want to do today is explore a little bit one particular site of convergence. It's a remarkable site having to do with the post-World War II reconstruction of Coventry Cathedral. And in particular, it's the new, self-consciously modern cathedral, immediately adjacent to the ruins of the old that were destroyed in the Blitz of 1940. But before I get to that, I want to comment upon a couple conceptual things at play in my mind. If we're thinking about architecture, not primarily in terms of objects that we encounter and think about, but as creators of space, we also experience architecture always through time somehow. That is, if we're thinking of our lives and the events of our lives individually or collectively, how we encounter a building or the built landscape, the built environment, we do so in motion. We approach and enter. We move through. We cross boundaries and thresholds. We feel protected or enclosed or not and all sorts of things like that. And I think when we consider particular sites with regard to traumas of war, it's very appropriate to remind ourselves we walk into any building with our own memories, our own histories, personal and partly shared, somehow also there. And so we respond to environments variously in part through imagination and memory as well as hope and desire. And if we're talking about churches, there's also a question here regarding sacredness, sacred space. Might it matter when we cross a certain kind of threshold that we're entering into a place where behavior has to change, we act more reverentially or something sort of like that. I say sort of because in the modern world, 20th century and beyond now, well beyond, we don't agree very easily regarding what is sacred and what is not and how to regard such distinctions. And so I'd like to suggest here that thinking about moving around and through an experiencing architecture as well as considering possibilities of the sacred and finally thinking of the modern experience especially. We're dealing with modes of mediation. One way or another, we're trying to navigate, negotiate, settle, at least provisionally, how we relate in the present to the past, how we relate as individuals to something that transcend us. One way or another, we're trying to bridge the gap between something and if anything, reconciliation is seeking to bring back into right relationship, parties, people, events, places, et cetera, that have been estranged. With regard to Coventry Cathedral in particular, I wanna introduce it briefly as a work of architecture you see on the screen an exterior view, not of the entire new building, but really of where the so-called west or entry end of it meets the ruins, the remains of the Medieval Cathedral. The attitude the architect Basil Spence consciously adopted regarding those ruins is significant because this was the result, the design, of an international competition. And yet, part of the requirements from the beginning was to say, we're going to keep the tower. All winning designs, potentially winning designs would have to incorporate the tower somehow into the new site. He went further and he basically decided that any and all parts of the ruined building that could be stabilized enough to remain should remain. He writes in his report accompanying the winning design, the following. Through the ordeal of bombing, Coventry was given a beautiful ruin. The tower and spire reveal themselves for the first time in an arresting new aspect from the ruined nave. As the cathedral stands now, it is an eloquent memorial to the courage of the people of Coventry. It is felt that the ruin should be preserved as a garden of rest embracing the open air pulpit and stage and the new cathedral should grow from the old and be incomplete without it. Clearly he's not designing a building to follow the stylistic gestures and traditions of the medieval. This is not a Gothic revival building. It's a modern building, but it's a particular kind of modern. Modern identity after all is a kind of negotiation with what attitude does the architect embrace or approach the past? Do we seek to be entirely and utterly new or develop some aspect of previous tradition? For Spence, he writes at length in his memoir of this experience that he was well formed in the long history of medieval architecture, especially church architecture. And he does not see it as a singular style. In fact, he says some of the greatest cathedrals embody within the single body of the building multiple styles that somehow work together over time. He describes the adventurous nature of this tradition and then turns the tables on the common discourse, all too common regarding modern versus tradition. People are, he says, shocked when architects think in this traditional way. They cannot see that the true traditionalists are people who think simply in their own era. The copyists then are surely the revolutionaries. One thing to note about this then, he makes a few decisions regarding the architecture that I'll point out. On the right, you see the plan and it forms a kind of L shape. And as it is, you see the entry in the gap between the ruins at the bottom and the building at the top. The orientation is maintained to be fundamentally about the altar end at the top of that screen. The zigzag walls that allow the windows to shed light on that end but not be seen as one approaches it from below from the entry and several other design decisions are included here. But I'm looking at this site, not just as a work of architecture with regard to ruins, but as a site also of another range of art forms. In particular, the musical performance, the premiere of the War Requiem by Benjamin Britton. Only five days after the consecration of the cathedral. Britton likewise adopts and actually had been described by others as a figure that manages a mediation between the modern and the traditional that's subtle and complicated. He was called a revolutionary conservative. And we see evidence of that attitude that's really distinctive here because he could for the celebration of the new cathedral choose any kind of sacred or secular text. He adopted the choice of the mass for the dead, the Requiem, and he interspersed within the text of that Requiem mass, the Latin text, fragments of anti-war poetry from Wilfred Owen, rooted in the experience of the First World War. And I want to simply bring these reflections regarding mediation to a focal point without attempting to do justice by any means to the complexity of the musical experience of modernity vis-a-vis tradition. But I'll suggest it's in the interstitial space, the threshold, the boundary between the church proper and the nave garden of rest of the ruins where a provocative aspect of the War Requiem takes hold. This entry zone into the new cathedral is a floor-to-ceiling, full-height, light metal frame glass wall, upon which are engraved images of saints and biblical figures, but most especially angels. And they range in different postures. The ones you encounter most directly are the standing angels along the lower row. Spence himself, when he talked about early visions for the cathedral, said, he always had a clear vision of the orientation toward the altar, but it was ever changing. I could not see the altar, but through the bodies of the saints. So there was an intention to keep a transparency there and yet also an arresting challenge. These were the products of lots of experimentation throughout the 1950s by the artist John Hutton. And I'd like to suggest that attending to the premiere of the War Requiem, this site takes on a new meaning in addition to that perhaps intended by Spence. And that is because during one of the, sorry, I should say first, the arrangement of the War Requiem is complicated. There were three different portions of performers, one of which, however, was a boys' choir. And the boys' choir sung in a decidedly archaic mode of Latin singing, and they were always held to be at a great distance. I believe, though I haven't found absolute evidence of this, but managing the interior organization of the space and speculating a bit, they must have been towards that entry end near this glass wall. And I'll close with simply this one passage from the Requiem Mass, which brings our attention back to the question of how we're encountering this memory that's being processed in a way and a religious tradition of the Requiem praying for the repose of the dead, that they be saved to a better afterlife than they had in life. But what occurs here is a bracketing in the offertarium of the Latin sung by the major choir invoking the grace and benevolence of God for the afterlife of the fallen soldiers. But it's a War Requiem, a Requiem not for the soldiers, but perhaps for war itself. For Britain was a conscientious objector. He was a lifelong pacifist and he chose to premiere in this spot a work of music that balanced as difficult as it might be, a challenge to reconciliation. So in the midst of prayers by the main choir and then at the end, the boys choir in the back, the two tenors seeing the text that you have seen here on the screen by Wilfred Owen. I won't read it and I haven't played any of the music because really you need to just listen to the whole thing and follow the text. It's an amazing back and forth of supplication for peace and a hope and desire and belief in that and a commitment to seeing straight on the horrors of what has been experienced. You'll see at a glance a familiar story repackaged from Wilfred Owen, the binding of Isaac, the would be, but averted sacrifice of his son, of Abraham's son, Isaac, the final two lines shifting our attention rather to the world wars of Europe. Thank you very much. So with that, thank you very much and we have 10 minutes for any questions. You can use these two mics right here. Hi. My question is to Professor Gray. So you were talking about how the 30 years war is like in between two different religions and so you said that other countries had to step in to solve that war, correct? The other countries really stepped in to take advantage of it and exacerbated it. They made it worse. So then have you come across any sources saying, showing how people at the time looked at this stepping in from the other countries? Oh, you mean how people from outside the Holy Roman Empire might have seen what was happening inside? No, how the inside was looking at what how the outside was reacting. So the way that people were reacting to it. Well, I think it's just like you find in every war. It was a really, really awful time. And this was, we sort of had new armies, great big armies, but they hadn't figured out supply trains yet. So anytime an army came through they would just take all your stuff. They didn't ask you what religion you were or what side you were on. Soldiers themselves were often changing sides because you would fight for whoever would pay you and so it didn't matter what religion you were. But for a lot of people they just saw it as a great calamity. A lot of people saw it as judgment from God coming down upon them for their sins. A lot of people blamed those outside forces. Oh, this is the fault of the Spanish. This is the fault of the French. Everyone's terrified of the Swedes, who knew. They weren't always as peaceful as they are today. And so I think there was a whole mix of emotions around this time. One thing that I can definitely say is by the time this was over, everyone was happy. Everyone was relieved. And I didn't get a chance to really get into this, but the Catholics have their own way of celebrating the end of hostilities and the peace that comes in Augsburg as well. Everyone was just so relieved it was over at the end. Thank you. So in the last panel Dr. Sadegrin talked a little bit on civil war memorials, in particular one to a perceived Confederate war criminal. So my question, and I believe this could go to either professor here, is how do you believe that the destruction of architecture, particularly those that hold a historical or cultural significance can impede the post-war reconciliation process? How does the destruction compete with? Is that the question? How can it impede? Impede, thank you. Okay, yeah, it's, the favorite professorial answer is it's complicated, right? Of course, but I will say that when it comes to architecture and the inherent pretense to permanence, there is automatically a question for future generations to always deal with. What do we do with very old buildings? And aside from explicit memorials and monuments about which we will variously disagree and need to process that for future generations in one way or another, that issue is a subset of a larger issue to me because it's, it continues to be a matter of in what way are we as humans represented, embraced, spoken to in anything like a recognizable language by the world we inhabit. We make the world we inhabit if we're talking about the built environment, but the we changes. It's always going to change and the more permanent a building or monument is, the more that becomes an issue for future generations to come to terms with what do we think about this? So it's not, maybe it's not a great answer to the question. It can certainly impede something that needs to happen, but sometimes what needs to happen is recontextualizing part of the past. And my mind goes in many different directions regarding it from monuments that we, to the degree we can speak in a common shared voice. And that's a very tentative thing. We may want to actively remake our public sphere aside from, and in addition to what we've inherited by happenstance, but aside from those particular kinds of things, we also have instances such as in New England, there are lots of little churches and the dwindling religious population. What do you do with those churches? More pointed in say France and England and Canada, but you can look around and see historic churches that are valued now as cultural properties and are de-consecrated, sold to developers and become something else. There's a wonderful one in Montreal that is now part of a museum. And to my mind, as long as it's in product of a process where the maximum amount of citizenry have a say, that's a good thing. Thank you. Thank you. Good question. Hi, my question is, Augsburg has such a long history of its peace festival. What is its history of resistance during wartime and who are the key figures from Augsburg that took the message of peace interaction? Oh, that is a great question. History of resistance in Augsburg. I wouldn't say, I mean, Augsburg loves to celebrate its history of peace, but I wouldn't say that Augsburg was really a leader in toleration as we think about it necessarily. For the people of Augsburg, the Lutherans and Catholics that were living together, yeah, they didn't kill each other, but they were very happy about the fact that they had to live together. And so the kind of model of toleration that we think about as, let's create a big diverse community and let's draw strength from our differences was really not how they thought about it. Now, all of this said, if there was a modern Augsburger in the audience here, they don't like to hear that. They like to hear about their history being one of everyone getting along great and we love diversity and diversity is our strength. And I think that's the way that the story gets told today. There's not a lot of historical evidence that that's the way that they felt about it back in the day. So as much as I would love to be able to tell you that Augsburg was a great leader in trying to create values of toleration and peace, I think they just did the best that they could in the unfortunate circumstances that they were in. And now we find ourselves 500 years later with actually a long history of people getting along great and they're justly very proud of that. Thank you. I think we have time for one more short question. So I had a quick comment and a question for Professor Parker. I visited Coventry as a teenager. Thank you so much for bringing back a flood of memories that I had not returned to in decades. Wonderful. And enriching that experience with an awful lot of understanding I didn't have then. For Professor Gray, the piece of Augsburg resulted in this rule that you cited, the Cuyus religio. So whoever the prince is, his religion is what will be the religion of the place. That's named after Augsburg and yet Augsburg did it have a prince that said, I don't care? Is that how it turned out? Yeah, the city council couldn't pick. But about 20% of the population was Catholic. They tended to be the rich people. 80% of the population didn't want to be Catholic. And so they found themselves in this kind of awkward position of they neither side could really establish itself as the one official religion. So they had two. It's very unusual. The parts of Germany are very specifically Catholic or Protestant by tradition. Even to this day, very much so. Yeah. Are there other cities you're aware of after the piece of Westphalia actually officially established this kind of parody constitution so you've got equal political representation for Lutherans and Catholics. There were only three of their cities that officially were mentioned in the piece of Westphalia and their cities you haven't heard about. Ravensburg, Bebarock, and Dinklesbuel. So not important cities. But there are actually, I think the whole Holy Roman Empire is an example of religious diversity because there's so many borders within the empire. For those of you who aren't familiar with the Holy Roman Empire itself, the EU today, there's borders everywhere and everybody's got their own culture. So you've got these different religions, like five minutes walk and you're in a different state that has a different religion. So there is actually much more religious diversity in the empire than I think we generally give them credit for. Thank you. Thank you all for coming. And let's give a round of applause to our presenters. Thank you so much for attending the morning sessions. So starting at 1 p.m., we will have three more sessions talking about the European memory and reconciliation from the literature perspective. And then 2 p.m., just the Asian memory and reconciliation issues, China, Japan, and Korea. And then three o'clock, student panel sessions, talking about the Russian, Ukrainian war, and the Chinese kind of transnational repressions and all other topics will be addressed. So student panel. So have a nice lunch and see you again. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Good afternoon, everyone. My name is Anna Lemler and I am a freshman pursuing a degree in computer and electrical engineering. My name is Gretchen Ries and I am a freshman in the core pursuing political science and criminal justice. Thank you for joining us at Norwich Fifth Annual Peace and War Summit. This year we're focusing on the human and political repercussions of the recent conflicts in Europe and the Middle East and how nations can better deal with these traumatic events. Today, Dr. Kyle Povetti and Dr. David Ward have offered their expertise in how war and regional conflicts have impacted Europe and the future implications these have on political and current climates. Kyle Povetti is an associate professor of English at Norwich University. His research has examined memory and political identity in early modern England, especially in the works of Shakespeare. His first book titled of memory and literary form, the making of nationhood in an early modern England, looked at ways literary devices that craft collective memory. He is also a co-author with John Garrison of Shakespeare at Peace, a study of the pacifist thinking in Shakespeare's work. His writing on adaptation of memory and identity has been featured in journals, Shakespeare studies in ethnicity and nationalism, modern theology and explorations in Renaissance culture. His talk today on emotional memory is inspired by the continued embarrassment he feels for mistakes made 25 years ago. Dr. David Ward is professor of German in Norwich's Department of Global Humanities. He holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from Duke University and his PhD in German Literature and Language is also from the University of Texas as Austin with studies in Munich as well and a year as a Fulbright Fellow in Frankfurt am Main. His primary areas of scholarly activity are post-World War II German literature and literary translation. His published translations include novels, plays, essays and non-fiction, most recently the memoir by Reinhard Glickner that he will be discussing today. We will have 15 minutes for each speaker and 10 minutes at the end of the session for questions where you can just come up to the mic and ask your questions. If you find something interesting and would like to address it with Dr. David or Dr. Ward, please prepare to be asked at the end. Thanks everyone. Thank you for being here and thanks to Gretchen and Anna for introducing us and moderating this session. So I also wanna thank Professor Aku, remember he went, for organizing things and especially Megan Liptak who I think is parked out front working on the next event she's got tomorrow. She runs all things peace and wars and are many of the centers here. We couldn't do it without her. So I approached today's topic memory and reconciliation as an English professor and that means I'm interested in literary representations of the past and in particular today I'm gonna be thinking about how drama depicts the past and how drama helps us remember things and in particular I'm looking at early modern England and this genre of play that becomes really popular that is the history play and especially in Shakespeare he keeps depicting the history of England and I wanna know what memorial work is happening there and I will be approaching this through the notion of memory but also you can see here in the title this idea of emotional memory. So I'll be talking a little bit about what's called affect theory very popular in literary studies these days and really it's talking about how emotions are constructed, how emotions are communicated and how emotions are shared among groups. So I wanna see what the history play is doing with kind of a collective emotion and a collective memory at the same time and I think it's complicated you can see this is a scene from Shakespeare's Richard the Third his famous play about the evil king and here you've got the responsible for the murder of these two princes and he's haunted by the ghosts that come to him and I wanna think about that moment to kind of the collective memory at work as Shakespeare's restaging past that are often painful, uncomfortable and that often English killing other English. So but I wanna start off with another moment from more recently and that is of March 2023 and that was an anniversary in the United States although 20 year anniversary not much commented on it was the anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. Not one marked by many parades or memorials but it was struck by a column from Lorraine Alice wrote this in the LA Times, she's an Iraqi American and she was thinking about what it means to be looking at the invasion of Iraq 20 years on and she says the anniversary of the war crept on us like an unwanted memory tucked behind bank failures and miraculous weight loss drugs. What's interesting here is she's using the language of trauma that this past exists out there it is kind of overwhelmed by the daily activities of our lives, the bank failures, miraculous weight loss drugs but then the intrusive memory appears and like that verb she uses it creeps up on us and she wants to know why isn't this being discussed more obviously the legacy lives on it is not resolved yet what will that reconciliation look like and she offers one potential answer about what might be getting in the way and it's the emotion that I wanted to look at today that is shame and she has this to say. So it's understandable why folks might prefer to overlook what has become to be seen as a shameful chapter in American history. So notice she's positing the emotion of shame against the memory of the war that it's because of shame that we don't want to look at that memory that keeps creeping up and what I want to do is think about this in terms of the early modern England the 1590s what Shakespeare is doing with English pasts and really to consider shame not as opposite memory but actually as part of memory and that I'll be arguing that this feeling of shame is in fact memorial work happening and is important for not just reconciliation but really thinking through national identity. So it's a lot to chew on here do I best to explain these terms? Let's start with this idea of emotional memory. So I have here a line from Lawrence Hedges he's a psychologist so we're borrowing from a lot of psychological language says that the best maximum for the 21st century is there is no memory save emotional memory. So important here to theory of memory that he's working on is that it's easy to think of memory as this library that you've got in your head this is the kind of cognitive model and when you wanna recall facts you can just kind of reach back there and pull some information out and what Lawrence Hedges wants to say as following many psychologists is that memories actually more complicated than that it's not nearly as stable as that model things we've just got your books kind of sitting your head waiting for you and he wants to say there's actually this notion of emotional memory here's a line from him with some fancy science terms. So he says our entire bodies are implicated in various ways and complex interactive systems of effective charge neuronal processing that influence all aspects of our being especially memory. So to break this down to think about memory is not just happening in your head it is happening throughout your body it is kind of imbued in the way your breath moves your heartbeat your sweaty palms all that is part of memory attends to memory so you remember things you're also feeling things I think if you're like me you wake up in the night having anxiety flashbacks to 10 years ago you've recognized yeah of course memory is emotional it pops emotions in us it also these thinkers talk about it going the other way too that your emotions you feel is also a demonic process that you have learned certain patterns in your body certain breath controls pulses feelings the way your blood vessels work that those communicate feelings to you and you were recalling those feelings for social purposes individual purposes at any particular time so when you feel things you are remembering things just as much as when you remember things you also feel them these two processes are combined and it's emotional memory so what does this do for memory theory? well we've seen today that a lot of this kind of idea very common in the field of memory studies that the past is reconstructed rather than simply represented you can build your memorials that communicate different things we can talk through the past in different ways it depends on what version of the past is being reconstructed at any moment there's a line I like from a classic kind of memory studies theorist Bartlett who says memory does not need to be true memory needs to be useful that goes for your individual memory too when you're remembering things you're not always pulling on what's true you're pulling on what's useful for you at the moment so this idea of memory the past is reconstructed rather than simply represented I've got one last line here from two memory theorists who talk about this affect the idea of emotions being shared saying that the turn to affect can also be seen as a turn to memory as long as such memories understood as embodied and non-representational so we talk about collective feelings what emotions are shared we're also talking about what is being remembered at any particular time so that's this idea of emotional memory not nearly as stable as you hope and involves a lot more feeling than you might want to admit when you're trying to recall information on the test so what does that have to do with Shakespeare? well as I mentioned Shakespeare wrote a lot of these history plays this is Sir Tom Hiddleston he's not a knight yet Sunday King of mischief playing Henry V that is Shakespeare's most famous king in the Henry V play that's the band of brothers play it's probably the most famous one of his Shakespeare's representing the past all the time and doing all these history plays are very common in the period and I want to think about the emotional memory work happening in these plays and it's occurring this genre is becoming very popular with two kind of historical circumstances one you've got an emergent nation state it's really where we're beginning to see nationhood in our modern sense of a government that's centralized and controlling policies we've got the emergence of the modern nation alongside this stuff being built at the time that is the public playhouses so they're becoming also popular in England at the period the playhouses of course have been traveling shows but these are permanent structures built in London that people could go to and I pulled a line here from scholar Stephen Mulaney says that they're accessible to literate and non-literate alike so mass groups of people can come see a play the drama that developed in the amphitheater playhouses was one of the more complex effective technologies of this or any other period if you've been to a play you probably know that yeah drama plays are about emotions right that's why we go you to feel things to cry if you're sensitive but laughter more of you are comfortable with laughter I certainly am and what he's saying is the play is really this technology that causes emotions to be shared bold claim of technology of this or any other period like right up there with social media public playhouses, early modern London so what emotions was it causing at the period here's Henry Cross he is a writer, sorry a writer thinking through what drama does in the period he has in mind here kind of an ancient theory of comedy he says this when you see comedies the spots and areas of our life are acted out to our own shame is impossible that we should be content to be such and not load our own evil in other words, if you go to see a play and you're feeling embarrassed by it or especially a comedy think this is when you're watching cringe comedy it can be deeply embarrassing even as you're watching this you watch the office and feel like you wanna hide Cross is saying that's part of the point of going to the theater you go to comedy to feel shame that is important because it teaches you virtuous action, what not to do right so playhouses are an effective technology deeply involved in shaming he also makes the move to implying something about public persecution so think about public shamings this is the kind of stocks public executions he gives you this image thinks about a man who has his ears cut off his head he has small cause to glory or boast but rather blush be ashamed and exile himself from common society and strive with humility to reform those rebellious passions so it is somebody who has punished publicly is shamed and that is an important social cohesive move it teaches you humility it teaches you how to control your passions what I'm getting at here is there is a culture of shame happening at the period of the same time you've got these playhouses in fact the Shakespearean Ewan Ferney says that Shakespeare is living in an atmosphere of raging shame you've got these playhouses that have effective technologies we are willing to feel things as a group in ways never possible before and what we're seeing is interest in the emotion of shame what is shame and how does it work and that is obviously here a theatrical experience and I want to go to a line from the scholar of affect theory Eve Sedgwick and she thinks a lot about how emotions are shared she's got a very long history of this and she begins her work with the affect of shame and importantly when she's talking about shame she wants to say that it is an exchange that shame is always participatory even if you feel like shame is a deeply individual feeling as Sedgwick wants to say no it's always an exchange between people so think about like bear with me if I'm up here with my zipper down and you're all watching going oh my gosh oh it's so embarrassing right you are identifying with me at the same time you're pushing me away as different right so Sedgwick wants to say shame is this constant exchange between people right she gives this line which is great for a Shakespearean the shame might be finally said transformational shame is performance and I mean theatrical performance so what I'm getting at here is Shakespeare's history plays are very much invested in the affect of shame and it wants you to remember the feeling of shame that that is a collective experience so if I go back to my Richard the third image Richard is haunted by the ghosts of his victims who come to him in the night and of course chant shame on him we can look at Richard as the villain here but also we are participating with him in that feeling of shame and remembering this legacy of English shame I'm gonna go to a line from Henry the sixth part one this is one of Shakespeare's first history plays and in this play he kind of shows this war between the French and the English and you can see here the death of Talbot Talbot is this great English hero in this Henry the sixth play he's kind of this marker of medieval chivalry and he dies in this play it's a very sad kind of ending to a to this kind of medieval period of kind of heroism it's the beginning of the war of roses which happened in the 1400s a longstanding English civil war Talbot's death is this moment where oh my gosh our last great English hero has died you can see these are two English lords saying well his fame lives in the world we will remember Talbot but his shame lives in you that is the death of Talbot and Talbot dies at this play because the English are so busy fighting with one another about who's going to take the throne that they don't send Talbot reinforcements his death in France is on the English hands this is the legacy of that play that our great hero has died and whose fault is it well it's kind of the English's own fault his shame will live in those lords so if I go to this kind of great play of Henry the fifth which is so triumphant often I have this line from Isabelle Kerman who says nostalgic spectacle is what induces a passion for the past in the audience if it is indeed a device for producing emotions that you can night a group of spectators and the theater surely is a privileged site of nation building through nostalgia that's a very kind of glowing we go to see English plays because like yes England we can see them we can build that pride what I'm suggesting is it's not that I disagree that there is this emotional exchange happening and the restaging of English history and the memory work happening there is that I think the emotions are largely about regret and humiliation Shakespeare's history plays aren't mostly about English triumphs they're mostly about civil war about English defeating themselves and doing damage to themselves like that's the memory that's being restaged I think that's the collective experience happening in these plays if I go back to Talbot when Talbot's dying he has the chance to save his son tells his son you've got to get away from this battle save yourself and his son won't leave says no I'm going to die with you here so this exchange part of my father may be saved in the Talbot says get away save yourself and young Talbot says if I leave no part of me will be saved but is shameful I left and I left you here to die this is a moment I think that happens often in Shakespeare's history plays where characters are always commenting on like wow what are people going to say about this in 100 years in 200 years it's always an ironic moment right because an audience is watching this history unfold and the characters are thinking how will we be remembered I don't know what do you think you hear those that survive are going to feel the shame of Talbot's death that's the memory we're going to feel into the future and in fact the English lords responsible for the tragedy of Talbot's death they get mad at each other and they specifically make this about memory they say I'll note you in my book of memory discourage you for this apprehension meaning I'm going to write down I'm going to remember in my book of memory what you did and it's about scourging that is the public whipping right so this is a shameful experience we are going to remember this and replay this and feel that shame again and again and again that's the emotional memory at work in this play and it serves a political purpose that is it is the binding force that's pulling the experience of these plays together and I think is having political effects and much inclined with national identity let me end with a line from Sarah Ahmed she's a theorist who wrote the cultural politics of emotion how do what do politics have to do with emotion and she says this line so it's shame that allows us to assert our identity as a nation so what I'm getting at here is the reconciliation of those English civil wars is very much about replaying that shame again and again and again to feel that regret and that's not opposite to national identity that is causing national identity so to think about reconciliation or what are we going to do with the legacy of the Iraq invasion it is a shameful chapter what I'm suggesting is that shame that we feel that Lorraine Aldi is pointing at is part of the reconciliation it is part of that memory work that shame is an emotional memory that leads to national identity thanks everyone hello everyone I'm used to talking in 50 minute chunks so I've been given exactly 15 to speak today so I don't trust myself to read without a text in front of me so I'll be reading this rather than presenting in lecture form the way my colleagues have managed to do my title is recovering from 40 years of state socialism the case of Greifswald as the Cold War wound down across the globe in the late 1980s the German Democratic Republic East Germany had two examples that could follow in response to the increasingly urgent internal calls for change since becoming leader of the Soviet Union in 1985 Mikhail Gorbachev had last had called for perestroika restructuring and glasnost openness in an effort to adapt to the changing circumstances in June 1989 the People's Republic of China took a different approach responding to growing internal unrest and demands for change with a brutal and bloody crackdown on protesters on Beijing's Tiananmen Square the government of the German Democratic Republic showed signs of following the Chinese example October 7th, 1989 during official celebrations of the GDR's 40th anniversary riot police in East Berlin broke up a substantial counter demonstration only a few blocks away beating some of the protesters arresting many others why then why then is that not the path that the GDR ultimately took and how did the peaceful transition that ultimately was accomplished look from the point of view of the East Germans I'd like to look at that I'd look at five key factors in the, in die Wende in this turnabout at the end of the which die Wende by the way means just to turn around to change directions as Germans refer to this year and a half process from the middle of 1989 through the end of 1990 when the Cold War came to an end East Germany collapsed and the two Germanies were reunited the outline of the story is familiar however for reasons it will become clear in the course of this talk the answer to our question how was that experienced by East Germans will vary greatly from city to city I'll use the memoir of Dr. Reinhard Glückner of the East German city of Greifswald his memoir to look at these developments from a local perspective so 65,000 residents of that medium-sized cities similar to Burlington in size and also like Burlington home of a major university so the first of these five factors I'd like to look at are the churches although Marx's Leninist ideology allows no space for religion the East German constitution was amended in nineteen eighty nineteen sixty eight to include explicit acknowledgement of a legitimate role for the church as an independent organization with important social relevance in East Germany under the heading church in socialism faculties of theology were allowed to operate at six East German universities the room the room to operate evolved within each community was negotiated between among the clergy the parishioners and local authorities in each case in air for it for example in southern Germany the geographical proximity is consistent also with networks of friendships of cooperation of understanding and communication that characterized this region was partly responsible for a change of variety at the pace at which change happened and the ways in which it happened within East Germany in these last crucial months in air for it this led to the church's for both becoming open spaces for dialogue and affirmation including inner city outreach and more and this entail the frequent the sometimes intense sometimes tense dialogue with state authorities thus when the events of nineteen eighty nine brought political discussion out into the streets church leaders new people in the government they could talk with and the danger of political police intervention as it broke out in Berlin on october seven could be avoided like to began in september with weekly peace services and public marches that grew to include tens of thousands of participants for secretary of the easterman party eric honaker had already given the order for security forces to use live ammunition on marches and like to but his deputy refused to carry out that order as a result on october eighteenth honaker has resigned from his post later that month when thousands of protesters were surrounded by riot police in dresden they elected while their leaders negotiated with local authorities and held off kind of a ceasefire kind of a standoff began to begin to diffuse the uh... this group together elected from their midst twenty representatives a group of twenty that would go and speak with and and dialogue with the local authorities offer was accepted that group was part of that in on going of the main structure that was maintained for months and beyond that and had a tremendous impact on how the events of these this transition played out in the city of leipzig excuse me it is against this backdrop of growing tension and differing local circumstances that would begin our closer look at greifswald so i wanted to you see the map there and where the cities are located we share with you you can refer to the timeline here for some of the different events that i'll be mentioning as these as this year-and-a-half progresses so divende begins in greifswald with a discussion that happens in the home of pastor glückner in nineteen eighty one at that time a discussion circle of the marienkirche of the city of greifswald was meeting in the home of of the glückner family the topic came up of tresden and the annual prayer service for peace held in that city's churches commemorating the firebombing of the city in nineteen forty four why them why just them we could do something like that here with grudging support from the bishop and his staff annual peace services began in the marienkirche that year looking back doctor glückner recalls divende for his congregation began with that that conversation and that decision to act by september of nineteen eighty nine churches in several cities in the southern part of east germany had begun hosting weekly public forums followed by lengthy marches doctor glückner's congregation joined them on october eighteenth the day that hannocker resigned so that the other parts of the country had a head start but that that this point this was their process of catching up and since stepping into and contributing to what was becoming a wave of wide wide spread popular motion movement for change the first evening marches passed by police headquarters on the way to city hall they found the police force assembled but after a tense moment they were allowed to pass when the marches reached city hall several members of the city council came out to meet them and some discussion was held the mayor offered the university dining hall as a site for future discussions and so it became a weekly event prayer service candlelight march public forum in the university dining halls second force second factor i'd like to talk about of the five were mentioned the state security agency stasi for short the dreaded internal police agency on december sixteenth a week after the berlin wall was opened the topic of the week in the unit in the greifswald university dining hall was the state security agency the dreaded stasi with the departure of erich hannocker a few weeks earlier the agency had been renamed but there was no change in its behavior dr glückner served as moderator for this discussion and representatives from the stasi were in a panel at the head of the table it became heated quickly someone called for all police authority to be taken away from that agency dr glückner called for a vote a show of hands made clear that all but a handful of the thousands in attendance supported that move the mood shift in the room was immediate later that evening a group entered the stasi headquarters and began inspecting the files the agency had been keeping on its citizens from then on teams monitored those offices day and night to read the contents of those files and to prevent the destruction in all of east germany greifswald is the only city where in those whose inhabitants read the stasi files of their own co-inhabitants there were files on twenty two thousand of the city's sixty five thousand inhabitants do the math that includes children too more than half of the adult population was includes had some kind of been spied on in some way and records were kept there stasi file cabinets were sealed on december fourth with the consent of the city's mayor by the end of december all fifty two regular employees of the stasi in greifswald had been fired the building had been reassigned to the university's music department those efforts led to further important step in destroying any remaining claim of legitimacy by the east germany state the stasi had marked the files of one thousand one hundred nine greifswald citizens who had not participated in the elections the previous may the published results of those elections stated that only four hundred twenty six had not voted in greifswald the city official responsible for the election was confronted and confessed that he had received a note before the election with the results that he was to report he was found guilty of election fraud and find greifswald and airford are the only are the two east german cities where the pervasive election fraud of the east germany state was documented and those documents made public you notice there's been little talk in the last couple minutes of the role of the churches that role had been threefold first to open a safe space for dialogue second to constantly and without exception commit all participants to non-violence and third to use pre-existing channels of communication to engage the authorities and to head off confrontation by december of nineteen eighty nine that work was complete and the churches were no longer directly involved and no longer needed for things to move forward third of the five areas to cover the round table der runde tisch from those discussions new movements sprang up nor his forum was one democratic uproh the one that angela merkel belong to or as an east german citizen in greifswald and many other cities as well their members were invited to join with local civic leaders and local government officials in an unofficial council they called it der runde tisch this is something like what enthrased in the group of twenty established that met regularly to maintain the operations of the city of greifswald the city in greifswald the city in the mayor council that excuse me the mayor of the city council pledged that they would consider the decisions of the round table binding upon their actions this ushered in the era of inclusion and collaboration that would continue until the gdr's first round of truly democratic local elections which were held on may sixth nineteen ninety factor to consider the marchers in october september and october of nineteen eighty nine took to the streets with the chant we are the people the isn't us folk you the government do not speak for the people we are the people and this is what we say we disagree after the opening of the wall within a very few weeks the chant changed significantly from we are the people visit us folk to the isn't I'm falling we are one people so the isn't us folk had been the central message of the courageous reformers who open the churches spoke and march through the through march through the fall of nineteen eighty nine soon after the opening of the Berlin wall though this group had comprised that it comprised the vanguard had been left behind as much larger crowds amended the chant to the isn't I'm folk people had moved from wanting to reform socialism to wanting to live in a different entirely different system west german center-right party of chancellor coal easily won the national elections that were held on march eighteenth as well as the elections for local and regional offices may six in greifswald know his forum received only six percent of the vote and democratic uproar one of whose spokespersons had been unmasked as a stasi collaborator got less than one percent so as dr glickner puts it in his book people voted for a unit in germany for the deutschmark the hard currency the west and for the banana the banana you the east europe the sub union had no access to hard currency therefore they couldn't import things like tropical fruits that were easily available in the west and not at all in the east a final note sister cities during the final years of the gdr cities were allowed to form partnerships with cities in the west including west germany starting in nineteen eighty eight greifswald partnered with osnabrück also a medium-sized north german town with a regional university at first delegations by visits by delegations from one city to the other were closely watched and pretty dry affairs but with the elections of may nineteen ninety and dr glückner's inauguration as mayor this partnership became a lifeline since the course had now been set for east germany to be incorporated into the existing economic and political and legal and educational systems of west germany greifswald city government desperately needed people familiar with those systems osnabrück sent heads of their respective departments in their city government for lengthy work visits weeks sometimes months in fact one moved to greifswald permanently while continuing to pay their salaries in deutschmark as greifswald's public transportation system in virtually collapsed as well as nabrück delivered nine buses to get them started again these acts of solidarity made it possible for greifswald city government to navigate the move on july first nineteen ninety to the deutschmark has the only valid currency the closing of east germany's national agencies in july the ceasing of operations of the district the government's by the end of august and the long weeks of political vacuum between the constitution of the newly drawn bundeslender in the east in september and the first meeting of the bundeslend legislature following elections in october was this the culmination yes the culmination of this year of elections was the all-german elections held in december the former german democratic republic was incorporated into the existing federal republic of germany comprising five of the now sixteen bundeslender for the first time since nineteen thirty three germany had a government freely elected by the whole nation was this the end of the recovery process of course not large issues remained and we're dealt with for the end are still being dealt with today did the issues remain unresolved or even unaddressed some yes but with the early efforts of the churches the brave participation of those marchers and discussants especially early on the pragmatic collaboration of all sides at the roundtables and some generous and timely help from a sister city greifswald and the other cities of the former east germany were ready to face the challenges the post-cold war era would bring thank you to professor pavetti and doctor ward we will now be having questions we have about ten minutes to do so anyone who has questions may at this point make their way to the mikes on either side of the aisles thank you i my question is you talked about shameless creating identity what happens if most people do not feel shame for an event like the iraq war uh... yeah i think that's a great question and and i think that's what's the struggle is happening in that article there are a few of those where people are wrestling with twenty years on what are we doing with this uh... and i think part of it is what would it take to create uh... affective shame that is collective in his shared and i imagine that will start to see that in some film and representations in art uh... about the iraq war invasion of afghanistan uh... i think uh... similar moment i think about vietnam films for instance that uh... often have these scenes where dealing with regret and shame and that those films are wrestling with what that legacy is like and i think that will start to happen i don't know for sure but i think that's that idea of that shaping what that memory will be will involve feeling what shame is and feeling what that collective feeling of shame might be if you could see if it's in one place might it then be shared amongst many thank you hi thank you for those great papers uh... professor pavetti absolutely fascinating discussion of emotional memory and shame in the way that those come together really appreciated that uh... what i what i would love to do is actually a professor ward respond to some of these questions that professor pavetti brought up because uh... you know the end of of the cold war in the east was a complicated experience uh... and i wonder if you could talk just a little bit about what the emotional memory of that period of reconciliation is like was there a sense of of shame in the immediate aftermath in east germany or is that not quite the right word to use to describe what was happening in the immediate aftermath how do we make sense of the largest emotion now it seems to be kind of nostalgia uh... you know how how does that fit in with emotional memory so i just would love to to hear you talk just a bit about at bringing these two together by by seeing what kind of emotions were brought up by that end of the cold war in the east i'm struck by i'm reminded of a passage in dr larkner's book where he talks about the citizens of the town going through the stasi files and reading what had been reported about their family members about their friends about their neighbors uh... secretly kept reported to the authorities and maintained as a filing to be used against them the processing of that the fact that these cities populations began to receive these files that the stasi files now are a matter of public record you can go anyone can go and ask to see their files everything that the stasi has had about them and they're able to to review those and see them you can't see anybody else's but you can see your own and that's a way of respecting people's privacy on the other hand making sure that they're they're aware of what was what was done i think if anything the fact that the east germans spoke up that they protested that they demonstrated that there were people that were willing to be yes they expected to be beaten and and driven out back on the anniversary of the of the fortieth anniversary of the east germany the fact that they were able to see that they didn't step up and speak out in large numbers will help a bit in east these these former citizens of east germany looking back without a sense of shame has been done and and what they lived through so that might it might be alleviating that processing a bit the other thought that comes to mind is that it took about ten years for the films just leave them to under and goodbye linen that have become sense famous films for looking back and examining this time to be to come out and be produced and so maybe ten years from now for eight maybe eight years from now we'll see something about the the iraq war and and it's beginning and end i mean i think you could there are some places you could see it now i think it creeps up i think zero dark thirty is a complicated movie about the legacies of the invasion of afghanistan i don't think it's simple it's led to a lot of debate and consternation about what is it telling us what's its message and it's it's hard because you're dealing in memory and it's being reconstructed at all times and it's always under contention i think we will see more so you talked about how going like to the theater like makes us feel shame and people like in general now i don't think they go to the theater as much it's like because many years ago i think people would go like every other week or some things just like what they do do you think because people don't go to the theater as much like in person because we watch movies right we do that by ourselves at home but we don't go to the theater we don't expect we don't experience that kind of thing as much do you think that that could like that ties in kind of into how like maybe you said how iraq we don't feel we don't like feel shame as much something or like does that connect somehow if you feel like with a shame feeling shame more often yeah i think that's that's really interesting especially if you're thinking about in shakespeare's day that's you know we're fifteen nineties and that theater is this kind of communal activity in that way and so like yeah there's that collective action happening movie theaters would be an interesting place to do that attendance is dropping so i think they're that's maybe maybe as part of the worries that we're losing a collective experience of emotion i don't know about shame and modern theater certainly in the fifteen nineties was an idea that was the coursing through the public consciousness has a lot to do with religion and that religious history about the importance of kind of shame rituals and what it does to correct your virtues it i think you're maybe there's interesting point about our kind of the fear of retreat into personal devices and retreat into worlds that we're losing out on a collective experience that might be driving some of that anxiety although you know i'm i'm not sure i don't know about tying it to the shame for the iraq war and that kind of increasingly isolated viewpoint i don't know i go that far but i do think there are worries about what happens we're all in our individual worlds and not sharing things collectively there's something interesting there about what is lost although you know on the other hand people do say like other social media is causing all these outbursts of emotions they're just being seen and transmitted in different ways i will say that certainly the online world does not seem to be interested in shame uh... particularly the opposite right it's increased anger and defensiveness not regret uh... so i don't know i have to take more thought about new technologies happening today i think it's a tough question i have a question for professor ward so in your presentation you went a lot on the role of the church in divenda and so i want to pose the question that without the role of the church in east germany and the ability for these forums and meetings to occur do you think that the reunification of germany would have fundamentally been different and if so how answer i can give and the most i think to the point because they focused so consistently on non-violence and because they had these channels of communication with local and regional authorities that they were constantly monitoring and using i think the chance that east germany would have gone the other way and followed the Stalinist or Chinese examples and suppressed protest with violent means would have would have changed the memory we have of it what it would be like for the east germany for the former east germans living today and but i do not think it would have changed the ultimate end of the soviet union end of the cold war end of the east germany is a separate existence and the incorporation of the east germany into the west thank you professor ask one quick question hey kyle what about stand-up comedy isn't that our shared what what almost what what shakespeare's place we're doing for his community then isn't that kind of what we have now i cringe it it could be i don't know if we're fringing this depends on the comedian about where that feels and can be a social corrective and i was thinking too that yeah that might occur and there is a line of thought that actually we do have kind of the cancel culture fears that's often coated in language of shame think about it this kind of fear that the social corrective is happening too much i don't know if that's well you may be that is leading to this kind of a new kind of figure out what the political identity is that really is about is wrestling with the past which i think is definitely true about what my monuments mean for example civil war minds being great spot to do analysis of what she means and that context uh... we want them are not and forget rid of them what is that suggesting uh... the suggestion shame i think yeah that's always part of memory stand-up comedy yes it can do that among many other things their questions thank you professor pavetti and doctor ward for your instant for your insights on the traumas and she retained by europe and thank you to everyone who came today to join us for the session you are welcome to stay for the next session or continue on with your day analyst and he fled mic good afternoon my name is balmya de farrakhan this is my co-moderator he has been saki today we would like to welcome you to the fourth panel session for this for the summit today and it's our distinct honor to introduce our esteemed presenters dr laio goldstein and professor young look who our first presenter dr laio goldstein is a leading expert on maritime and new class security issues in asia he has over twenty years of experience as a research professor at the u.s. naval war college way also found it and let the china maritime studies institute and with all this he brings unheard expertise he has all the seven books on chinese strategy including the acclaimed meeting china halfway and is currently working on a book exploring china russia relations with proficiency in chinese and russian a p h g from primstein and degrees from johns hopkins s a i s and harvard goldstein's insights will surely enrich our discussion on the critical challenges and opportunities in the region over the next fifteen minutes dr goldstein will present his paper on the politics of memory and reconciliation between china and japan around the plot as he makes his way to the podium please uh... good afternoon uh... so uh... honor to be here uh... packet uh... norwich place very close to my heart and i'm learning so much here as i always do uh... particularly appreciate the interdisciplinary aspect here that uh... is seems to me is very important uh... as we talk about reconciliation i unfortunately i'll be talking probably less about art and architecture and such things uh... and uh... more about some of these dark deeds uh... which you know i hope that i won't uh... upset and offend too many people uh... when you talking about atrocities is is very difficult i think uh... for everyone including me well how did i arrive at this uh... issue well it's uh... it's something i've thought about a lot although i've i haven't written uh... terribly much on the subject uh... but uh... part of it was i was inspired very much by uh... as revogel who's a scholar at harvard who he passed away unfortunately very recently but his last uh... incredible work uh... focus sort of this tone on china japan relations that uh... came out just a couple of years ago and as i read through that i i became aware of so many things i didn't know about the relationship including by the way that china japan you know have a relationship that goes back thousands of years and uh... uh... you know this is a case where you cannot say something like well they've been fighting for thousands of years that's just not the case china japan have have gotten along very well and had uh... let's say very strong uh... relationship over time uh... you know one of you know very deeply you know shared uh... cultural ties and so forth so so really i think this book brings out that uh... that awful period in the uh... in world war two and just before that was really an anomaly but i i would also just share some experience that i had in germany here uh... i had studied a little german uh... before i got interested in asia and lived in this city essin a bit and there's this striking photograph i came upon while visiting the synagogue in essence of the photograph of the city of essin completely destroyed you know ninety nine percent destroyed but what's left standing is the synagogue somehow you know it's course extremely ironic that the synagogue would be the only building really left uh... but here you see it fully restored uh... in the in the photograph below and having gone through this uh... the restored synagogue you know i think it's it's very uh... touching as a jewish person to see just how germany has fully reckoned with its with its dark history and uh... this extremely important and it's just something that japan to my uh... understanding has has really not endeavored to do and and this is sad and uh... shameful uh... that's a word used on the last panel a lot i think it's definitely the case here now i just thought i'd show you quickly this uh... pie chart of world war two casualties which you know obviously show so the union vastly suffered uh... the most in world war two but china not too far behind uh... you can see germany japan are there too where's the united states well hardly there even it's uh... we're you know in in one of the small slivers uh... and i think looking at this chart you you and thinking hard about the modern world i do think this tells us something i mean it's in a way uh... tells us something about these two powers that is russian china which have quite a different view of history uh... and one that we are not really comfortable grappling with uh... but this shadow of world war two and it's awful devastation sort of hangs over i would say both the our relationship with russia but also our relationship with china too and in the china case it's it's not up to talk about now you know japan's predation are predate uh... world war two of course you know here's some uh... couple insights from my twitter feed where i'm often reporting about chinese news so please uh... have a look at that uh... feed and you'll see some things but i've actually visited these sites in northeast china and undoubtedly uh... even these earlier episodes uh... helped build a kind of narrative uh... which is quite quite sad and and awful in in china with that they build their nationalism against japan and of course it's maybe useful for chinese leaders i think we'll get into that but it's it's also uh... a sad reflection of uh... where china japan relations are uh... which is in a very bad place today i estimate uh... this is i think from uh... twenty twenty two twenty twenty one even uh... talking about uh... the chance of war between china japan over taiwan and this is really becoming i think acute and uh... it's the kind of thing that keeps me up at night uh... but people don't realize how closely this is tied to the history uh... both japan's occupation of taiwan but also the uh... you know these visits to the shrine and so forth uh... something deeply offensive to chinese and uh... if you watch chinese military news as i do almost every day you'll you'll see uh... warnings aimed at japan also the united states but at japan in particular are uh... almost a daily occurrence i would say uh... you know most people are just not aware of this which is rather disturbing uh... and uh... china really monitoring how japan is developing its military further uh... and you know here you can see this statement this is uh... you know from pl a daily japan june ball where they talk about they connect you know some of these recent developments and say well this is clearly not in line with the pacifist constitution right hypersonic weapons uh... so they continue to bring that up uh... and as they look at what how japan is going forward with basically preparing for a taiwan scenario uh... they are monitoring on this this on a daily basis and and you know to me as somebody who is watched this over a period of decades unfold you know i i you know i i don't think i could exaggerate how dangerous the current situation is here and and japan's role i think is is poorly understood uh... you know speaking of japan's role on taiwan from this book by vogal i i had not been aware as a china specialist about the some of the atrocities that japan carried out in taiwan itself when uh... it uh... was was governing taiwan uh... but you know you can read for yourself here you know ordering every person within five miles of the site of a uh... incident you can imagine that's a pretty bloody deed uh... and then you know i uh... i don't like to show you this picture below but uh... these are heads uh... collected after another such outbreak of violence this one undertaken really uh... concerning a uh... a minority group that had risen up against the japanese occupation and you know basically they beheaded all males over the age of fifteen in that area of taiwan so a lot of this is sort of conveniently forgotten and including by the taiwanese themselves because it's not uh... it's not convenient it's not in a good fit with modern thinking so we can talk about japan's legacy more but even you know most people are familiar with the non-jig massacre but even as you look at the details here uh... we see uh... non-jing as sort of the tip of an iceberg or part of a larger pattern that is largely not understood and neglected underestimated and horribly sad you know here's a comparison we've talked a lot about art here this is comparing the events at guernica uh... this is straight from the vogal book but saying you know well actually that was a really small incident compared to what happened several times worse and yet nobody you know i would challenge anybody in this room i was certainly not me knew about this uh... severe bombing of shanghai as early as nineteen thirty two you know it's it's very disturbing and these you know one can pile up these data points uh... i haven't made a career off that but it one could you know it's that it's that bad of course you know i i couldn't give this discussion without broaching non-jing you know horrible atrocity you know maturing probably to three hundred thousand deaths rapes this is the account of an american doctor who witnessed the events and i've been to non-jing to to see the memorial there uh... there's there's a couple of good movies about this actually that helped to tell the story one and one is about a nazi who act happened to be there and happened to save thousands of chinese lives which is an incredible story sort of like schindler's list but uh... anyway most of the story courses is a horrible one of a horrible atrocity but the point is this is not an exception but rather the rule of uh... what japan did in china uh... here's you know just again another glimpse of it this is you may be familiar with the do little raid that took place in uh... the spring of nineteen forty two where our uh... pilots uh... miraculously were able to bomb japan but few have thought about what happened to the chinese who helped to save the pilots they were actually punished their villages were wiped out to the smithsonian here says perhaps as many as a quarter million chinese were killed in the reprisals for that race a quarter million and this is in nineteen forty two so this is nothing to do with non-jing it's just part of this pattern that's largely not discussed and not documented in english very well you know i'm sorry it gets even worse this is uh... in the nineties we began to learn about this uh... unit seven three one this biological warfare outfit but they also did medical experimentation including uh... vivisection which i guess is the dissection on a live human which is about the most awful thing one can think of so don't like to show the slide like this but these are the facts and uh... again this also thought to approximate deaths just caused by this unit to be in the hundreds of thousands of chinese killed uh... so you know it's a long way of saying that horrible things were done i don't think it's adequately understood not even close uh... i've been looking for a long time to find sort of one repository for all of this information and i can't find that please enlighten me if you have that well what is japan done to apologize in in a word not much uh... there have been some words like this from the prime minister serious damage was done to me is is uh... doesn't cut it not even close you know most theorists would say that that japan gave over normalization they were able they were willing to normalize their ties with china that was sort of their you know kind of a tacit agreement that they would move on uh... so that's part of this here's the fiftieth anniversary of the war you know you can see the statement by the japanese prime minister doesn't even mention china uh... and it's regarded as a mistake sorry about that it's you know to me this is just so far from what needs to be done that it's you know i feel i feel kind of silly being up here explaining this because it's so obvious but uh... having spent some time in japan myself and seeing the kind of things that are set in japanese museums i'm afraid that there is a very little uh... actual uh... contrition it's certainly not institutionalized uh... in the way it needs to be although you know i think japanese people might grasp this uh... anyway you know some academic work has been done on this uh... lin's book you know i have to continuing to look at it but i i feel like she has uh... really focused on how states use you know manipulate basically memories for political ends and uh... she basically i think includes that it's not worthwhile the effort which which i think is a it's a shame that that uh... i mean to me i can't swallow that let's put it that way and there's this new book uh... that looks at that the judgment at tokyo i think this is quite important and but here again the focus is not on the fact that that justice was not was so incomplete which is obvious but rather that that i think bass focuses more on the importance of of these kind of trials but to me the trial was so far short from what is necessary uh... look here's something that i find encouraging and this is in in political science in my field of security studies actually this is the premier journal international security so i was quite encouraged to see this uh... kind of a suggestion i hey you know a lack of contrition uh... is part of the root cause of violence and this unrecognized victim hood breeds further conflict i mean to me it suggests a necessity to look at this again uh... and and uh... this author suggests a strategy of atonement and she says you know this is not just uh... we shouldn't just do this because it's the right thing but we should also do it because it's uh... it has major political benefits and folks you know i can't stress enough as somebody focuses on focuses on the security situation the asia pacific is very dicey china japan could go to war at any moment and we need new strategies besides deterrence i mean deterrence is one strategy and and i favor it in many respects but we need other strategies to to calm these tensions all right that's the timer saying i should wind up so uh... sure there are some counter arguments you know maybe all the people are dead from these instances so let's you know let's move on look it would damage the u.s japan alliance if we start being quite critical of japan uh... so there are all kinds of arguments here you know sure to china use this and manipulate these memories sure uh... so we'll you know happy to talk more about some of these counter arguments uh... but i don't think that they outweigh the the obvious need to to pursue this with more seriousness and uh... that means you know in my view kind of re-centering the history in the relationship it means pushing for that billy brunt moment i think that's i think it's so badly needed in china japan relations and uh... indeed you know i think the r-word yes reparation should be on the table you know still uh... absolutely sort of more concrete farm form of this and does china have some apologizing to do yes absolutely uh... here's these bells represent a very important instance where uh... we have begun to examine some of our history in the asia pacific that's quite dark in the philippines uh... i think more of this is needed uh... because the area is really a powder keg and uh... we should be thankful that pieces still rains in the asia pacific but we you know we we are on the edge of a precipice in my view so thank you very much for uh... hearing me out i'll welcome your questions your thoughts i was a very insightful presentation doctor go inside thank you our next presenter is doctor young look who he's an esteemed scholar with expertise in asian politics u.s. foreign policy and the complexities of memory and reconciliation in east asia and europe professor coup brings a wealth of knowledge to our discussion with a bachelor of arts from so gone university a master of arts in international affairs and a phd in political science from george washington university currently serving as the associate director of the peace and war center in norwich and the editor of the journal of the journal of peace and war studies he has authored numerous publications including the co-authored book politics in north and south korea professor coup's forthcoming work historical justice reconciliation in peace promises to shed light on the crucial role of agents in coming to terms with the past his insights into the denuclearization of north korea and intricate dynamics of the korean peninsula are highly sought after by government institutions a round of applause for professor coup as it gives his presentation over the next fifteen minutes thank you so much that goldstein uh... just to give us uh... very important to historical the background and what kind of atracious actions uh... japan uh... had done uh... vis-a-vis uh... china so or so that applies to the korean people and many other southeast asian the people so today um... the actually for this uh... the summit i wrote one paper the title of the politics of memory and reconciliation japan struggles to come to terms with the past vis-a-vis uh... korea i think the in the opening remarks i addressed this briefly but just uh... right will go to japan's colonial rule over korea from nineteen ten to nineteen forty five uh... ended almost eight like a decade ago but still uh... uh... korean people and japanese people they are contesting over the past history and this uh... conflictual interpretation of their past history affect current uh... governmental policies even just as i mentioned the u.s policy toward the age of pacific has been complicated because of these historical dispute between uh... japan and south korea so today the uh... in my paper and in this presentation i briefly touch upon why has it been so difficult for japan to address the past wrongs vis-a-vis uh... korea even just vis-a-vis china and other former victims uh... but uh... japan has been uh... just changing in its behavior toward past the wrongs over time so what has made japan to take action to uh... just address some issues uh... over past eight decades let me briefly touch upon the japan's past wrongs i mean dr school sign uh... briefly touch upon this but uh... especially vis-a-vis korea uh... during the colonial rule over almost a thirty six years period i mean japan brutally ruled uh... korean society so political suppression was always there and just uh... the south korea especially southern part of korea at the time they produced a lot of uh... rice and all those uh... crops so they try to exploit it uh... exploit those resources for uh... japan's society and then later on japan's uh... war efforts or so the a lot of korean people at the time they were banned uh... from using the korean language as well so the japan systematically tried to assimilate uh... korea korean culture into uh... japanese one or so uh... many of the korean people at the time they had a discrimination so uh... many millions japanese immigrants to korea at the time they had a lot of chances to get well educated but uh... just the original korean people they had some some of them they were able to get the elementary school and middle school high school education but most majority of them uh... they were discriminated discriminated against the japanese folks at the time particularly as you see the photo there so uh... comfort women issue so uh... from i think nineteen thirty seven to uh... nineteen forty five during the seven to eight years period japan systematically or uh... like a forcefully uh... tried to draft uh... the asian women uh... so the ranging from the fifty thousand to two hundred thousand women so eighty to ninety percent of those women were koreans so i think against the deal will i mean they were deceived to go to japan or other uh... warfront so uh... like japanese recruiters or even just the korean collaborators uh... with japan at the time state to save the most people but as we know at the time korean society was really poor so so many women they wanted to have better chances uh... to uh... make money for their families and all those things so they are deceived to go to japan and other part of the asia to make money but eventually when they got there so they got raped by uh... that's just uh... uh... private entrepreneurs there and eventually uh... sent to the military uh... come through in uh... uh... kind of stations so like uh... uh... under hellish conditions they had to serve japan soldiers sexually uh... so some according to some testimonies like a uh... twenty times thirty times they had to have sex with uh... uh... japan soldiers they forced to do that uh... daily it's a kind of miserable uh... conditions they had uh... so many people they died at the warfront or so uh... survivors they couldn't return to korea because korean society was very patriarchal so the social stigma was shame uh... as we already addressed uh... they couldn't return to uh... korean society so a lot of kind of miserable conditions they had or so about seven hundred twenty thousand korean people they were forced to to work for uh... japanese uh... companies like michi vishi and uh... michi that's kind of still companies under inhumane conditions right they had to work and some of them died and injured and all those kind of issues uh... so we had so uh... in my paper i tried to create some kind of concept of contrition or in different terms we can use penitence or apologies so like i tried to categorize uh... those tom into three like a deep cons contrition and shallow contrition no contrition so i am not gonna dive into the details but in terms of deep contrition uh... so the the perpetrator state that should provide clearly apologetic statement and then they provide uh... direct compensation to former victims and in history textbooks they have to provide like reflective view of history and even just the world memorials and world museums uh... they just a display artifact uh... to show uh... clear remorse but shallow contrition and no contrition as you see there should be difference like that so when we look at the over the past eight decades how japan has addressed uh... it's a past the wrong doings like this simply speaking three uh... time period in three stages from nineteen forty five to nineteen ninety one no contrition later on why why that happens uh... from nineteen ninety one to nineteen ninety six uh... japan made some efforts japan's government even society made some government to provide apologetic statements to the uh... former victims and try to provide some uh... partial compensation to that just to even included some historical descriptions of com to women forced to labor and other uh... just a historical the misdeeds but starting in nineteen ninety seven japan i think like a best lead uh... which means that just uh... uh... the japan's addressing were coming to terms with uh... it's past misdeeds swung between the shallow contrition and uh... no contrition so uh... in my just a paper i in my analysis i try to analyze that issue using uh... this analytical frame up so uh... usually even just to be looking at the german case external pressure is really important so without external pressure in perpetrator states and society they are not voluntarily just trying to address their past wrong doings so so in looking at the uh... germany's like nineteen fifties and sixties historical kind of component the germany also was not very penitent or contrite in addressing them but in late nineteen sixties that changed a lot but the japan case until nineteen ninety one there was no strong pressure external pressure uh... in terms of handling and dealing with uh... japan's issues so external pressure like a coming from the victim state to see the society organizations or perpetrator states to see the site organizations and victim government as well so external pressure when the perpetrator states face faces uh... external pressure there should be some kind of uh... state society dynamics within perpetrator states like a conserved the society progressive society or just the conserved the ruling coalition and progress ruling coalition so depending on those combinations they're just the outcome of contrition should be different like a uh... deep shallow or no so states society dynamics in dealing with the past so i i just tried to created these two by two metrics in political science we love to create some concept love to create some kind of analytical frameworks uh... before giving the historical uh... narratives so uh... the simply speaking when in perpetrator state right when ruling coalition is there or so the society is uh... just i mean conserved ruling coalition meet with conserved dominant the society usually there is no contrition but on the other hand when progressive ruling coalition uh... control the society and then society is the dominant practice progressive dominance of society when when those two variable meet together i think the outcome uh... can be uh... just the deep contrition so i mean in this paper i uh... address that in more detail but let me move on uh... in terms of the like of the next four minutes i'm gonna talk about this uh... real issues so uh... from nineteen forty five to nineteen ninety one no contrition why because at the time so intensifying cold war politics is eventually right after the end of world war two the united states try to remilitarize and uh... democratize japanese society thoroughly when the cold war gaining was gaining the attraction uh... actually uh... u.s. policy occupation policy toward japan got reversed so from demilitarization to remilitarization uh... from the democratization to economy recovery especially america's main policy goal at the time was to check and balance to prevent the spread of soviet uh... coming in at the time so that changed the japanese attitude a lot or so uh... before the end of world war two right a lot of political leaders and bureaucrats who were running the wartime the japanese government actually many of them right some of them got purged uh... after the end of world war two but they continued majority of them they were able to continue their political status after the war so think about it those conserved people they don't they didn't want to address their past wrong doings because they can that they can damage their identity and political interest also prevalent sense of victimization among japanese uh... the public i mean uh... as we know so right before the end of world war two uh... hiroshima and nagasaki the atomic bombings also the allied forces just conducted very serious and harsh the aerial bombings of uh... over japan and many other cities so even uh... because of nuclear bombings uh... more than uh... one hundred thousand people got killed immediately uh... after that so many people suffered from the all those radiation exposure and everything even in allied the uh... aerial bombings over tokyo within one night more than one hundred thousand people got killed so what i'm saying is japanese people after the end of world war two they didn't know what a precious actions japanese soldiers had done in asia in china in southeast asian war front and toward the korean people but they had uh... they were they felt they were victims uh... so that kind of uh... victimization feeling uh... was uh... hindering uh... japan from addressing the its past wrong doings or so as i said no aizen to seriously raise the issue of japan's pessimistic because china was in a turmoil in the the communist revolution korea uh... as we know from nineteen fifty to nineteen fifty three uh... korea suffered from the korean war and then south korean case so up to nineteen eighty seven the korean society was the rule of dictatorships so i think until the end of uh... late nineteen eighties right uh... just uh... no external pressure to japan in addressing all those issues but in nineteen ninety starting in nineteen nineties uh... after the end of cold war that changed as a trip korean society got democratized and just a lot of korean civil society organizations they began raising company many issues and forced labor issues a lot of history tax book issues and yes korean shrine and war memorial issues and everything so korean the organizations and then progressive japanese civil organizations also supported uh... those transnational company movement to transnational history tax movement and all those things so responding to that in early nineteen nineties thankfully japanese society's ruling coalition in politics was a transitioning to kind of progressive uh... political dynamics so those two got mad and then shallow contrition uh... just that we witnessed just one minute let me use and just in but starting in nineteen ninety seven i mean japanese society right the long ruling the conserved the party liberal democratic party retake retook the power and then just to continue to rule japanese society until present time except for two thousand nine to two thousand twelve time period what i'm saying is that after nineteen ninety seven japanese society japan's political ruling coalition is very very conserved and japanese society is conserved dominant society so it is really difficult for the external actors and even just the progressive japanese folks within japan push japanese government and society to delve into these historical issues so bottom line is that it's uh... uh... currently ongoing issues and a lot of korean people especially left side korean people they have still historical antagonism toward uh... japan so uh... thank you so much and just in korea sessions we can address these topics a little more thank you thank you professor cool will now open the floor for questions if anyone has questions will ask you move to either side of the room to ask hello my question is for uh... professor goldstein so you mentioned shinzo aze it was on your twitter feed uh... so his grandfather nabu suki uh... kinsi was also a prime minister from nineteen fifty seven to nineteen sixty he was also a class a war criminal who was not charged tried or convicted by the u.s. after world war two for his actions in manchuria and i was wondering if you can uh... talk about the influence u.s. the u.s. had had on japan's projection of its actions in world war two as thanks for the excellent question i think you you bring up another uh... yet another side of this which is uh... you know i i've maybe neglected here a bit and i guess we're with maybe that one of the themes of this uh... discussion is is shame but uh... unfortunately uh... i think as professor cool mentioned also part of the reason why japan's crimes are not really well understood either in japan or or elsewhere in the world is that uh... you know we had substantial reason to move on quickly right and professor cool i think mention we we we had this imperative to to get japan on its feet and get it moving in a direction that that uh... you know that we saw as positive which meant you know uh... absolutely preventing any kind of soviet uh... uh... influence in japan or uh... you know communist infiltration which meaning which meant we we needed a kind of cohesive japan a democratic japan a pro-american japan and not one that was uh... uh... tied up in this history so uh... and and by the way that also meant a a re-armed japan and although all japan's defense uh... establishments are called self defense uh... units uh... you know trust me they have a first-class military uh... and and perhaps that's that's right you know as a quote normal country but i think a lot of countries around including china uh... have real questions about this uh... but unfortunately you know as you you alluded in your good question that that the part of this is is sort of our complicity our our willingness sort of not to uh... you know press uh... japan on the historical issues so so you know i think this is quite regrettable and abey himself uh... you know i i would commend parts of his diplomacy as as kind of skillful but but uh... china japan relations have been on a kind of downward trajectory uh... for really last twenty or thirty years so it's it's how to arrest that trajectory and change it uh... it's a good question i'm i have you know some of my ideas involve history i i think leaning on the historical uh... issue i think japan could quite quickly turn turn this around if it if if there was some kind of political will there so but but again a lot of people bring up well then you're going to jeopardize the u.s. japan alliance which is seen as kind of sacred uh... look i i'm i favor the alliance as well i think it is important for asia pacific security but we need to be open to other ideas as well uh... not instead of but along with thanks for the question thank you we'll take one from the side of the room thank you very much and uh... thank you for your presentations this is something i really don't know a lot about and i really appreciated being uh... enlightened on how they're wrestling with memory in that part of the world i'm a historian so i'm going to ask a history question i guess just fundamentally for both of you uh... how does japan present its own history in the war to its own people when i when i look at some of the subjects ideal with within historical memory in america i think there's really kind of three categories there's outright denial no the rape of nanking didn't happen it just nothing like that uh... there's minimization which is all well bad things happened but it was not to the level that it's been portrayed and then there's relativism which is well bad things happen in in nanking but the chinese also did bad things here here here do any of those categories really apply to japan have you know how do they tell this story to their own people yeah let me uh... briefly touch upon this thank you for a very uh... enlightening question uh... just as far as i know i think during the kodo period uh... i think in japanese society the progressive civil society organizations especially the teachers union was really uh... strong uh... so that's just uh... they made uh... big impact on historical narratives and all those things but obviously under the rule of uh... liberal democratic party they didn't really want to incorporate those uh... just a reflective view of history uh... in history textbooks and all official historical uh... narrative but um... the one i can say is that after the end of uh... kodo war so in nineteen nineties as i briefly touch upon that when japan society when japan society faced external pressure coming from especially the south korean civil society organizations i think japanese government they tried to incorporate uh... certain descriptions of historical wrongdoings in history textbooks so that was really big uh... advancement in terms of japan's history policies starting in nineteen ninety seven when the uh... especially the conservative and nationalist forces uh... within japanese politics and society they witnessed the inclusion of those comfortably many issues in into textbook they got mad and they just launched the so-called historical revisionist movement so the starting in nineteen ninety seven i think japanese society and political uh... realms has been turning to very conservative directions i think unfortunately right now as far as i know many japanese history textbooks they don't talk about those company many issues and those things anymore so it's a really sad unfortunate kind of uh... advancement thank you yeah i think unfortunately i think we may be going backward here i mean look at some level i do think we need to have some japan specialist here who you know i i just don't uh... in my scholarship i don't i don't really delve into uh... where japan is is uh... is going on this but but i just say anecdotally uh... and by the way i i didn't talk about comfort women in china i mean to my knowledge it was uh... may have been on the scale or exceeded the scale of what you know these horrible crimes perpetrated against korean women why do we know more about the korean case here because koreans have spoken up loudly i'm glad about it i mean in other words they've led the way but i think you know china's kind of been shy about raising these issues i don't know partly probably because of humiliation uh... but also partly because they fear you know well what would happen to japanese investment and things like that so they don't wanna you know they're i think a little more anxious to uh... kind of raise these things but just answer the question more you know i've spent i spent one uh... uh... uh... one day in a japanese history museum this was attached to the yasakuni shrine so it's not just some museum it's one of the most important war memorials they have and uh... i'll tell you i was i came out shaking out of that museum you know you learn in that museum that roosevelt started the war against japan that's it was roosevelt's doing conspiracy uh... and that what they were doing in china was actually a counter-terrorism operation so uh... it's and this was in english actually i don't read japanese so uh... it's it's shocking you know truly shocking uh... and and the museum is stunning i mean they don't have any shortage of funding they have big cavernous rooms like this with with exalting you know uh... japan's military achievements and their martyrs so yeah again uh... that's anecdotal so i have not done an exhaustive search of of tokyo's museums and memorials and whatnot i have so i'm not ready to go that far but somebody better i mean and i haven't seen it you know so i'm not sure why scholars seem to be american japanese i don't know they seem pretty uninterested in this uh... subject which is disturbing thank you very much for the sake of time i know everybody has a lot of questions but we'll take one more question for this session thank you for a question from professor goldstein with this issue uh... you mostly focused on china as one country and even in your pie chart you showed the communist flag but when you're referring to taiwan isn't like i think a key issue about china being two countries right now and currently how does um... japan reform with the main communist china which currently does the same colonial practices toward the Uighurs mongolians the man choose the tibetans that japan did in its past how does it reform or reconcile with the government's that's committing the same crimes yeah i mean it's like this is a good question and china has done some truly awful things and is doing awful things today as you point out and uh... it's important to raise those issues um... for the record you know china does not consider taiwan another country or they don't consider it to china's whatever you think or i think that's what they think uh... which is important uh... but uh... look uh... look a common response to this kind of presentation that i made is look uh... whatever you think about japan and china now did much worse than any any you know he killed more people than anybody so why we even talk about this well i i that is a certain perspective as a scholar of international relations i guess my approach on this is to say look americans we americans we've done horrible things to each other we've killed each slaughtered each other in huge numbers right i was very glad for the presentation of the civil war anderson bill and all these things don't really welcome the japanese or chinese telling us how to sort out our issues between americans and uh... and we have a lot of issues well in this case i also think there's a there's just a difference between you know when china whatever you conceive of china whether it includes to bed or not i don't know i mean that's a question for them to figure out i guess uh... and they are but but but i'm saying that sort of one uh... set of issues but then these international issues you know that's what i think we are kind of focusing on here they cut very deeply and and here's the the practical reason whatever china does with the eager we get it's you know it's terrible and we may feel awful about it but it is not going to cause world war three the issue i'm talking about is going to cause world war three and as americans you should be concerned about that so i'm just a kind of practical person and that's what i'm worried about so one last comment i wanna make is if i may just one minute uh... just to today uh... that goes down and i uh... to a certain extent like a best the japan and japan is uh... the politics politicians and society probably uh... if concept of political leaders in japan and opinion leaders uh... here that here this kind of uh... topics and talks they would hate us so one anecdotal uh... story i can share says that when i was a kind of presenting my research in uh... tokyo at the time i tried to compare the japan's policy history policy with uh... germanese uh... history policy and then uh... one of the audience was uh... the japanese uh... kind of governmental official uh... definitely he was a conservative uh... the folks and then he raised the hand and then he just countered my argument that why do you try to compare japan with uh... germany uh... we are totally different uh... countries and different kind of historical experience we have don't make that kind of uh... comparisons so that was really uh... just uh... uh... shocking kind of uh... instant to me but anyway the japan made uh... definitely some efforts to address uh... that these issues that in today's talk uh... we didn't talk about two thousand fifteen company in agreement uh... so dot japan i'll try to create uh... fund to uh... provide compensation to the former victims and all those things but the korean victims of many of them and uh... their supporters and supporting organizations didn't accept the reluctant reluctant compensation reluctant apologies and all those things so much more details uh... should be in this kind of discussions thank you fantastic uh... over the last fifty minutes we have engaged in a rich and insightful discussion today examining the intricate dynamics surrounding historical reconciliation in northeast asia our distinguished panelists have illuminated the immense challenges but also potential paths forward when it comes to achieving justice closure and lasting peace between nations still grappling with legacies of colonialism war and human rights abuses let's give a well-deserved round of applause to our esteemed panelists so uh... starting at three p.m. uh... we're gonna have uh... final session the students presentations for brilliant uh... students they will uh... make a presentation so about their research papers so about russia china and even american uh... just uh... civil war and all those things please just uh... continue to join our sessions thanks again that's right i did and you're back for more that's kind of a round two hello welcome uh... my name is emi woodbury tees i'm the associate dean for interdisciplinary curriculum with the college of arts and sciences as well as the chair of the department of global humanities and an associate professor of english welcome to the fifth annual peace and war summit i hope that many of you have had the opportunity to attend sessions throughout the day and have gained new knowledge and perspectives as a result if this is your first session i'm glad you made it and promise that it will not disappoint as we have four outstanding student panelists speaking to you this afternoon these student scholars will share their research on different topics related to this year's theme of war reconciliation and memory as you listen to these insightful papers i encourage you to consider the connections as well as the incongruencies intentions produced between them recalling comment on the colors message from his keynote this morning we gained new perspectives into our collective histories and ourselves when we seek to make connections with the stories and experiences of others before i introduce our first panelist i want to know the structure of this afternoon session each speaker will present for ten minutes the presentations will then be followed by discussions by doctors michael andrew and michael themberg of our history and political science department faculty we will then have time for what i hope will be a robust question and answer session featuring you our audience members so without further delay i would like to welcome our first panelist michael cathy who is a senior political science major from clement new hampshire with a minor in spanish in his free time he enjoys skiing in the winter and hiking and camping in the summer he will present the shift in china's support of russia in the russian ukrainian war thank you doctor would be a tease uh... welcome everyone thank you for coming so as we all know to eat about two years ago russia launched a full-scale invasion of ukraine their alleged goals of the special military operation where to denotify ukraine however more accurate descriptions of their goals were one of iridentism to regain their former uh... soviet spirit influence within eastern europe and revisionism and attempt to push back uh... against organizations like nato and any other organization that represents the western liberal order now my research question for this paper was why has china gradually grown support russia after initial hesitation to either fully support them or condemn russia's invasion of ukraine starting off i want to talk about evidence for china's shifting policy immediately after the invasion china was careful not to overtly favor either side in the conflict china maintained its rhetoric as a supporter of territorial sovereignty in this case ukraine but did so by tacitly blaming the u s for taking an aggressive cold war stance regarding russia and ukraine this argument pretty much sums up all of china's diplomatic overtures towards the ukrainian situation in the immediate months following the invasion the gist of it is pretty much we do not support the war but the war is primarily the responsibility of certain nations who have a history of propagating color revolutions and expanding their neo imperialist ideals logically they're talking about the united states and other western nations recently chinese and russians officials have met on multiple occasions and discuss furthering strategic partnerships between the two nations in the realms of their economies joint political overtures and their joint security partnership these overtures are mostly for show and mostly diplomatic however there has been some hard evidence uh... indicating china's shifting policy but there's also been the first kind of backtrack of it and explain why china has been hesitant choose either side has mostly chosen hedging street strategy should china fully supported russia's invasion of ukraine it would likely suffer the same section sanctions russia faced from the international community which could destabilize the chinese community as i'm sure most of you know recently the chinese stock market uh... suffered a crash and about their stocks are about of their values what they were last year additionally china would lose its global reputation as a champion of the sovereignty of weaker nations which is a key selling point for china's international investment and development ambition ambitions primarily in the global south for the belt and road initiative however given the sanctions imposed on russia after the invasion china has had the opportunity to kind of test the waters and see how their own economy would react to such sanctions and what they can do what changes they can implement in the future to safeguard against the negative effect of sex sex sanctions uh... previously scholars have agreed that the chinese economy is mostly capable of weathering western sanctions this has the effect of kind of pushing china further into russia's corner uh... as the more the war drags on and the more the sanctions drag on the more confidence china gains in their ability to weather sanctions and to support russia more and more on the other hand even if their economy can't weather the sanctions that also pushes china into a corner with russia uh... as they would need a economic partner who is not a part of the global economy and the western led uh... global economy kind of a stable relationship that they can rely on and that they can back on given their kind of aggressive stance and aggressive ambitions in the global market so my independent variables for this uh... paper kind of the reasons why i'm explaining how and why china has shifted their policy uh... in the past two years of the invasion our first public sentiment and elite sentiment regarding nato china's geopolitical reality and finally china's economic relationship with russia now starting off with sentiment about nato uh... in april of twenty twenty three finland became the thirty first member of nato recently sweden has also joined uh... the treaty organization this shows the enhanced resolve of european nations and their fear and their desire to join nato uh... and to join a global uh... a regional security organization to defend against uh... perceived russian aggression and to defend against russian aggression additionally immediately after the invasion it was recruited by the pure research center that american sentiment about nato about the organization was at an all-time high since they started recording next china's geopolitical reality china's been careful to avoid any parallels uh... between ukraine in taiwan uh... they don't they want to maintain their image especially in the global south as a protector of state sovereignty from larger more imperialistic forces however they don't want that same uh... rhetoric kind of backfire on them in regards to taiwan however the taiwan situation is an important facet to consider giving china's shifting attitudes towards russia as chinese support towards russia and the invasion is kind of like an investment for the future for china right china views that if we tacitly and strategically support russia now and should the situation in taiwan or korea or anywhere in the south china see escalate that support of russia could come in handy uh... to china in the future uh... and that could form what could be uh... a much more ironclad strategic partnership whereas now it's mostly a limited strategic partnership uh... and finally china's economic relationship with russia uh... the war in ukraine has had negative consequences for the chinese economy that is only adding on to the negative consequences to the chinese economy that covid-19 had already imposed on their economy starting in twenty twenty china has pursued a more aggressive investment in development strategy among the global economy particularly investing in infrastructure and development projects in the global south uh... and that combined with the covid-19 situation has left the chinese economy relatively volatile and vulnerable and like i said earlier an increased level of strategic partnership economically with russia uh... could kind of be a hard-backed uh... security and safeguard uh... to protect the chinese economy given this aggressive economic stance so to conclude as of now china's relationship with russia can be best be described as a limited strategic relationship china is hedging their bets however now the pros of supporting china sporting russia more and more outweigh the cons so what does this mean from an american perspective right from an american perspective it's my belief that we need to view this in the realm of what we can and what we can't control we can't control the fact that china has essentially wedded itself uh... to mahskow's revisionist point of view and irredentist point of view that's the consensus view among scholars we can't control that we also can't control the lessons china is learning particularly on how to handle and safeguard against sanctions and particularly about what we as the united states will do in a situation with russia and ukraine as you all know the u.s. is extremely has extremely hesitant to provide military support towards russia given fears of escalation between nuclear powers that could prove uh... a similar lesson to be learned later on in taiwan uh... i think we must be wary of china and their increased level of support uh... for russia however i don't think we should take the united states it would be in the best interest in the united states to take an entirely hawkish uh... standpoint i think there are still areas in which uh... there can be reproachment between china and the united states particularly in the arctic which is a less volatile uh... regional security situation thank you michael uh... let me switch gears here i'd now like to call up august query area who is a senior political science and studies in war and peace major he is the headquarters company commander in the core of cadets and will be commissioned as a transportation officer in the u.s. army after graduation august participates in norwich's campus corollers and is a member of the national political science honor society he presented during the twenty twenty three peace and war summit on the threat of nuclear weapons and today he will talk to us about the donbas separatist movement thank you ma'am and good afternoon everyone it's an honor to appear on the student panel of the peace and war summit for my second year this project originally began in professor andrew's revolution and forces of change course back in the fall twenty twenty two semester i was presented with the opportunity to expand on my research for professor roberts costs of war course this past semester i want to expand on the topic of the donbas separatist movement in the context of self-determination as a cost of war in this presentation i'll cover the transformation and the globalization of the donbas separatist movement with its origins following ukraine's independence from the soviet union the remobilization of the movement in reaction to the euro my don and the movement's ideological framework i'll then discuss the entry of foreign fighters into the war beginning in twenty fourteen and russia's engulfing of the movement following its invasion in twenty twenty two global attention to the conflict in ukraine began in the weeks leading up to russia's invasion on february twenty fourth twenty twenty two bloodshed in the region regarding this conflict started back in twenty fourteen with the my don revolution and the declarations of independence of the donetsk and luhansk people's republics as well as russia's annexation of the crimian peninsula fighters were worldwide then flocked to the conflict motivated by ideology purpose the thrill of combat and connection to the land although donbas separatist sentiment uh... widely exploded following russia's intervention these sentiments existed prior to russia's support for the separatist republics identity politics russophobic sentiments and political moves that impacted east in ukraine pushed inhabitants to desire separation from kiev but russia hijacked this movement for their strategic interests to the harm of the donbas people globalize the conflict in ukraine from a domestic independence movement to a pawn in the struggle between east and west self-determination has been tossed aside separatist sentiments in the donbas originate with the international movement of donbas founded in november nineteen ninety and active throughout the nineties it opposed unity with ukraine and favored independence for the donbas region the movement united minors and regional elites against kiev's policies that caused poor economic conditions and attempted to ukrainianize the donbas the movement emphasizes donbas's unique cultural identity at least it's claimed cultural identity as home to dozens of people throughout history separatist sentiment laid dormant from two thousand from two thousand three until the year of my dawn of twenty thirteen the movement's spiritual successor founded a democratic uh... the donets peoples republic in twenty fourteen the year my dawn protests were triggered in november twenty thirteen by then president and you could get denying the ukrainian parliament's approval of an association agreement with the european union opting in instead to strengthen ties with russia's eurasian economic union the protests were violently dispersed which triggered a wave of riots that culminated in the my dawn revolution of february twenty fourteen and the removal of you know kiev's from power russia annexed crime in march of twenty fourteen which helped fuel the confidence of separatist groups in the donbas who voted in april of twenty fourteen to establish the dpr and the lpr resulting in armed conflict between government forces and separatist militias the minsk agreement stabilized the frontline which changed little until russia's invasion in february of twenty twenty two since its independence three of the seven ukrainian presidential elections have seen an identifiable split between east and west these elections proved to those in eastern ukraine in their eyes that kiev and the rest of western ukraine were unwilling to cooperate for a peaceful unity that would recognize the sovereignty of the different cultural groups within ukraine's borders the rise of ukrainian nationalism triggered a paranoia amongst the separatist groups in donbas which was aimed back towards kiev who they feared were trying to subjugate them the donbas separatist movement is a unique sort of populism based on a cross-cultural civic nationalism which incorporates the cultures of the multiple historic occupiers of the region as well as economic dependence on both agriculture and industrialization when the conflict first broke out in twenty fourteen foreign fighters immediately flocked to ukraine joining both sides of the war they're motivated by ideology, thrill and in search of a sense of purpose there is no single defining characteristic of the foreign fighters both sides had fighters with anti-fascist or communist ideologies they had nationalists, racial supremacists and a variety of faiths, cultures and nationalities one example is texas in the bottom picture a southerner with a deeply communist ideology he dons a cowboy hat emblazoned with a hammer and sickle he speaks russian with an extreme southern twang and likes to entertain his comrades with his guitar and songs about the war laced with profanity in other parts of the world the italian far-right has been highly divided over the war volunteers aligning with the ruling right-wing coalition have fought for the donbas while those hailing from the neo-fascist movement from the kassapound party fight alongside the asal battalion in ukraine some fighters have even admitted to having fought for both sides of the conflict at different points in the war many of the stories espoused by these foreign fighters in ukraine evoke memories of mercenaries in the cold war and specifically the southern african bush wars many of the fighters both during the cold war and now face similar struggles of betrayal frustration and anger focused towards their home governments these stories have helped enable the initial stages of the globalization of the conflict in eastern ukraine the presence of the foreign fighters forced their home governments to begin taking stances on the conflict including laws forbidding involvement in foreign conflicts as mercenaries the increasing number of ideologies involved in the fight meant more global attention on the conflict to determine ideological stances this rising international focus set the stage for russia's invasion in 2022 the donbas felt they were pushed to separatism by both kiev and moscow from kiev they were labeled terrorists smacked with economic blockades by military force and were told that having a weak ukrainian identity would no longer be acceptable from moscow they saw the annexation of kramia additional manpower and material support as demonstration of russia's power at least what we thought was power back then thus the donbas turned toward moscow which came at the price of their self-determination despite the original separatist intent to establish independent regions the 2022 referendums in the separatist republics allegedly voted to be fully integrated into the russian federation and russian officials have replaced all of the domestic leadership within donbas the donbas separatist movement began with a genuine desire for independence and self-determination they have the right to self-determination like all other people but the endless global struggle for hegemony has dragged them in as pawns with both the west and the east expressing hypocrisy in their actions and policies denying self-determination and independence the greatest tragedy of the war in donbas is the refusal of self-determination by both eastern and western powers for both the donbas and ukraine as a whole no matter who wins the end the donbas is already lost thank you august sorry i'm a mac user ingmo i've lost the uh... technical problems we're back uh... i'd now like to uh... call up kaleb hogan who is a current senior criminal justice and political science double major with a minor in pre-law kaleb is a member of the core of cadets and has spent time with the mountain cold-weather company practicing practical mountaineering skills upon graduation kaleb plans on pursuing a good graduate degree from norwich in international relations while working full-time within the federal government he will present his research on china and russia's use of transnational repression thank you good afternoon everyone thank you for having me and thank you for being here uh... today i'm gonna be presenting my research done on china and russia's use of transnational repression specifically within the united states i'll first be going over what transnational repression is and why it's important important for us to look at and understand uh... the methods at which these two nations utilized transnational repression and then comparing the two and how they differ and compare first what is transnational repression transnational repression is crime conducted internationally by foreign nations on citizens located outside of their boundaries and their sovereignty the fb i definition is when foreign government stock intimidate assault people within the united states this is an obvious concern to us and our freedoms given to the people within our confines because it inhibits their ability to practice their fundamental rights of protests and freedom of speech the four nations typically utilize transnational repression as a way to silence dissidents and to stop them from speaking out against uh... specifically the p r c or the russian federation it is important for us to understand this because we need a way to combat this in order to preserve the rights that we guarantee to all of our citizens and all people located within united states now looking at the methods of transnational repression i will be going over four methods first being surveillance this is when opposing governments will throw advanced technology or human sources watch and track foreign citizens living abroad the first is to do digital methods in which through open source intelligence they can look specifically through social media to gain information on individuals they can gain informations regarding their family who are located abroad who they surround themselves about with and most importantly what they're saying social media is an open book to discover who is talking out against these foreign governments and who they should target to try to stop them from talking out in these ways social media allows for them to easily find this information without having to look very hard it's out there on the internet for them to find the second is through fishing scams this is where china or russia will send scams emails messages on social media or other sources of uh... fishing scams in order to persuade them to give them information about themselves their family or whatever information they'd be seeking the second form of surveillance we see is through uh... human sources this is when their actual uh... intelligence agents or representatives of these governments located in country who are conducting human surveillance uh... upon citizens located within the united states uh... which will go into more in detail discussing each country and how they conduct transnational repression second is to prescribed threats these are the most severe types of threats that can be conducted through transnational repression and this is where the line of whether this is transnational repression or more extreme crimes is blurred through assassinations assaults disappearances violent force renditions done to silence individuals uh... this is when they send operatives into the united states to conduct these sort of crimes against people within our boundaries these are the most extreme and the most alarming to people who are speaking out about these governments this is the far end of the spectrum of transnational repression third method is known as coercion by proxy and what this means is it is threatened violence or physical violence on family or sanctions against individuals within the territorial jurisdiction of the united states uh... for the purpose of repressing a target outside of our jurisdiction this is typically done uh... mostly with the weger population in china where if we have speaking out uh... chinese citizens located within the united states they'll often receive a message or a threat that's uh... prc will harass uh... or take their family members into camps labor camps located in china this is a threat against their family as a way to coerce them into not talking out about this government or to gain intelligence uh... or whatever their end goal is in this scenario fourth method is through mobility court controls and course return this is the least common because it requires uh... these people to be the outside of the united states where they're unprotected this limits these individuals ability to travel internationally and freely move about the world this can be done by various methods including uh... invalidating passports extraditions if they go into a country where they can make that exchange or anyway at which the country's can stop them from moving about the world internationally however this is the least seen within the united states because when they're located here is one of the most protected first looking at china's use of transnational repression they mostly do it through surveillance and course and by proxy uh... as stated previously the uber population in china is an easy way for them to use coercion by proxy by threatening to put their family in labor camps or uh... harass those individuals put them in jail uh... having a family member threatened is an easy way to silence someone located outside of their jurisdiction and it's also easy to perform because it can be done simply through social media or digital means this is very also very difficult for the united states to combat because a simple message given to someone uh... is difficult for us to pin a crime upon and it also prevents them from wanting to speak out about it they receive a threat that they know could very very possibly be performed because they do have family located in china uh... there these individuals are much less likely to speak out about this and the second is through surveillance there has been many cases of what is known as chinese police stations located throughout the united states these police stations are almost spy centers where the chinese can use these centers to surveil harass threaten and try to silence people throughout the united states most notably uh... there are have been multiple cases of chinese police stations in uh... new york city have been released and shown by the federal bureau of investigation uh... these other locations have also and shown to house uh... chinese groups who are directly related to uh... the p r c and have gone to trial for surveilling and harassing american citizens in our home country next looking at russia russia most notably uses prescribed threats they do so on the extreme and of what you would look at the transnational repression scale being the most extreme forms of it uh... assassinations most of these assassinations are not typically done within the united states or at least the ones we are able to or we have evidence of uh... there have been multiple across europe of them silencing distance of the russian federation uh... and there is countless in russia of that happening within the united states there have been multiple assassination attempts that have been found and released to the media however currently there is very slim to know assassination uh... success stories by the russian government within the united states however based on evidence in europe along with the attempted assassinations in the united states it's safe to assume that this would be their main form of transnational repression the other is through espionage and although this is not directly known as transnational repression this is where the lines slightly blur and it moves into a different category they're directly related in how they are conducted uh... when they use spy agents to try to intimidate or harass politicians within the united states which there are cases of that happening uh... that directly falls into the category of transnational repression being conducted through espionage which is why i included it here comparing the two they each have shown their willingness to commit transnational repression in the united states and throughout europe as well china on the one hand is much more direct and does so much more obviously having police stations located within the country uh... is a clear intrusion upon our sovereignty and is a way for them to try to silence those speaking out against china and it is done in a way that is not trying to be hidden uh... the messages being sent uh... through the surveillance digital means clearly is done to silence these individuals and is done in a way that is not trying to be uh... hidden or trying to be discreet russia on the other hand chooses much more carefully and is more on the extreme and uh... when they choose to use transnational repression done through assassination attempts or other extreme methods are much more successful based on the fact that there is less it is less known it is not in the media and there's less evidence for them however the cases that are known are on that extreme and so comparing the two china is much more blunt and is less has less care of being found out about it because there's not much that the united states can do about it russia on the other hand is much more discreet and one thing i would like to note is that this presentation is only being done about china and russia however there are multiple other countries who are known to commit transnational repression within the united states and throughout the world iran's saudi arabia are just a couple to name also conduct this type of crime therefore it is important for our legislator legislatures and law enforcement to be aware of this as it is very infrequently talked about crime but it has a large impact on our american citizens and the people living within the united states who expect to be given the freedoms that we expressively give in our constitution and should be given to all americans foreigners living in the united states thank you kaila and finally i'm very sorry forgive my here it is got it here it is to keep going alright everyone's loving that's right this is so fun okay here we go okay last but not least is eithan trask a senior pursuing a degree in studies in war and peace and a minor in religious studies representing norwich abroad trask spent five weeks in pristina kosovo as part of the frederick c kuny peace and conflict summer immersion program here he learned firsthand about united nations mandated missions peace operations and post-conflict reconstruction throughout former ugas lavia he additionally completed an internship in washington dc with the united states of america vietnam war commemoration he intends to scare carry his skills interests and experiences into the intelligence community post graduation today he will talk with us about confederate perspectives on the first world war thank you ma'am and thank you everyone for coming today we've heard some fantastic presentations from my colleagues here on russia china and ukraine and legacy of war uh... throughout each of those nations and right now i'd like to focus on united states and kinda bring our focus inward on the legacy of war here at home so today i'll be presenting on confederate perspectives on the first world war and how subsequent shifts in identity led to reconciliation for many southerners as americans over the past fifty years the legacy of the vietnam war has shaped how we as americans perceive war and how our soldiers perceive themselves looking back over a century the same can be said regarding the impact of the civil war on world war one which took place in mere forty nine years apart in this study i compare the combat conditions between the later years of the civil war in the early years of world war one and dive into how these similarities and differences are reflected in post war confederate media as will be shown a common cause and a little bit of time were able to quickly and fundamentally shift the confederate perspective primary information was collected from the post civil war periodical the confederate veteran magazine is national based publications on minimum readership in the tens of thousands and would come to be adopted by major organizations such as the united confederate veterans the united daughters of the confederacy and the sons of confederate veterans selection of news articles memoirs and entertainment written by confederate veterans and their families documents what they thought about the world around them and more importantly what they thought about themselves for many readers it served to keep them connected to the confederate cause post reconstruction some key secondary literature prove vital to putting the findings of the study into context first and foremost was doctor anthony saunders trench warfare eighteen fifty two nineteen fifty which discusses the aspects of warfare that veterans of both wars with a face going beyond trenches into the introduction of hand grenades automatic weaponry and sharpshooters furthermore doctor steven soda grins the great weight of responsibility dives in on many confederate narratives up to and around this time and serves as a sufficient baseline for studying the social impact of confederate media between both wars the first recorded instance of trench warfare in the civil war was a mere three months after the outbreak of the war in the first battle of bull run in eighteen sixty one though its use was not extensive later war battles in the overland and petersburg campaigns were much more reminiscent of world war one with trench line stretching miles on end and many of the same methods and tactics that were seen fifty years later the eighteen sixty four battle of cold harbor outside richman virginia was a devastating defeat for generals grant and me it is their forces charge general ease trench lines over a six-mile front the defending confederates were able to inflict four times the casualties they took and this battle highlighted the supremacist static warfare over open battle further the nine-month-long siege of petersburg virginia was one of the most traumatic battles of the war with poor conditions in the winter leading many to die from disease if not desert to the opposing side besides the trench lines sniper fire and artillery strikes new innovations were being made in the field of hand grenades and the gatling gun saw some of its first usage in the trenches of petersburg the importance of all this context cannot be overstated these are just some of the many comparable experiences that confederate veterans would uh... hold on not only the stories of from the front lines of world war one but but any personal experiences to follow well it must be said that many soldiers did not experience these conditions many did postwar confederate veterans saw solace within each other forming organizations of up to a hundred sixty thousand members to preserve their community and legacy participation in these organizations was seen as a respectable thing and a way of showing one support for the cause even after defeat many veterans would then go to reunions at the expense of both their physical health and financial ability narratives such as the lost cause took root at these reunions and succeeded in shifting the physical loss of the war into an ideological victory for the confederates uh... claiming that the confederacy had successfully fought for liberty and democratic principles against an authoritarian and unjust system meanwhile they would downplay the role of slavery in secession and in war an intellectual fascination with the south and the confederacy followed suit the lost cause took root in academia not only at home in schools like johns hopkins university where new southern history courses were added but abroad notably the royal military academy sandhurst studied stonewall jackson almost obsessively from the end of the civil war up until world war one textbooks on the history of jackson's campaigns were an integral part of their education in nineteen ninety eight colonel george fr henderson wrote stonewall jackson and the american civil war more colloquially known as the life of stonewall jackson which brought southern military history all around the world and a mutual fascination in respect emerge between ex-confederates and the british military that would solidify confederate support for the british long before nineteen fourteen by the outbreak of the world war one most veterans were in their seventies and eighties and were displeased by how discussion the civil war domestically had faded away over time commemoration of their cause and service was key to them and many were worried that the cause they fought for would simply be forgotten about if not so drastically distorted by northern historians that their legacy was forever tainted viewing themselves as also being victims of an oppressive invading an industrialized army confederate veterans and their families felt extreme empathy for belgians after the german invasion in nineteen fourteen with some out of sympathy and others taking advantage of a newfound hype over the war in europe authors drew comparisons between the german union armies both at a strategic and ideological level much of the discussion surrounded defending confederate legacy in actions and highlighting any suffering on their part the hope of many of these authors was to show that the brutality of the german army was no different from how the union waged war and the americans today ought to be focused on american suffering not european general sherman and charitain were consistent topics in this regard northern journalists began drawing comparisons between the germans and confederate forces and very quickly magazines and newspapers became a hot bed for who is most like the germans in many ways the outbreak of the war reignited all divides in a revival of confederate sentiment ensued yet by the u.s. entry into the war in nineteen seventeen this narrative of german union similarity shifted from targeting the north to targeting germany distinctions were made between the union of them and the united states of now which was increasingly deemed no longer authoritarian thanks to their own efforts president would you're a wilson was able to bridge much of the social divide having been considered a proper southern democrat despite his longtime residency in new jersey and pennsylvania veteran organizations declared their wholesale support for him and echoed his calls for the defense of france in belgium both confederate union veterans thus reunited in their old age and tended to rejoice at the notion of a common cause offering to go overseas together and fight alongside their grandchildren on multiple occasions some recommended a draft for those in their seventies and eighties deeming themselves most qualified to fight a war poetry uh... very quickly became a staple in confederate media and often wished both northern and southern boys good luck on the front lines and the stars and stripes became a symbol of freedom and liberty to all by nineteen eighteen unity was at the forefront of discussion and any acts of trees and against the united states were felt to be fundamentally anti-american this correlation of anti-united states and anti-american signals an almost unbelievable change in attitude uh... from these confederate veterans and is a very far cry from the days of secession and civil war ultimately two key points can be identified in regard to reconciliation war creates common causes and time is a major factor while secession was a popular concept many poor southern soldiers during the civil war had not identified a reason behind their own personal fighting some did so for the preservation slavery uh... others in hopes of defending their families in hometowns the lost cause served to provide a new morally superior justification for their actions being anti-authoritarianism the onton of world war one would rally along this very principle and the north and south would find themselves fighting under the same banner as americans being half a century after their own conflict these veterans would find pride in their children and grandchildren being patriotic american soldiers post war confederates would often name these new veterans of world war one in their obituaries hoping to attach themselves to a new southern legacy separate from the confederacy right well thank you to all four of these presenters um... we can give them another round of applause and we now have remarks from doctors michael andrew and michael thunberg and i'm not sure of the order here so are you sitting or would you like to come up afternoon welcome once again for the thumbberg and i decided to divide the labor so i read augusts and michael's papers i'll comment on on those was reading them i was looking for a theme obviously they both deal with ukraine but in addition to that they're also both about identities and they both remind us both papers remind us that it is not states or countries that act or behave or believe it is human beings and identities often serve as a filter through which human beings make decisions and act and believe the first paper i'll talk about is augusts and he wrote about the role of the dombas separatist movement in the ukraine war which is i think a unique and special perspective when we think about the war in ukraine we often think of it in terms of the conflict between democracy and authoritarianism or east and west maybe russian greed land hunger what augusts focused on was the underlying tension the identity tensions and i wanted to i think something that august should probably develop more thoroughly is that idea of the self-determination movement the dombas i found this sentence near the end of his paper the greatest tragedy of the war in dombas is the refusal of self-determination to the dombas from both eastern and western powers and i think that something that really could be developed should be developed is that idea of self-determination and what we often refer to as the right to self-determination we often speak in terms of nation states the fact is of course that very few states are actually nation states most states are multi national in that context what does self-determination mean is self-determination the right to a state the right to be sovereign is it the right to secede is it the right to dismember an existing state we know that even though most states are multi national many states do not experience violent internal conflict others do why is it that some are more violent than others i think it comes down to me i think see this in our own country is different groups believing that they are or are not represented so one solution that's offered by erin lippard is what he calls constitutional democracy and constitutional democracy is a way of sharing power and that can come in the form of say proportional electoral system or grants of autonomy and one thing that i would like to see august do is discuss the minsk agreements in more detail because the second minsk agreement included provisions for self-government for donbas but that was somehow swept aside and in twenty twenty two russia decided to recognize both the nets and luhansk in the donbas something else i think that august should consider is what's going on in the donbas how ethnically homogeneous is donbas or how diverse is it because if you were to create an autonomous region in donbas would that create new minorities and what would their rights i also thought that it would be important to explore why ukraine is important to russia not just the donbas but ukraine more broadly more broadly speaking what kind of spiritual significance does ukraine hold for for russia and since the end of the cold war russian foreign policy has been animated in part by desire to protect russian minorities in the former soviet union or former russian empire what rights does russia have to protect minorities if it believes that those minorities are being oppressed is there even an obligation on behalf of different countries even international community to intervene in the affairs of states if they believe that minorities are being oppressed turning to michael's paper the shift in china's support for russia in the russian ukrainian war i think that one growing area of scholarship in international relations focuses on cooperation between authority and regimes there's a lot of research on cooperation between liberal democracies we've developed the democratic peace theory which is the idea that liberal democracies don't go to war with each other instead they form security communities probably wouldn't go so far as to say the same kind of relationships develop between authoritarian regimes but under what conditions do authoritarian regimes share common interests and i think that might be expressed in president g's twenty thirteen announcement of what he referred to as the new type of major country relations which is really about basic principle of that is relational reciprocity which means each country respects each other countries core interests and major concerns and it could be that that is what china and russia are are doing china is recognizing russia's fear of influence and russia is reciprocating that of course causes problems for the united states in the south china c because what we see as freedom of navigation exercises china interprets as an effort by the united states to infringe on its sphere of influence so i think this gets back to the idea of identities and one thing that i think michael could explorers some is up scheme called national role conception where you look at how different leaders in different countries understand their roles and the roles of their countries so how do chinese leaders understand their history and how do they understand their ability to shape international relations and what should international relations look like thank you so first i want to say doctor who's asked me to do the student papers for a couple years now uh... and i really enjoyed doing it because it's always great to see what the students right and i will say it is fundamentally different subjecting yourself to open critiques then it is to just submit a paper and get feedback from a professor so credit all of you for being up here in the first place uh... hogan and trask i will email you my critiques uh... but i'll go in order that they are represented and so i'll do the hogan paper uh... first which looks at how russia and china use transnational repression against the united states uh... so i think you provide some good examples of things that china and russia are doing to engage in some of these transnational repression uh... i like the end where you build that little table so if you're here for the previous uh... panel doctor coup talked about good political scientists coming up with their two by twos we like our two by twos and our little tables and you had a good table in there so i think that that's a good start a few points though of what i would like to see uh... that i think it really strengthen the paper some i encourage you to think a little bit about the severity of those different things that you're talking about you hit on it a little bit in your paper and you say this is the most severe one but you kind of jump around throughout the paper and i think if you identify the levels of severity for each of those things that would help clarify the paper a little bit for you so you're not going to be able to know kind of the distance and severity between surveillance and assassination we know those are pretty far apart but we know that assassination is higher than surveillance so to be able to put those in some order i think would would benefit uh... the paper some i really like that at the very end of the paper you said russia and china are not the only countries that are engaging in this and then you listed off a bunch of other nefarious actors and countries that are engaging in this the united states is one of those countries we surveil we engage in espionage we engage in open source collecting we do all of these things right so it's not just that these other countries the united states is doing this stuff too we just don't see it as an attack as we're doing it outward so i think that that needs to be incorporated into the paper a little bit and i'll get to that uh... i'm kind of a reframing issue that i think could help uh... really help strengthen the paper your thesis talks about transnational repression towards the united states and how the united states needs to be aware of what's happening so that we can kind of defend against it a lot of the examples that you give though aren't happening in the united states right they're happening outside of the united states so you know that's kind of a different question even the example that you give about the kind of secret chinese police that get set up in the united states that's being used to suppress chinese dissidents that's not really against the united states that's against dissidents speaking against china right so i think you need to uh... work on and tease out a little bit what exactly you mean by repression and what you mean by a kind of a u s attack so a couple clarifying things could could could help with that first the idea of creating that ordinal scale might help understand what is actually being directed at the u s specifically uh... you say we need to understand what's happening so that we can create policy solutions i completely agree but the first thing we have to understand is where the problem is because depending on if it is in the united states or if it's abroad that's going to be different policy levers that we're pulling to address that certain thing so the more you can kind of flesh out those different levels and where it's actually happening i think the better able you're going to be to uh... to create some of those potential policy solutions so i think you could reframe your thesis in one of two ways to really help with that uh... the first one the first one focuses about kind of broader geopolitical implications from these events so it's the u s perspective on how transnational repression is occurring so not like an attack on the u s but how is the u s responding to what russia and china are doing in engaging in transnational repression right and then that helps you move away from it's an attack on the u s there are some things that happen in the u s but they're also external things that china and russia are doing that the u s is concerned about that they want to respond to so i think that that's one frame that you could focus on i think the other frame uh... that that could be a really beneficial contribution uh... is to incorporate the united states into that into that uh... that table to show where the united states falls because we don't fall far down on the severity level too often and then look at how democratic to authoritarian regimes mitigate transnational repression to say that while china and russia are authoritarian they're more likely to lean towards those higher levels of transnational repression versus the democratic constraints that are put in place on the united states that limits us from being able to do so so that can kind of reframe it a little bit uh... take a more institutional structure uh... and have a look at uh... transnational transnational repression so i think you have a lot going uh... in here and you have a lot of good rich examples a little bit of reframing i think it really strengthens could strengthen the paper okay the trash paper uh... trash paper seeks to understand how world war one was used as a catalyst for reconciliation following the civil war uh... it's very well sourced you clearly did some archival work uh... you organize those sources uh... use them to tell some stories so i say some stories and i'll get to some of those stories in just a second uh... i really like that you use some creative pension data to identify the number of living civil war veterans and widows between that forty nine-year period of the end of the civil war and world war one so i think that that was really creative uh... a few comments that again i think it helps strengthen the paper a little bit your first major section talks about uh... what the veteran perspective was to go to war during the civil war and world war one and how going to war might inform that uh... perspective so i have two major points here you take that idea and then you kind of launch into this idea of tactics trench warfare uh... the advent of military machinery all of those things tactics change uh... and yes going to war in eighteen sixty two is going to be fundamentally different from going to war in twenty twenty two but i think the idea of going to war there's going to be a lot of similarities right you're being taken away from your family you're being put into life and death situations you're away from home right there's a lot of similarities that are there that the tactics aren't necessarily driving so you have this large focus on tactics but i think there's a bit of a disconnect from what you're talking about which is this perception of going to war and i think you could clarify that uh... a little bit uh... the second thing so you need to be a little bit clear i think about how you're using that tactical component uh... identify this reconciliation idea uh... it's not until much later in the paper that i kind of see that you're making this claim that world war two helps actually pull together groups uh... especially civil war veterans into this kind of reconciliation like we're all americans type per type perspective so i can see that being a really compelling argument that world war one helps reconcile the nation uh... and you say that this is an unintended consequence of uh... of war uh... i like that you bring up wilson in it and you say that wilson is able to kind of bridge this divide there's a really strong theory in political science called the rally around the flag theory right so uh... president george w bush uh... his approval rating skyrockets after nine eleven highest we have ever seen right uh... wilson we go to war probably a ton of support for for president wilson during the war and as the war starts but then he comes home and can get the league of nations passed right because that that support dissipates so i'm curious how you might integrate that idea of the rally around the flag is it simply that the country is coming together because of conflict or is it something else i think the value that you could really add is kind of the mechanism found in some of those unique individual stories so as you started to talk about the same way that at the end of your paper uh... some confederates are still figuring out like why they were fighting i think to tap into that a little bit more and find out some of those individual mechanisms beyond just this rally around the flag incident that's creating this unified approach to the american idea i think it'd be a really strong contribution uh... and then i think lastly to potentially better support uh... your theorist theory is what's happening after world war one right so is that a temporary blip where those civil war veterans are like yep here we go we're at war let's come together and then it goes away because we still see in here today the south will rise again and you can drive different places the country and see people flying confederate flags right so you know when does it kind of swing back does it persist long after world war one is that a more recent phenomena how does it fit into kind of the monument debates that we're having today about southern uh... southern soldiers so again i think a lot of kind of rich detail that you have in some of the stories that you're telling some reframing could potentially help strengthen the paper a little bit uh... but i think uh... both uh... the trash and hogan paper onto something something interesting let's see if this does this work it does uh... so now is the audience's turn uh... i'd like to welcome anyone who has a question up there's two microphones please uh... provide some comments or questions for our four presenters if you have them lovely uh... hello so i have a question for the ethan trask about so your summation of findings you have those two main findings there would how would you feel like when your research did you find anything with the spanish-american war with civil war veterans and how they viewed the uh... spanish-american war and if those those findings would have carried through with that war as well is working yeah uh... yeah thank you um... regarding the spanish-american war uh... i definitely came across references to it uh... i didn't find that it really had any significant impact on on the the social uh... perspectives uh... in very least the sources uh... that i was able to locate uh... world war one had a had a very broad impact domestically that that wasn't really seen with the spanish- american war at least at the same extent so there was some evidence to that but not necessarily enough material to elaborate upon this question is for mister hogan so you mentioned assassination as a method to suppress in silence uh... so can you talk about i don't know if you know but uh... a recent assassination plot directed by an indian official targeting a seek separatist that was out of new york and the seek separatist was located in canada so what happens if the country that is orchestrating these assassination plots is friendly with the u.s i know you mentioned places like north korea iran russia china but this is india and we're kind of friendly with india so what happens when these tactics are used by friendly nations i can't specifically talk about how like the united states would react to that um... that's i see that as a very case-by-case basis however i i think it would go back to you know any international laws that it is breaking if those individuals who committed those crimes are able to be prosecuted i think they would be prosecuted i don't think it would be handled differently on the individual basis if it were a animation urinal nation i think we are able to prosecute those individuals who committed the crimes they would likely do so uh... as terms for the relations between the countries uh... i think that's dependent on the situation the countries who are at work uh... and how it was conducted uh... as for that specific case i am unaware of that one so i'm not uh... quite sure how we would react or how we're going to react uh... but my best judgment would say that uh... it would be done at the individual level of the individual criminals committing those crimes uh... and how we would prosecute and proceed with that thank you my question is geared towards august in his uh... assignment with the donbasque so in your pur at the end of your presentation you said that the donbasque had you know in quotations had already lost the war because they had lost the agency right the agency to be able to fully commit to their own independence because of the amount of russian proxy that's going on into their war for independence in their own region has anyone within the donbasque that's fighting believing themselves as an independent as an independence fighter right how they realized this because an important part of an independence movement is that the people in the independence movement believe that they are truly fighting for their agency any sort of international aid that they may receive whether it be overtly or covertly is only a supplementative to what they believe so have they even realized that rushes treating them as a proxy i think by and large the independent set sentiment has mostly died out in good and do not do no fault of their own but because of the amount that like you said the amount of russian influence and aid to the militias fighting in the region there is no more there is no more effective independence movement because of russia's uh... stage referendums uh... after following their invasion there's i don't i don't think there's any more leg for donbass to stand on if they even wanted to still remain independent i mentioned in my paper i believe it was a a new york times uh... poll in conjunction with both ukrainian and russian agencies to sort to try and mitigate potential biases from those groups but all three conducted a poll people within the donbass region and they're they're driving motivation for who they support his finances there is no more ideological stance to what to who they support it's financial bill quick my questions for august gray on and his article i just uh... want to ask how do you square up against the orange revolution of two thousand four and the donbass uh... kind of independence movement obviously and the two thousand four orange revolution the donbass was given the opportunity uh... for self uh... determination self-autonomy or at least a little bit more autonomy that was uh... having in the rod at the time but they declined that they declined there the further expansion of their autonomy so how do you square up against the ideas that don't ask him who wants want to be independent when like i said in two thousand four they're given the chance to at least have more autonomy but declined that uh... like i said this this is on right uh... like i said i think uh... largely separate to sentiment remain dormant uh... in regards to the orange revolution they didn't really have a reason at that point to fully attempt to separate themselves to ukraine that largely was re-mobilized following the year of my dawn when that increasing rhetoric of east and west started to gain traction again i was just gonna say like on top of that victoria kovic was two thousand ten presidential election was uh... highly contested this orange revolution was a result of the two thousand four uh... referendums in ukraine but victoria kovic still came out on top for both presidential elections especially in two thousand ten uh... it wasn't until the twenty fourteen year my dawn did we actually see any sort of separatist movement what i'm trying to say is that do you think the separate smooth was truly homegrown was more manufactured by uh... russia i guess in twenty fourteen and this is strictly talking about early year my dawn homegrown revolution there was definitely amount of propaganda it certainly helped to re-mobilize those sentiments that hadn't exist existed for at that point largely a decade uh... again following the year of my dawn with the increasing rhetoric plus moves by russia and the removal of yanukovich that's where that and at that that's where i think that sentiment sprung back out but like you're implying there definitely was a level of propaganda that helped to restart that movement questions remarks okay i can uh... okay yes good yeah i don't want to let michael off the hook without a question here uh... so towards towards the end of the paper uh... you said that the united states shouldn't really take a hawkish approach uh... so we should be more dovish economically integrated right we do take those approaches uh... with china but we also still build aircraft carriers and the idea of strategic ambiguity with taiwan has faded a little bit and and we're more supportive of taiwan now to say if there is something we're gonna we're gonna be there to back you so i guess my question is how do we how do we combat this idea that realism real politics at the end of the day hard power is the thing that kind of drive some of our national foreign policy verses wanting to avoid that thank you for the question uh... one thing that i kind of contend in the paper is one of the weak points of american foreign policy in regards to how china has shifted its policy towards russia has been uh... the hesitation in american foreign policy uh... to not escalate the situation but to provide military support uh... and even the the hesitation about the ukrainian situation in our own domestic political sphere regarding financial aid i think that's from the chinese and russian perspective that is a lesson they've taken away from the conflict is that we the united states in a conflict uh... regarding one or two nuclear powers showed a bit of hesitation and continue to show a bit of hesitation so and one thing i talk about is things we can control in in can't control we can't control that they've learned that lesson uh... and we can't some of the reasons we made that lesson obviously we just like anyone else fear escalation of conflict especially among nuclear powers uh... and are motivated to do anything to prevent nuclear war there's not a whole lot we can change there and again without imposing a hawkish stance one that further backs china in the russia's quarter corner and isolates china and russia together as one common revisionist access i think with that said we do need to again as you said acknowledge the realities of real politics and power geopolitics well thank you all for coming and this concludes our final session of today's summit dr yang walk who might have some closing remarks let's give a round of applause thank you so much for research and comment and discussions so today from the nine o'clock to four thirty p m so we have been discussing the so many different issues are starting from the conflict in the memories uh... issues so i think the since two thousand eighteen as i mentioned in the opening remarks we have been discussing the very current contemporary issues north korea with china rivalry and ukrainian russia koreanian war and just uh... uh... the conflict in uh... middle east but this year uh... we chose the topic war memory and reconciliation so rather than just uh... thinking about the immediate and contemporary the uh... global issues that we need to think about the lingerie and negative impact of all those conflicts uh... we have been witnessing in this world so we discussed that and even in our student panels we had a lot of like a multiple uh... just the topics uh... from the china russia and uh... ukraine uh... even just uh... uh... american civil war and world war one uh... that kind of relations so i think in looking at the student panel like our future leaders so uh... we i don't want to see this continuation of these kind of wars in this world but in reality uh... we might continue to witness all those outbreak of the wars and lingerie negative impact of those wars on our individuals and societies and international relationship everything our future leader you have to think and ponder upon all those issues how to prevent right all those uh... conflict and then how to uh... just to resolve those issues and achieve peace and reconciliation uh... in this global community so today we're gonna wrap up the our discussion here but tomorrow uh... the scholars and we will have enclosed uh... works workshop sessions to exchange our world scala reviews and critics and uh... how to improve our uh... research and papers so that will be happening in libraries uh... norwich libraries multi-purpose room starting from nine a.m. to uh... twelve fifteen so if you are interested in these topics please come to join that uh... either as well so thank you so much uh... for joining uh... two thousand twenty-four percent was something so let's uh... just the end today's session here thank you