<TITLE: Politics Seminar 1
ACADEMIC DOMAIN: social sciences
DISCIPLINE: political science
EVENT TYPE: seminar discussion
FILE ID: USEMD01A
NOTES: continuation of USEMP01A, seminar also includes presentations USEMP01B-C (USEMD01B and USEMP01D-E are part of the same course)

RECORDING DURATION: 46 min 53 sec

RECORDING DATE: 27.11.2001

NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS: 11

NUMBER OF SPEAKERS: 11

S1: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: Finnish; ACADEMIC ROLE: senior staff; GENDER: male; AGE: 51-over

S2: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: Somali; ACADEMIC ROLE: undergraduate; GENDER: male; AGE: 31-50

S3: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: Finnish; ACADEMIC ROLE: undergraduate; GENDER: male; AGE: 24-30

S4: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: Lithuanian; ACADEMIC ROLE: undergraduate; GENDER: female; AGE: 17-23

S5: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: Finnish; ACADEMIC ROLE: undergraduate; GENDER: male; AGE: 24-30

S6: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: German; ACADEMIC ROLE: undergraduate; GENDER: male; AGE: 24-30

S7: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: Dutch; ACADEMIC ROLE: undergraduate; GENDER: male; AGE: 17-23

S8: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: unknown; ACADEMIC ROLE: undergraduate; GENDER: male; AGE: 17-23

S9: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: Chinese; ACADEMIC ROLE: undergraduate; GENDER: male; AGE: 17-23

S10: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: unknown; ACADEMIC ROLE: undergraduate; GENDER: female; AGE: 17-23

S11: NATIVE-SPEAKER STATUS: unknown; ACADEMIC ROLE: undergraduate; GENDER: female; AGE: 17-23

SU: unidentified speaker

SS: several simultaneous speakers>



<PRESENTATION USEMP01A by S2>

<S2> yes </S2>
<S3> you mention that er in your opinion er second cold war started in the 60s </S3>
<S2> yes [er (xx)] </S2>
<S3> [how can you] defend this when we know that the 70s was a detente period </S3>
<S2> well er absolutely great question er [i defend er] </S2>
<S1> [good point] good point </S1>
<S2> a good point i appreciate it actually erm i defend er because er when i'm saying my point of view i'm talking just myself and i have basic reasons to refer and i'm referring because the tensions was very high it was the time that soviet union deployed er er in a soviet er missile er you know er missi- nuclear missiles in in cuba which was er about 90 kilometres from from from the united states the tensions was very high , and the fate remember the fate of of of millions of people around the world including nordic countries were in the hands of two people president john F kennedy and kruchev er i hope i i premier yes yes kruchev yeah those two they compromised within 13 days within 13 days er they compromised without that i mean the whole world will be blown out thank you another question </S2>
<SS> @@ </SS>
<S3> but the 70s <S2> what </S2> but the 70s that's <S2> [seven-] </S2> [between] the 60s and the 80s [what about the 70s] </S3>
<S2> [yes er] the scholars do believe that er 70s 80s is the prob- er probable time that the second wo- the the second cold war has started but er i wouldn't say so </S2>
<S1> i'll make a point here <S2> yeah </S2> and and the question was really relevant <S2> yeah </S2> er just because what you said because the 70s and detente , so if you if you're really trying to apply your approach <S2> uh-huh </S2> then i think you should talk about first second and third cold war <S2> mhm-hm </S2> and somehow this is possible to defend this argument 'cause er er after kruchev came er first secre- secretary of the communist party ge- general secretary of the party and stalin's period was more or less over then there was a short period of detente <S2> yeah </S2> which maybe ended in cuban missile crisis but at the same time it's possible to say that this was just a continuation of the same period and cuban missile crisis wasn't any er turning point anyway <S2> yeah </S2> i- in other ways that may be that caused somehow er super powers into a detente policy 'cause they realised they are really on the frequency all the time <S2> yeah </S2> but then then we have to talk about first and second , that if you take seriously the de- short re- detente period vienna agreements and er in the 50s then we can maybe talk about three different periods of cold war but not first and second in that case <S2> yeah </S2> okay </S1>
<S2> yes </S2>
<S4> you told something about the president urho kekkonen <S2> yeah </S2> but as we know here he didn't have any power to resolve to dissolve the parliament <S2> mhm </S2> but he did in fact he made some agreements without any , any governmental er dealing with any dealing with the government and so and er <S2> [mhm] </S2> [he] was like a (companion) with the soviet union what's your attitude towards him as knowing that he was acting , without er taking care of constitution </S4>
<S2> well i don't know actually erm if he had the power er you know to dissolve the parliament here er those days [but] </S2>
<S1> [at that time] he had </S1>
<S2> yeah er yes i i absolutely i (do) with him er , <SS> @@ </SS> politician who save finland er when the situation was very much delicate those days erm because of the tensions er in between soviet and and and finland very high he saved he saved i said out of the mess from finland erm , his initiatives if you just pay an attention erm marvellous he did absolutely you know marvellous job and , yes please yes next question comments please yes </S2>
<S5> how close was the conflict after all or was it just a political act there's no crisis between finland and and soviet union </S5>
<S2> well er </S2>
<S5> how- was it was it actual situation or or was it just play that kekkonen played with the @with the@ soviet leaders </S5>
<S2> well er i do believe that er the situation those days er er was you know was very close to explode er and to finland to have clashes with soviet union was in the matter of few inches after when i have read @in the course@ of this course erm i just found out that er because of the winter war from ni- 1939 to 1945 if i remember correctly er and the civil war that finland had itself in between red (guys) and the whites i mean within that civil war soviets had (xx) in in in finland you understand my point what i'm going (to say) er you know finland paid terrible price and those and those and those clashes that it had with the er soviet union one winter war and the other you know er pre war i will say civil war that finland lost more than ten per cent of its own population er if i'm not wrong er which is substantial damage actually , but urho kekkonen the w- why i do ad- admire him i admire just because he saved finland from the mess yes please </S2>
<S6> er well the the erm the (xx) finland <S2> mhm </S2> was russian anyway before then <S2> yeah </S2> @so@ i mean there's no point really about talking he saved finland from bad bad soviet union or something </S6>
<S2> even when i was referring er the nordic countries were divided eastern and western orientation @@ i had in mind finland to east- eastern orientation </S2>
<S6> [you were (xx) it's a part of russia anyway] </S6>
<S2> [it was as a bridge yeah okay] as a bridge in between east and west finland was er you know at the core er yes </S2>
<S7> i must say that er you say it was part of russia anyway would that be too well (xx) in between er finland er becoming independent <SS> [yeah yeah] </SS> [(xx)] er so there's a question of international security level also in a way international relations worked everything has been er severe changes since finland's independency <S2> [absolutely yeah] </S2> [and] finns er are more (sensitive) erm erm [(looking at looking at er looking at the east)] </S7>
<S2> [yeah (xx)] </S2>
<S6> in the two world wars finland was just trying to er well to keep itself alive because it was in fear sort of that it might come back under any rule whether western or eastern rule anywhere , so i mean this is just a struggling that was going on </S6>
<S2> mhm mhm but i i as i have already said at the beginning er finland was an ally with germany er at the end of of of of world war two and even when germany was defeated there were some troops stationed at the north of finland , that has forced you know er from the soviet perspective they thought that finland is posing a threat because it's still keeping @german soldiers@ in the soil of finland er so you know , [(xx)] </S2>
<S6> [you know] germans were quick to turn around and then [er you know (xx) it was forced yeah] </S6>
<S2> [er yes yeah yeah because its national interest because] its national [interest] </S2>
<S6> [but that's] anyway that's just a struggling to keep alive <S2> yeah yeah </S2> it i know <S2> [absolutely yeah] </S2> [it's just] a construct to <S2> [yeah] </S2> [me] so i would not really say that er it needed to be saved because anyway erm lenin was about to grant independence to finland anyway </S6>
<S7> that's if we're talking <S2> [but er] </S2> [about] er 40 years earlier </S7>
<S6> i know i know that's why that's why i don't understand why there's always the fear of finland </S6>
<S7> the or the the the (xx) </S7>
<SU> yeah </SU>
<SS> @@ </SS>
<S1> there wasn't a fear of finland there was a fear of germany <S2> [yeah mhm] </S2> [in the] soviet union </S1>
<S6> er no no the fear that finland inhabits <S1> ah </S1> the finnish politicians inhabit to lose their finnishness their new found finnishness </S6>
<S1> that's because how the history or how we have been taught or er socialised into the past and there russia has been presented always as an aggressive power though if we read history in a bit different way it has been sweden via finland which has been the more aggressive power , but later there have been also two russian invasions into finland </S1>
<S2> yeah </S2>
<SU-6> but also finnish [invasions to russia] </SU-6>
<S1> [i mean before] er 19th century </S1>
<SU-6> okay </SU-6>
<S7> er if i as far as i'm er informed (xx) i think i agree with (a lot) on that that i think finland did have really something to say finland was (xx) finland was democratic but they were like erm looking trying to be as much western as possible basically even if they were eastern ori- oriented (xx) eastern oriented they rather wished to be part of the west which is shown in many things (xx) ended by this er (topics) that we talked about last thursday the finnish (xx) and and things like EU and all that all those things finland has always had er as much as possible orientation towards the west and erm if they would've been like incorporated as being part of the soviet union it would have been militarily very well possible by the soviet erm people their army was big enough to theoretically to just take out finland in say one day or whatever if they i mean during winter war russia was at war with quite some other at least they had like their troops in other places in 1960s there was less of a need for that they could have just overrun finland but they didn't and that's much because of i think also urho kekkonen even though he became a bit authoritarian because [because] </S7>
<S1> [okay] okay i think that it's time to go to the next topic but before that i still say some brief comments the first general comment is that , er in fact prob- one problem in academic sense in your presentation is and was that that was more a story but no problem , it just described a certain situation and from a perspective let's say simply admiring of kekkonen's policy <S2> yeah </S2> somehow and that was there behind er and kekkonen again is something we can that , attitudes of any of us in finland are very much divided and it's it depends how you look at his policy i myself very much share your opinion that in a foreign policy or security policy sense his policy was wise i wouldn't say that he saved finland 'cause er there really never were any that kind of threats that finland would have been needed to be saved but okay he kept finland out from even maybe a more <S2> yeah </S2> critical , serious threat situations , but then in internal policy domestic policy kekkonen used a moscow card against those politicians who whom he said saw as a threat to his own power and position , and finlandisation that might be true in a domestic policy but not necessarily that much in the foreign policy , er and then final comment is about , a danger to put different things to a one package somehow , for instance you talked about eastern threat to the nordic countries i think that denmark never had or it has certain periods due to certain periods but not all the time a threat of soviet union and even norway at the beginning had a conflict in different understanding of the soviet union which came and er liberated northern norway from germans , er and what about iceland . some certain periods of the cold war even iceland felt that russian or soviet threat but its experience from the second world war was a bit different it was afraid of german threat as well as denmark , so to put different countries into the same block in a very sh- could i say light way might be a bit problematic , er . and that same is when when you said EFTA unified nordic countries okay that is a more limited international organisation than for instance UN but one could also say that UN unified nordic countries as well <S2> yeah yeah </S2> 'cause in fact in the in in the context of the UN nordic countries tri- tried to define a common position in different issue areas but not that the position wasn't common in different votings when they were or nordic countries were in different blocks but still there are also other organisations where nordic countries worked [together] <S2> [(xx)] yeah </S2> yeah so it it's not necessarily EFTA it might have an influence and that might be a good point <S2> yeah </S2> , okay let's go to the next </S1>

<PRESENTATION USEMP01B by S6>

<APPLAUSE>
<S1> thank you . erm questions comments , reactions </S1>
<S3> well we know that erm or us finns we criticise ourself criticise ourselves quite often for for being loyal to a country or an institution er would you say that these two theories explain the the comment that maybe moscow has been replaced by brussels [so] </S3>
<S6> [well] this was basically what i was try to explain er there was actually no other possibility </S6>
<S3> exactly [so erm] </S3>
<S6> [them them] behaving like that it was because sometimes you just say like to use this bad word finlandisation and like finland just tends to like er be acquiescent to towards other countries but this should explain that or this explains to a certain extent for me that it's , yeah </S6>
<S3> yeah the next question to follow this is that would you then say that erm this alienation between the people and the government is one of the reasons for this so people in general would actually if they were to be put on the on the scale would the finnish people actually be higher </S3>
<S6> er i i would say so yeah i would i would yeah erm , because people always have i mean they just want something they don't have to consider if this is possible or not the government has actually <S3> yeah yeah </S3> so </S6>
<S3> so these internal factors mhm when you mention media and business er are you actually referring to nokia <S6> erm </S6> or one of them </S3>
<S6> well not to nokia nokia in particular but like to well ther- there has been er er i've been describing at the very beginning that erm finnish companies were as a whole er were massively investing into the EU countries and erm so </S6>
<S1> but much before that or into USA and canada and all those investments failed </S1>
<S6> they did </S6>
<S1> yeah it caused losses for the finnish enterprises </S1>
<S6> but still they invested so abroad so </S6>
<S1> yeah but also much before joined EU </S1>
<S6> mhm . so d- did i answer your question or </S6>
<S3> yeah yeah it wasn't really that much of a question just a sort of a . just to er look at your problem different point of view </S3>
<S6> yeah but i mean nokia is a ca- i mean my nokia phone is actually made in germany so </S6>
<SS> @@ </SS>
<S3> they (xx) before so , at the time </S3>
<S8> yeah er er i was just wondering erm if you read if you can tell anything about the difference between norway and finland because norway i mean there are still many people <S6> mhm </S6> they are saying that this was a good decision </S8>
<S6> erm yeah sure this comes to the referenda probably er finland having erm er the strongest support th- i i say there was the referendum in norway sweden and and finland finland having the the strongest support and norway having the least was basically also an internal game because periphery talking of farmers people living in the north were not so much or not the least in favour for joining the EU and er , so in finland the centre like southern finland is much stronger than the periphery and norway has erm like laws or in political culture the periphery is much stronger so they say the periphery won in norway against the centre while as in sweden and finland it was the other way around </S6>
<S8> i mean erm i didn't really say what i want to say but you said like finland didn't have any choice so why did norway have the choice [not to join] </S8>
<S6> [well] </S6>
<SU> oil </SU>
<S6> oil @@ </S6>
<SS> @@ </SS>
<S8> yeah just wan- want to hear er if you know any other reasons than oil i mean oil is oil </S8>
<S6> erm i don't know er </S6>
<S1> fish </S1>
<S8> i mean because this </S8>
<S7> sorry </S7>
<S1> [fish] </S1>
<SU> [whaling] </SU>
<S8> i mean it's like it's also about influence [and so] </S8>
<S6> [for example] for example one that put it to one external factor that norway doesn't have is for finland russia its security for example that has to be provided norway is not so much important like dependent on on er security issues or it's not that important and erm , yeah basically that i suppose there might be some other factors </S6>
<P:09>
<S1> any other questions or comments </S1>
<S7> yeah er possibly not really i mean it's about the little (xx) you made i mean it's a bit (xx) what he said on this erm brus- er moscow being replaced by brussels thing you could in fact apply the very same diagram with the very same narrow choice to finnish erm erm choice during this cold cold war right </S7>
<S6> [actually it's like] </S6>
<S7> [and that way that way] you could say i mean that's why i think erm and i should (xx) (because) erm y- you said this being being criticism that re- er moscow has been replaced by brussels but is it really criticism i mean moscow wasn't a real much of a choice but (the moscow influenced) (xx) same thing for brussels as you have said </S7>
<S6> probably yes actually this theory deviates from the security dilemma which is erm was important before that </S6>
<S1> okay <COUGH> this was <COUGH> more or less the first presentation which had a very strong theoretical orientation in in this (xx) so in that respective it was a good presentation , but somehow there should be a theoretical perspective always in academic works it doesn't be explicit always it can be also implicit but here it was very explicit but then er i have . some , not necessarily doubts but er i think that somehow history can also explain this must or to be a nice member , nice child in EU and that has par- partly dealt already in this discussion , it's a history or should i first say that you also refer to political culture , in one of your answers <S6> [mhm , that's] </S6> [that] might explain something </S1>
<S6> but that's the very concept that's the problem </S6>
<S1> that that is and that is something what is often used if you can't explain anything something you ca- really can't explain then we refer to political culture er that this is a kind of a dumping block , all the reasons are there or all the factors are there so that explains everything and then we don't need to explain anything , that is how i understand the function of political culture very much </S1>
<S6> it has an effect but [it's so (xx)] </S6>
<S1> [yeah it has and i will come] i will come to that <S6> okay </S6> er it's not only moscow in fact first it was stockholm or sweden we were very loyal , and there are very few finns who wanted to in early 19th century who wanted to join finland to russia but there were and that was the nobility who thought that they will gain something by being in russia which was which was more backward than sweden , but people , peasants , they fought for the swedish king for the swedish state against russians and thought that they , nobility has left them even even er clergy had left the ki- er the people , and then after that it was very much russia moscow or st petersburg at that time , and then maybe , after the independence not all the time but after the second world war it was moscow and now moscow has been changed into brussels so pe- finland finnish people or finland is loyal to the sovereignty to the au- authority , that is something which is in the history , er and , it this is also something that is difficult to explain , though there might be some explanations also to that , and one explanation is that it's it's not just to , be loyal to the authority but also to gain something from this position er if if you look for instance the russian time er those people who created finnish or were the fathers and they really we- were men mostly founders of finnish nationhood finnish nation and finnish state they were very loyal to m- to st petersburg to czar and that gave space for them to create a nation , to create a state , and the same was the same function was with with this er treaty between finland and soviet union on mutual cor- friendship and mutual cooperation it was used as a tool or a mean for space or , expanding the space for finnish policy independent policy , er but and then but in this case politicians they had a mission but is there any mission now when we finland is in brussels </S1>
<S6> well as i said there were some there were this er three threats which the first one and the most important one was the economic one and that one was solved through joining the EU i'd say so there was [a certain there was in fact] </S6>
<S1> [in a way yes or in fact that that] that was very much the argument what was used for in in the support of or to get people to support membership </S1>
<S6> i think this is true i mean there was the need to form these alliance probably under the circumstances so that was a certain game but there was also a loss , and er <S1> yeah </S1> the how to measure the loss i mean okay that's my personal er thing that @@ national sovereignty is not that worth or not that high value actually </S6>
<S1> but the- the- then in the history there is also another aspect finland has been divided country since very much divided country since er 16th century , when there was the , i don't know whether it was really first kind of the civil war in finland , but there was a peasant war in finland against er the state authorities and then finland was divided more or less alo- along the same line finland was divided in the civil war at the beginning of the last century then the same dividing line was there when er there was the referendum for EU south from this area the red finland voted for EU and white finland against EU and then the same division line is there there still when , current president was elected the south the red finland was for halonen and the non-EU finland against halonen and for aho very much , this is again something i- it that is something what exists there but it's hard to explain </S1>
<S6> yeah well i tried to explain this by the centre-periphery [i mean] </S6>
<S1> [yeah] you tried [yeah] </S1>
<S6> [but it's] i mean i'm not a finn so i i'm not i don't get so much insight that's the problem </S6>
<S3> but that's an asset <S6> mhm </S6> that's an asset that you're not a finn in this in this topic i think </S3>
<S6> what does asset mean </S6>
<SS> @@ </SS>
<S3> it's an advantage </S3>
<S6> okay yeah , well </S6>
<S1> and then what you said about the threat that is also quite true , there's something what you didn't say but i know pretty well in the early 90s in finland there was a serious discussion and ev- even serious decisions were made about russian coming immigrants or ref- refugees or whatever they were called , finland was prepared to receive couple of millions of russians and there were emergency meetings in the eastern finland and in the northern finland how to accommodate this people coming in millions , escaping from russia , er i was one of the few people who said that i don't see any reasons to be afraid of of millions of russians coming to finland if you look back to history and other factors , but many even scholars went around in finland in different meetings and gave presentations how russians soon are coming to finland and we have to be prepared and there were in the eastern and northern finland schools who which were reserved for russian emi- immigrants for accommodation , and also other preparations were made all this in secrecy not in public , but 'cause i have attended to some of those meetings i know there were these plans , so finns were really afraid of not a military threat but russians invading finland </S1>
<S6> yeah that's that's actually an interesting part of of political culture here that russia is always <SS> @@ </SS> no as i perceive it it's always like russia as the threat and erm for example this immigration threat i mean [(xx)] </S6>
<S1> [yeah it's a threat] in in different senses [yeah] </S1>
<S6> [yeah] but but but nobody could that people were so afraid of or like elites also were pretty afraid and didn't consider that russians might as well also like their country and stay there even if it's not as rich as as the west so </S6>
<S1> okay let's go to the last presentation </S1>
<S6> there was one question </S6>
<S1> [oh] </S1>
<S4> [no] no it was just a comment because when you said about the russia's threat it's very funny because i read an article and it was about like that er estonia like soon joining the EU i was like reading like er do you people realise that er there are er russians are in big numbers are coming into EU they are i- it was kind of like (xx) because like okay there's half of the million of the russians living in estonia it was very it's they they really made from russian people like something like evil big evil and that they're coming in big numbers into the EU and like it's it's very i mean it's just like kind of erm very strange er </S4>
<S1> i still we don't we haven't seen those russians in finland <S4> @@ </S4> in masses </S1>
<S4> yeah it's like so it's they're really working hard and making the people </S4>
<S1> okay </S1>

<PRESENTATION USEMP01C by S9>

<S1> thank you <APPLAUSE> well <COUGH> reaction from the audience </S1>
<S11> actually er i don't know maybe you changed your topic , and you didn't say er (xx) but i missed the er information about russia and china how about your imagination (xx) </S11>
<S9> but the main point is [i i] </S9>
<S1> [it is in the paper] it is in the paper <S10> @@ </S10> yeah </S1>
<S9> but main point main points are the analysis on the current EU and the future enlargement of the EU [the idea] </S9>
<S10> [do you think] it's possible you know to make such a cooperation between these EU russia china as they are they have so different directions so different well at least nowadays attitudes and er [they really] </S10>
<S9> [er because] there are there are common interests becau- like er the russia the russia has its policy named like two heads of angel i'm not sure and the russia want to face both the west and the east to keep its own security and er and in in this and currently EU don't want to involve russia inside i- i- in the seeable future </S9>
<S10> so what about china if EU doesn't want russia do you think EU will want china </S10>
<S9> no no no i mean er if we didn't take care of russia so there there is long distance between china and EU and the cooperation must be difficult to make so if we involve russia so , yeah these three countries must be profitable i think (what do you think) i'm not sure , (xx) </S9>
<S11> oh you talk about the position of several erm european countries about the future of europe but what about nordic countries and erm are they for european federation or they (claim) for northern er model in europe </S11>
<S9> nordic countries they want to keep their own er characteristics or natural interest in the future they are er they fear to lose their own cultures in the federation and they don't want like those superpowers in the EU like germany and france they decided anything and nordic countries don't want to see this kind of situation so they keep their own opinion about the future because germany proposed a federation because germany is the leading power so and nordic countries don't want to see this kind of </S9>
<S11> but i must say that finland quite easily are is losing one of his national characteristics adopting the euro from from this coming january <S9> mhm </S9> and losing its national currency </S11>
<S9> but sweden is not included in in euro </S9>
<S11> so </S11>
<S1> and in this occasion we also losing our own language </S1>
<SS> @@ </SS>
<S11> it's possible </S11>
<S4> and and just </S4>
<S1> <NAME S4> yep you first </S1>
<S4> oh er no just a small reminder it's not meant a question you mentioned that the turkey wasn't accepted because of they were religious </S4>
<S9> in some case yeah <S4> it's </S4> from my point of view i mean because they are like islam culture </S9>
<S4> yeah but i mean i believe their official policy have to be free from prejudice and [like , that , yeah it's not] </S4>
<S9> [i heard i heard that one president one president said that] </S9>
<S6> [(xx) the official policy yes of course] </S6>
<S4> [yeah yeah but] er the yeah the problem was i believe for the human rights that that was a big problem </S4>
<S6> it's also a problem but this is also to do with erm religion [after all it's a cultural perspective] </S6>
<S4> [no i agree i agree but it's] no i (xx) </S4>
<S1> <NAME S10> </S1>
<S10> well i i i just in in in that connection was the religion and i i met erm a guy he was studying in in in turkey for some time and er it's quite interesting because of course there is the problems with human rights but the religion i don't know whether it really matters that much and i would i would i think i would strongly contest that because er for example in turkey there is a culture since er atatürk er who founded the modern er turkey erm and er this this country is is pretty secularised and there is a very strong point in turkey that er this is that the politics i mean it's (xx) er more or less that this is very much er divided from from er religion so it is a secul- secular state and er i think i mean the (xx) we say islamic party just recently and i think also what i would like to ask you in this context erm that you perceive now you you come from outside the EU <S9>  mhm-hm </S9> and er you made a very strong point with er the catholicism er the the the kind of er cultural background , do you yourself i mean being here travelling around did you perceive that still i mean also amongst young people there's something really well prevalent important erm and er because i i i i don't really believe because talking to the young people religion doesn't seem to be that important in that sense only as a projection perhaps against other religion like islam now [(xx)] </S10>
<S9> [no i mean] er EU as from EU point of view EU said that because of some high employment er unemployment rate in turkey or some er some er </S9>
<S11> human rights </S11>
<S9> i mean er mhm </S9>
<S11> human rights ignoring </S11>
<S9> yeah human rights or democracy or some </S9>
<S10> but that's an excuse </S10>
<SS> @@ </SS>
<S1> okay </S1>
<S7> can i </S7>
<S1> go on </S1>
<S7> one important point on that you said [(xx)] </S7>
<S1> [yes] we're over time already </S1>
<S7> yeah okay erm i think i think that y- you look at religion too much (everything) i i personally i'm not religious yet i'm (xx) all my values and and (xx) i think everything i believe and do is very similar to common pros- pros- protestant values but i'm not i'm i'm a i'm a religious yet my culture and the way i look at things are very much based upon a certain religion you can have many things in in ho- how religion works how a culture works it can be divided from religion even though religion itself is not that big anymore , [and] </S7>
<S11> [could capitalism] be a sort of religion </S11>
<SS> @@ </SS>
<S6> well where where does capitalism come from that's the question it's a very protestant idea so it comes from religion after all </S6>
<S7> that's [very (xx)] </S7>
<S1> [oh its] its origin is in northern italy , <SS> @@ </SS> from the time when there wasn't any protestantism </S1>
<S6> well alright you may say it's a religion but its nowadays appearance is very much protestant i would say erm even more zwinglian issue of life or calvinist because erm er religion is not an abstract thing which is here and the state is there and our culture's just another third point somewhere else religion has influenced the cultures of the world very strongly and despite we are not , we might not be er religious anymore that much er we still derive many customs and our behaviour and our views from old religious erm dogmata , for example we talk about d- different cultural circles but how do we come to define these cultural circles , it's also a question of religion </S6>
<S4> you mean that the cultural circle is a metaphor of religion or </S4>
<S6> well no you you're just looking at it like culture and [religion] </S6>
<S4> [you don't know] how i look things @@ </S4>
<S6> but religion is inherited in culture , there is no culture without religion , (not possible) in our <S7> if i </S7> in our (point) </S6>
<S7> may i point that point that i made i made a little sociology study on religion just a week ago and <SS> @@ </SS> basically the fun thing is [many sociologists many sociologists] </S7>
<S1> [has it been published in any] any good international journal </S1>
<SS> @@ </SS>
<S7> yeah many sociologists argue actually that religion erm is rather a reflection of the culture and that way (xx) again religion is a piece of culture and and erm influence the culture again and then becomes a perfect reflection of the culture it's like a continuous circle so they are like integrated everywhere which is kind of support what he said (xx) </S7>
<S1> yeah but when we talk about religion the the problem is what tradition what do we mean it with it because religion can be used for different purposes and it can be interpreted in different many different ways , er on that there you are right that the values of the of europe , and i mean not only i don't mean only western europe but all europe they are very much christian values , or religious values but then the point is that the difficult point is that whether we whether we live according to the values we talk about <SS>  mhm </SS> or not and that that doesn't depend on the religion , that is another matter </S1>
<S6> but they're (innate) erm values you do not think about semiotics you just do it because it's innate it's in your cultural memory you cannot [(xx)] </S6>
<S1> [yeah yeah they are there] but we don't live according to all our values </S1>
<S6> you do not think about that sometimes you just do it and it's still according to values you do not question anymore or not at the moment because they are not that quickly evolving </S6>
<S1> okay this is a discussion we could go on for couple of hours or days even maybe er but any o- the point is here that we are talking about northern europe and only we are discussing about turkey er that is <SS> @@ </SS> that is one of your pr- pa- problems of your paper it doesn't have any northern european aspect , in a sense it's a relevant paper but what is the relevance in the context of this essay seminar , you don't have any reference or you don't refer at all to the northern europe what is what kind of a role the northern europe would have in this in your vision , and the paper is very much about the vision but if it is about vision one could ask what is there behind why there should be any , or what are the common interests of china russia and europe . well you did you haven't said anything about that m- my my guess would be a common interest is to create a block against USA hegemony , and then there is a political interest but you don't refer to in your neither your paper or not in this presentation that much , but there is nothing natural in EU russia china triangle , but if it has a value it it has to have a political value somehow for some actors , er then what you for what you had time to say in your presentation 'cause you didn't have time for everything you had in your paper or you have in your paper or essay er i think that you make some reasonable arguments er but some of the arguments you make could be addressed a bit more precisely . but for instance what you said about national interest and leadership a struggle for leadership in EU that was very visible very concrete for instance in the nice er europe council meeting where all the documents were couple of hours available only in french not in any other languages , this was a french way to keep power in its hands those who didn't understand any french they couldn't even participate the discussion for couple of hours and normally the documents are very fast in at least in english french german spanish not in the minor languages that might take some time , but in the nice nice meeting or council meeting the situation was very much french dominated er that was one at- way of attempting to get a leading position , i- in the whole EU , and this is the case also otherwise in the EU there is a struggle for a leadership within the EU all the time but i think that northern european countries can't even think about fighting for a leadership in EU and there you are right that that there is a division between small and big states , okay let's this be all this time , about the next session , do we have three presentations for the next presentation er next session </S1>
