The Event I Do Not Want to Miss This Year: The Fourth International Deleuze Studies Conference "Creation, Crisis, Critique"

I have just applied to The Fourth International Deleuze Studies Conference "Creation, Crisis, Critique". The deadline was supposed to be tomorrow (February 1, 2011). But to my knowledge it was prolonged (March 1, 2011). I applied as an "author" (you can choose whether you attend the conference as an author or participant). Besides, I have also applied to the Summer School: Deleuze Camp 5 "Creative Critique". I have never attended any Deleuze Studies course or summer school. I am the only person who is dealing with the Deleuze and Guattari's works in the American Studies Department at TU, DO. The Bochum PhD Candidate Dennis Mischke is the only Deleuzian I know personally in the Nordrhein-Westfalia. The 3rd Deleuze Conference, which I was honoured to attend last year, turned out to be great and isnpiring. Since, my productivity boosted. The Deleuze and Guattari's nomadology A Thousand Plateaus is at the basis of my methodological framework. I cross my fingers and go on working on my dissertation... hoping to be able to present an interesting paper about slightly different subject in June in Copenhagen.

Spreading WikiLeaks: (Part 3)

Source: WikiLeaks

----
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
08STATE79112 2008-07-23 15:03 2010-11-28 18:06 SECRET Secretary of State

O 231500Z JUL 08
FM SECSTATE WASHDC
TO AMEMBASSY ASHGABAT IMMEDIATE
AMEMBASSY ASTANA IMMEDIATE
AMEMBASSY BEIJING IMMEDIATE
AMEMBASSY BISHKEK IMMEDIATE
AMEMBASSY DUSHANBE IMMEDIATE
AMEMBASSY KABUL IMMEDIATE
AMEMBASSY TASHKENT IMMEDIATE

S E C R E T STATE 079112


E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/22/2033
TAGS: MNUC PARM PREL AF CH KG KZ TI TX UZ

SUBJECT: (S) FLIGHT OF PROLIFERATION CONCERN BETWEEN DPRK
AND IRAN

REF: ASTANA 1286

Classified By: ISN Acting DAS Kenneth W. Staley,
Reasons 1.4 (b), (c), and (d)

THIS IS AN ACTION REQUEST. SEE PARA 2.

¶1. (S) Posts are requested to approach appropriate-level host
nation officials regarding a planned North Korean flight to
Iran of proliferation concern and encourage them to deny
overflight for the aircraft or require that it land and be
subjected to inspection before proceeding. Posts may draw
from background, objectives, and talking points/non-paper
below as appropriate.

----------
OBJECTIVES
----------

¶2. (S//REL AFGHANISTAN, KYRGYZSTAN, TAJIKISTAN,
TURKMENISTAN, UZBEKISTAN): Posts should encourage host
governments, as partner nations in the Proliferation Security
Initiative (PSI) and consistent with their obligations under
UNSCRs 1718, 1737, and 1747, to deny overflight or to insist
that the aircraft land for inspection before proceeding.

¶3. (S//REL CHINA) Embassy Beijing should encourage China,
consistent with its obligations under UNSCRs 1718, 1737, and
1747, to deny overflight or to insist that the aircraft land
for inspection before proceeding.

¶4. (S//REL KAZAKHSTAN) Our information currently does not
indicate a North Korean intent to overfly Kazakhstan,
suggesting that GOK, per REFTEL, has denied the DPRK,s
request. Embassy Astana is requested to express appreciation
for GOK,s proactively notifying us of the DPRK overflight
request and urge them to deny any such request if they have
not already done so. Post may share the below non-paper with
GOK, as appropriate.

----------
BACKGROUND
----------

¶5. (S//REL CHINA, AFGHANISTAN, KAZAKHSTAN, KYRGYZSTAN,
TAJIKISTAN, TURKMENISTAN, UZBEKISTAN) The USG has received
information that a flight of proliferation concern between
North Korea and Iran is scheduled to occur in late July.

¶6. (S//REL AFGHANISTAN, KAZAKHSTAN, TAJIKISTAN) Our
information does not currently indicate a North Korean intent
to route the flight over Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, or
Tajikistan. We are, however, providing them this information
in the spirit of our cooperation under PSI, and to ask them
to deny overflight or inspect the aircraft in the event the
North Koreans re-route the flight.

¶7. (S) Embassies should note that bullet #1 is for Beijing
only, bullet #2 is for all recipients except Beijing, and
bullet #3 is for Astana, Kabul, and Dushanbe only. The rest
of the non-paper is for all recipients.

------------------------
TALKING POINTS/NON-PAPER
------------------------

¶8. (S//REL CHINA, AFGHANISTAN, KAZAKHSTAN, KYRGYZSTAN,
TAJIKISTAN, TURKMENISTAN, UZBEKISTAN) Begin talking
points/non-paper:

-- (S//REL CHINA) We would like to raise with you a North
Korean flight of proliferation concern that may request
overflight of your territory as it transits to and from Iran.

-- (S//REL AFGHANISTAN, KAZAKHSTAN, KYRGYZSTAN, TAJIKISTAN,
TURKMENISTAN, UZBEKISTAN) In the spirit of our cooperation
under the Proliferation Security Initiative, we would like to
raise with you a North Korean flight of proliferation concern
that may request overflight of your territory as it transits
to and from Iran.

-- (S//REL AFGHANISTAN, KAZAKHSTAN, TAJIKISTAN) While our
current information indicates that this flight will not cross
your territory, we are providing it to you in the spirit of
our cooperation as PSI partners and in the event that the
flight,s schedule is changed and you do receive a North
Korean overflight request.

-- (S//REL CHINA, AFGHANISTAN, KAZAKHSTAN, KYRGYZSTAN,
TAJIKISTAN, TURKMENISTAN, UZBEKISTAN) We are concerned that
this chartered, round-trip passenger flight may be carrying
DPRK personnel involved in ongoing cooperation with Iran on
ballistic missiles.

-- (S//REL CHINA, AFGHANISTAN, KAZAKHSTAN, KYRGYZSTAN,
TAJIKISTAN, TURKMENISTAN, UZBEKISTAN) As you know, the
transfer by North Korea of WMD components or delivery
systems, certain military goods, and related materials
including spare parts, is prohibited by UNSCR 1718. UNSCR
1718 also prohibits transfers from or to North Korea of
technical training, advice, services or assistance related to
WMD, their delivery systems, and certain conventional arms.
Iran is prohibited from obtaining WMD, delivery systems,
related components, and related technical assistance and
training under UNSCRs 1737 and 1747.

-- (S//REL CHINA, AFGHANISTAN, KAZAKHSTAN, KYRGYZSTAN,
TAJIKISTAN, TURKMENISTAN, UZBEKISTAN) We therefore request
that overflight permission be denied or made contingent on
inspection of the aircraft to ensure that any cargo or
passengers it carries are not arriving in Iran in violation
of UNSCR 1718, 1737, 1747 or other UN resolutions.
Alternately, if this aircraft requests a fueling stop in your
country, we request that you grant this permission and
promptly search the aircraft upon its arrival for evidence of
prohibited items or activities.

-- (S//REL CHINA, AFGHANISTAN, KAZAKHSTAN, KYRGYZSTAN,
TAJIKISTAN, TURKMENISTAN, UZBEKISTAN) Information about the
flights are as follows. The outbound flight from the DPRK is
expected on or about July 31, 2008. The aircraft is a North
Korean-registered Il-62, flight JS-621, scheduled to depart
Pyongyang on 28 July at 0001Z and land in Tehran at 0940Z.

-- (S//REL CHINA, AFGHANISTAN, KAZAKHSTAN, KYRGYZSTAN,
TAJIKISTAN, TURKMENISTAN, UZBEKISTAN) From North Korea, the
flight is scheduled to pass into Chinese airspace at or about
0025Z and leave Chinese airspace for Kyrgyzstan at 0600Z.
From there, the flight is scheduled to pass over Uzbekistan
and Turkmenistan and arrive in Iranian airspace at or around
0825Z.

-- (S//REL CHINA, AFGHANISTAN, KAZAKHSTAN, KYRGYZSTAN,
TAJIKISTAN, TURKMENISTAN, UZBEKISTAN) The return flight,
JS-622, is scheduled to depart Tehran on 31 July at 1330Z and
arrive at Pyongyang at 2220Z.

-- (S//REL CHINA, AFGHANISTAN, KAZAKHSTAN, KYRGYZSTAN,
TAJIKISTAN, TURKMENISTAN, UZBEKISTAN) From Iran, the flight
is scheduled to pass into Turkmenistan airspace on or about
1440Z and pass over Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, entering
Chinese airspace from Kyrgyzstan at 1655Z. From there the
flight is scheduled to re-enter North Korean airspace on or
around 2200Z.


END POINTS.

-----------------------------
REPORTING REQUIREMENT AND POC
-----------------------------

¶6. (U) Please report delivery of demarche and any immediate
response by July 24.

¶7. (U) Washington point of contact for follow-up information
is Tom Zarzecki, (202) 647-7594, zarzeckitw@state.sgov.gov.
Please slug all responses for EAP, NEA, ISN, SCA, and T.
Washington appreciates Posts, assistance.
RICE


NNNN




End Cable Text

Spreading WikiLeaks: Leak Related to the U.S. Embassy in Kyrgyzstan (Part 2)

This is the second leak related to the U.S. Embassy in Kyrgyzstan, which became available on the WikiLeaks.

----
VZCZCXRO1478
OO RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHDBU RUEHLH RUEHPW
DE RUEHEK #0135/01 0441151
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
O 131151Z FEB 09
FM AMEMBASSY BISHKEK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 1794
INFO RUCNCLS/ALL SOUTH AND CENTRAL ASIA COLLECTIVE
RUCNCIS/CIS COLLECTIVE
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 2870
RUEHRL/AMEMBASSY BERLIN 0711
RUEHMD/AMEMBASSY MADRID 0094
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 0183
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHDC
RUEKJCS/OSD WASHDC
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 1217
RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE 3257
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 2643
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO BRUSSELS BE
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS
RUEHLMC/MILLENNIUM CHALLENGE CORP
RUMICEA/USCENTCOM INTEL CEN MACDILL AFB FL

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BISHKEK 000135

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR SCA/CEN

E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/13/2019
TAGS: PGOV PREL MARR KG
SUBJECT: CHINESE AMBASSADOR FLUSTERED BY KYRGYZ ALLEGATIONS
OF MONEY FOR CLOSING MANAS

REF: A. BISHKEK 96
¶B. BISHKEK 85

BISHKEK 00000135 001.2 OF 002


Classified By: Ambassador Tatiana C. Gfoeller, Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).

¶1. (C) Summary: During a meeting with the Ambassador
February 13, Chinese Ambassador Zhang Yannian ridiculed the
idea, but did not deny categorically, that China would
provide Kyrgyzstan a $3 billion financial package in return
for closing Manas Air Base. Zhang said Kyrgyzstan was in
Russia's sphere of influence, and China had only commercial
interests here. He also complained bitterly about Chinese
Guantanamo detainees being shipped to Germany instead of
China. Zhang was very interested in whether the U.S. would
negotiate to keep Manas, and he advised just giving the
Kyrgyz $150 million a year for the Base. "This is all about
money," he said. End Summary.

LOSING THE ABILITY TO SPEAK RUSSIAN

¶2. (C) Ambassador met February 13 with Chinese Ambassador to
Kyrgyzstan Zhang Yannian. After opening pleasantries, the
Ambassador mentioned that Kyrgyz officials had told her that
China had offered a $3 billion financial package to close
Manas Air Base and asked for the Ambassador's reaction to
such an allegation. Visibly flustered, Zhang temporarily
lost the ability to speak Russian and began spluttering in
Chinese to the silent aide diligently taking notes right
behind him. Once he had recovered the power of Russian
speech, he inveighed against such a calumny, claiming that
such an idea was impossible, China was a staunch opponent of
terrorism, and China's attitude toward Kyrgyzstan's decision
to close Manas was one of "respect and understanding."

¶3. (C) Composing himself, Zhang inquired if maybe the Kyrgyz
had meant the trade turnover between the two countries, which
he claimed was about $3 billion a year. When disabused of
that notion, Zhang went on at length to explain that China
could not afford a $3 billion loan and aid package. "It
would take $3 from every Chinese person" to pay for it. "If
our people found out, there'd be a revolution," he said. "We
have 200 million people unemployed" because of the downturn
in exports, he said, and millions of disabled and others who
need help from the government.

A SLAP IN THE FACE

¶4. (C) When the Ambassador asked whether he would
categorically deny what the Kyrgyz officials had told her
about a deal with China, Zhang snapped that "releasing 17
from Guantanamo is an unfriendly act toward us." He then
went on at length about what a "slap in the face" it was to
China that the Uighur detainees were not going to be returned
to their homeland but instead shipped to Germany, where
reportedly they had already been granted refugee status.
While not stating a tit-for-tat reaction on Manas, he did
imply that the Guantanamo situation had made China look for
ways to hit back at the U.S. When the Ambassador inquired if
maybe the Chinese were favorably disposed toward closing
Manas because of their SCO membership, Zhang acknowledged
that the SCO had pronounced for closing Manas, but claimed
that "that was years ago and nothing has happened since." He
denied that the SCO was pressuring the Kyrgyz to close Manas.


RUSSIA: A GIFT FROM GOD FOR THE KYRGYZ

¶5. (C) The Ambassador then asked what Zhang thought about the
$2 billion plus Russian deal with Kyrgyzstan. After some
hemming and hawing, Zhang said it was "probably true" that

BISHKEK 00000135 002.2 OF 002


the Russian assistance was tied to closing Manas. Asked if
he had any concerns about the Kyrgyz Republic falling ever
deeper into the Russian sphere of influence and whether China
had any interest in countering this, he answered that
Kyrgyzstan was already in that sphere, and China had no
interest in balancing that influence. "Kyrgyzstan is
Russia's neighbor," he intoned (somewhat expansively, since
Kyrgyzstan does not share a border with the Russian
Federation -- though it does share a border with China).
"And when the Kyrgyz ask me about this, I always tell them
that a neighbor is a gift from God." As for China's
interests in the Kyrgyz Republic, he stated flatly: "We have
only commercial interests here. We want to increase
investment and trade. We have no interest in politics." He
claimed that some Kyrgyz had argued for China to open a base
in Kyrgyzstan to counterbalance Russian and American
influence in the country, but China has no interest in a
base. "We want no military or political advantage.
Therefore, we wouldn't pay $3 billion for Manas," he argued.

PERSONAL ADVICE: PAY THEM $150 MILLION

¶6. (C) Zhang asked the Ambassador whether the U.S. would
negotiate to keep the Base open. The Ambassador answered
that the U.S. side was evaluating its options. Zhang then
offered his "personal advice," "This is all about money," he
said. He understood from the Kyrgyz that they needed $150
million. The Ambassador explained that the U.S. does provide
$150 million in assistance to Kyrgyzstan each year, including
numerous assistance programs. Zhang suggested that the U.S.
should scrap its assistance programs. "Just give them $150
million in cash" per year, and "you will have the Base
forever." Very uncharacteristically, the silent young aide
then jumped in: "Or maybe you should give them $5 billion and
buy both us and the Russians out." The aide then withered
under the Ambassador's horrified stare.

¶7. (C) Commenting on the recent diplomatic corps lunch (Ref
B), Zhang noted that Russian Ambassador Vlasov had been in an
expansive mood and dominated portions of the meeting. "I
think that's when he found out that they'd reached a deal"
with Bakiyev to close the Base, he opined. Zhang, who is
doyen of the diplomatic corps, said he would be leaving
Bishkek soon, but did not yet know his next assignment. "In
our service," he said, "we don't know our postings until the
last minute."

Comment
-------

¶8. (C) Zhang was clearly flustered when confronted with the
claims of Kyrgyz officials that they were negotiating a
financial deal with China in return for closing the Base.
While he ridiculed the notion of such a deal, he did not deny
it outright. Perhaps because of his being discomposed, he
returned several times to the topic of a possible revolution
in China if the economic picture does not improve and work is
not found for the millions of unemployed there. In our
experience, talk of revolution at home is taboo for Chinese
diplomats. While candid at times, the meeting ended on a
very cordial note.
GFOELLER

Spreading WikiLeaks: Leak Related to the U.S. Embassy in Kyrgyzstan (Part 1)

Thanks to a non-profit organisation WikiLeaks, several documents related to the U.S. Embassy in Kyrgyzstan entered the public domain. WikiLeaks documents have not been accessible for several days already. (Guess why?) That's why I have decided to publish the leaks related to Kyrgyzstan in my blog, and I encourage bloggers to do the same with the other documents. Now that the confedential information leaked, let's make it more difficult for the governments to stop us from satisfying our healthy curiosity.

----
Browse by classification
CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL//NOFORN SECRET SECRET//NOFORN UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Community resources
Follow us on Twitter Check our Reddit Twitter this Digg this page
Viewing cable 08BISHKEK1095, CANDID DISCUSSION WITH PRINCE ANDREW ON THE KYRGYZ
If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs

Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:

* The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
* The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
* The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.

To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #08BISHKEK1095.
Help us extend and defend this work
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
08BISHKEK1095 2008-10-29 12:12 2010-11-29 23:11 CONFIDENTIAL Embassy Bishkek

VZCZCXRO8787
RR RUEHBI RUEHCI RUEHLH RUEHPW
DE RUEHEK #1095/01 3031207
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 291207Z OCT 08 ZDS
FM AMEMBASSY BISHKEK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 1474
INFO RUCNCLS/ALL SOUTH AND CENTRAL ASIA COLLECTIVE
RUCNCIS/CIS COLLECTIVE
RUEHBJ/AMEMBASSY BEIJING 2724
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 0265
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHDC
RUEKJCS/OSD WASHDC
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC
RUEKJCS/JOINT STAFF WASHDC
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 1087
RUEHVEN/USMISSION USOSCE 3111
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 2497
RUEHNO/USMISSION USNATO BRUSSELS BE
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS
RUEHLMC/MILLENNIUM CHALLENGE CORP
RUMICEA/USCENTCOM INTEL CEN MACDILL AFB FL
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 165

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 04 BISHKEK 001095
C O R R E C T E D C O P Y (ADDRESSEE)
SIPDIS
DEPT FOR SCA/CEN (GORKOWSKI)
EO 12958 DECL: 10/29/2018
TAGS PREL, ECON, KG
SUBJECT: CANDID DISCUSSION WITH PRINCE ANDREW ON THE KYRGYZ
ECONOMY AND THE “GREAT GAME”
REF: BISHKEK 1059
BISHKEK 00001095 001.4 OF 004
Classified By: Amb. Tatiana Gfoeller, Reason 1.4 (b) and (d).
¶1. (C) SUMMARY: On October 28, the Ambassador participated in a two-hour brunch to brief HRH the Duke of York ahead of his meetings with the Kyrgyz Prime Minister and other high-level officials. She was the only non-subject of the United Kingdom or the Commonwealth invited to participate by the British Ambassador to the Kyrgyz Republic. Other participants included major British investors in Kyrgyzstan and the Canadian operator of XXXXXXXX. The discussion covered the investment climate for Western firms in the Kyrgyz Republic, the problem of corruption, the revival of the “Great Game,” Russian and Chinese influence in the country, and the Prince’s personal views on promoting British economic interests. Astonishingly candid, the discussion at times verged on the rude (from the British side). END SUMMARY.
¶2. (C) British Ambassador to the Kyrgyz Republic Paul Brummell invited the Ambassador to participate in briefing His Royal Highness Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, ahead of his October 28 meetings with Kyrgyz Prime Minister Igor Chudinov and other high-level officials. The Prince was in Kyrgyzstan to promote British economic interests. Originally scheduled to last an hour over brunch, the briefing ended up lasting two hours, thanks to the super-engaged Prince’s pointed questions. The Ambassador was the only participant who was not a British subject or linked to the Commonwealth. The absence of her French and German colleagues was notable; they were apparently not invited despite being fellow members of the European Union. Others included major British investors in Kyrgyzstan and the Canadian operator of the Kumtor mine.
“YOU HAVE TO TAKE THE ROUGH WITH THE SMOOTH”
--------------------------------------------
¶3. (C) The discussion was kicked off by the president of the Canadian-run Kumtor mine, who described at length his company’s travails of trying to negotiate a revised mining concession that provides a greater stake in Kumtor’s parent company to the Kyrgyz government in exchange for a simplified tax regime and an expanded concession. He was followed by the representative of the British owner of Kyrgyzneftigas, who explained his company’s role in Kyrgyz oil exploration and production, as well as doing his share of complaining of being harassed and hounded by Kyrgyz tax authorities. One example he gave was that a Kyrgyz shareholder was now suing the company, saying that his “human rights” were being violated by the terms of his shareholders’ agreement.
¶4. (C) The Prince reacted with unmitigated patriotic fervor. To his credit, he diligently tried to understand the Kyrgyz point view. However, when participants explained that some Kyrgyz feel that they were “unfairly” led in the 1990s to sign unfavorable contracts with Westerners, he evinced no sympathy. “A contract is a contract,” he insisted. “You have to take the rough with the smooth.”
“ALL OF THIS SOUNDS EXACTLY LIKE FRANCE”
----------------------------------------
¶5. (C) After having half-heartedly danced around the topic for a bit, only mentioning “personal interests” in pointed fashion, the business representatives then plunged into describing what they see as the appallingly high state of corruption in the Kyrgyz economy. While claiming that all of them never participated in it and never gave out bribes, one representative of a middle-sized company stated that “It is sometimes an awful temptation.” In an astonishing display of candor in a public hotel where the brunch was taking place, all of the businessmen then chorused that nothing gets done in Kyrgyzstan if President Bakiyev’s son Maxim does not get “his cut.” Prince Andrew took up the topic with gusto, saying that he keeps hearing Maxim’s name “over and over again” whenever he discusses doing business in this country. Emboldened, one businessman said that doing business here is “like doing business in the Yukon” in the nineteenth century, i.e. only those willing to participate in local corrupt practices are able to make any money. His colleagues all heartily agreed, with one pointing out that “nothing ever changes here. Before all you heard was Akayev’s son’s name. Now it’s Bakiyev’s son’s name.” At this point the Duke of York laughed uproariously, saying that: “All of this sounds exactly like France.”
¶6. (C) The Prince then turned to the Ambassador for an American take on the situation. The Ambassador described American business interests in the country, which range from large investments such as the Hyatt hotel and the Katel telecommunications company to smaller investments in a range of sectors. She stated that part of the problem with business conditions in Kyrgyzstan was the rapid turnover in government positions. Some reacted to their short tenures in a corrupt manner, wanting to “steal while they can” until they were turned out of office. While noting the need for greater transparency in doing business, she recounted that she had hosted the American Chamber of Commerce’s Members Day last week (attended by the Foreign Minister and the Deputy Minister of Trade and Commerce) which had been widely attended and a resounding success (see reftel). She then described the beneficial impact on the Kyrgyz economy of the Coalition Air Base at Manas Airport.
“YOU HAVE TO CURE YOURSELF OF ANOREXIA”
---------------------------------------
¶7. (C) With a mock groan, the Duke of York then exclaimed: “My God, what am I supposed to tell these people?!” More seriously, he invited his guests to suggest ways Kyrgyzstan’s economic prospects and attractiveness could be improved. Everyone agreed that in his talks with the Prime Minister and others, he should emphasize the rule of law, and long-term stability.
¶8. (C) Agreeing with the Ambassador’s point about rapid government turnover, they urged him to impress upon his hosts the importance of predictability and the sanctity of contracts in order to attract more Western investment. At the same time, they pointed out that none of this was necessary to attract Russian, Kazakh, or Chinese investments. It appeared to them that the Kyrgyz were satisfied with their level and on the verge of “not bothering” with making the necessary improvements to attract Western investments. Returning to what is obviously a favorite theme, Prince Andrew cracked: “They won’t need to make any changes to attract the French either!” Again turning thoughtful, the Prince mused that outsiders could do little to change the culture of corruption here. “They themselves have to have a change of heart. Just like you have to cure yourself of anorexia. No one else can do it for you.”
PLAYING THE GREAT GAME (BY EXTENSION THE AMERICANS TOO)
--------------------------------------------- ----------
¶9. (C) Addressing the Ambassador directly, Prince Andrew then turned to regional politics. He stated baldly that “the United Kingdom, Western Europe (and by extension you Americans too”) were now back in the thick of playing the Great Game. More animated than ever, he stated cockily: “And this time we aim to win!” Without contradicting him, the Ambassador gently reminded him that the United States does not see its presence in the region as a continuation of the Great Game. We support Kyrgyzstan’s independence and sovereignty but also welcome good relations between it and all of its neighbors, including Russia.
¶10. (C) The Prince pounced at the sound of that name. He told the Ambassador that he was a frequent visitor to Central Asia and the Caucasus and had noticed a marked increase in Russian pressure and concomitant anxiety among the locals post-August events in Georgia. He stated the following story related to him recently by Azerbaijan’s President Aliyev. Aliyev had received a letter from President Medvedev telling him that if Azerbaijan supported the designation of the Bolshevik artificial famine in Ukraine as “genocide” at the United Nations, “then you can forget about seeing Nagorno-Karabakh ever again.” Prince Andrew added that every single other regional President had told him of receiving similar “directive” letters from Medvedev except for Bakiyev. He asked the Ambassador if Bakiyev had received something similar as well. The Ambassador answered that she was not aware of any such letter.
¶11. (C) The Duke then stated that he was very worried about Russia’s resurgence in the region. As an example, he cited the recent Central Asian energy and water-sharing deal (septel), which he claimed to know had been “engineered by Russia, who finally pounded her fist on the table and everyone fell into line.” (NOTE: Interestingly, the Turkish Ambassador to the Kyrgyz Republic recently described her analysis of the deal to the Ambassador in strikingly similar language. END NOTE.)
¶12. (C) Showing that he is an equal-opportunity Great Game player, HRH then turned to the topic of China. He recounted that when he had recently asked the President of Tajikistan what he thought of growing Chinese influence in Central Asia, the President had responded “with language I won’t use in front of ladies.” His interlocutors told the Prince that while Russians are generally viewed sympathetically throughout the region, the Chinese are not. He nodded, terming Chinese economic and possibly other expansion in the region “probably inevitable, but a menace.”
RUDE LANGUAGE A LA BRITISH
--------------------------
¶13. (C) The brunch had already lasted almost twice its allotted time, but the Prince looked like he was just getting started. Having exhausted the topic of Kyrgyzstan, he turned to the general issue of promoting British economic interests abroad. He railed at British anti-corruption investigators, who had had the “idiocy” of almost scuttling the Al-Yamama deal with Saudi Arabia. (NOTE: The Duke was referencing an investigation, subsequently closed, into alleged kickbacks a senior Saudi royal had received in exchange for the multi-year, lucrative BAE Systems contract to provide equipment and training to Saudi security forces. END NOTE.) His mother’s subjects seated around the table roared their approval. He then went on to “these (expletive) journalists, especially from the National Guardian, who poke their noses everywhere” and (presumably) make it harder for British businessmen to do business. The crowd practically clapped. He then capped this off with a zinger: castigating “our stupid (sic) British and American governments which plan at best for ten years whereas people in this part of the world plan for centuries.” There were calls of “hear, hear” in the private brunch hall. Unfortunately for the assembled British subjects, their cherished Prince was now late to the Prime Minister’s. He regretfully tore himself away from them and they from him. On the way out, one of them confided to the Ambassador: “What a wonderful representative for the British people! We could not be prouder of our royal family!”
COMMENT
-------
¶14. (C) COMMENT: Prince Andrew reached out to the Ambassador with cordiality and respect, evidently valuing her insights. However, he reacted with almost neuralgic patriotism whenever any comparison between the United States and United Kingdom came up. For example, one British businessman noted that despite the “overwhelming might of the American economy compared to ours” the amount of American and British investment in Kyrgyzstan was similar. Snapped the Duke: “No surprise there. The Americans don’t understand geography. Never have. In the U.K., we have the best geography teachers in the world!” END COMMENT.
GFOELLER

The Prison of My Perspective

I purchased "The Prison of Perspective" at the 21st Annual GNEL / ASNEL Conference "Contested Communities: Communication, Narration, Imagination" (13-16 May 2010, Bayreuth, Germany). Rudolph Bader, the author of the novel, gladly signed the book at the event. I was happy to have a brief conversation with Mr. Bader, afterwards. (And very pleased that my name was spelled correctly).

At first sight, it appeared to me that his looks had much in common with Anton Pavlovich Chekhov, one of my favourite Russian short-story writers. But, of course, they are not related. Or, maybe, I should come up with another perspective. In this case, I dare to rephrase Archimedes of Syracuse: "Give me a perspective, and I shall prove Chekhov and Bader are related." "The Prison of Perspective" is a novel which calls for a deep reflection. I feel the same way when I read Anton Chekhov...

According to Rudolphbader.com, the author was born in Zurich, Switzerland. He has lived and worked in many countries, mainly as an academic in English Studies and as a literary critic. He holds several academic degrees, and he has published seven books and dozens of scholarly articles under his German name. Today, he lives in East Sussex (England) and in Switzerland. The Prison of Perspective is his first novel. His second novel, White Lies, is forthcoming.

I made up my mind to buy Mr Bader's book right after he mentioned the Russian Sputnik during the brief reading session.

This is one of the many other vivid examples of the potential fallacies of perspective. Peter is being indoctrinated by the school teacher, who makes her best effort to explain what "West" is and what it is not by rearranging the prejudices of her time. I imagined Soviet kids indoctrinated by Soviet teachers... What was "West" for them? I do not remember.

According to the author's own synopsis, the novel unfolds around the three major narrative perspectives.

The first narrative perspective

In 2007, Ivan MacGregor, a London-based businessman in his late forties, drives out of London thinking of episodes in his past. He has a car accident which involves a young woman, Emma Richardson. Although the accident is not his fault and although he has no responsibility towards her, he feels strangely connected with her. He tries to find out as much as possible about her life, and he becomes her benefactor. Formerly a fast-living playboy-type, the accident causes him to change his life and become more responsible.

The second narrative perspective

In the 1950s, Peter Hoffmann, a shy but alert young boy grows up in a mediocre small-town society. Through the years he makes his first experiences in sexuality, in human relationships and in the limitations of life. He likes to take mental photographs of memorable moments in his life. He grows up, suffers various disappointments and re-assesses his relationship with his brother Fred, who dies in an air crash in 1978.

The third narrative perspective

In the 1960s, Cathy, an eager girl searching for truths, grows up in a narrow-minded village community. Her old-fashioned aunt, her best friend Becky and her brother Stephen pull her young mind in different directions. She suffers several instances of male aggression, and when she grows up she has various affairs, most importantly with an older man from Germany. She gradually turns into a bitchy person. Her world is shocked when her brother dies in that air crash in 1978. Then she spends two years in Australia on a scholarship, during which time she gets pregnant after a one-night stand and gives birth to Emma. After her return she meets Don Richardson and falls in love. They marry, and he adopts little Emma. Their marriage looks happy from the outside, but in reality she lives at Don’s emotional expense. Only her friend Becky understands the real situation. (...)

Every character mentioned turns out to be a prisoner of the assumptions and dogmas of his or her lifetime, which they question either instrumentally or intuitively. But Cathy's case is extraordinary. She is a high IQ/low EQ type of a woman. Her rebelism is admirable. Yet her snobbism is emotionally devastating to the people who love her. Cathy is shot during a bank robbery in Finchley Road, and she dies on the floor of the bank hall. Her death draws some characters together, and some apart.

After Cathy's death, most of the attention of the reader is shifted to the tender relationship between Don and his stepdaughter, and their mutual friend Peter. The relationships between Ivan and Emma, actually, the biological father and daughter, are very complex. Unaware of the nature of their blood relationships, they establish a positive friendship. Yet there is a kind of sexual tension in the story, which is, finally, resolved by Ivan himself:

"If Emma and Peter are good freinds he must accept it. She is a grown up woman who knows what she is doing. (...) Ivan admits to himself that the vision of Peter as her lover has probably emerged from his own secret wishes, because he has not been intimate with a woman for such a long time. But even without the possible existence of Samantha he knows that he never ever looked at Emma as a potential lover. He still cannot explain his interest in her, but he knows it is there."

The end of the novel is open. Emma, Peter and Ivan meet at the graveyard. Ivan bends downs and places the bouquet on Cathy's grave.

"I wonder what secrets she took to her grave with her," Emma whispers. "There is so much that the older generation knows but never tells. What will my life teach me, I wonder?"
The path cranches, a dog barks in the distance."

Emma is in the process of being patterned to fit the needs of a different generation, but, unlike her mother, she is open to other views of things (like those of her Muslim colleague Aysha from the fashion magazine or her mature friend Uncle Peter, the child of the ascetic 50ies). Will Emma's understanding of reality be ever complete? This question leaves the reader shifting between two different "realities": that of Emma and the reader respectively.

Top1 Book on My List: Eczema-Free For Life by Adnan Nasir, M.D., and Priscilla Burgess

I knew that moving to a sunny seaside resort for good was the Top1 solution to take control over my eczema. Still, I took my time and read Eczema-Free For Life very carefully. Basically, the purpose of this blog post is to praise the book.

I have been struggling with eczema since childhood, and none of my doctors helped me to get better informed about my health condition. I do not blame them for that. They tried to help me with their pieces of advice. But reading this book was better than 100 visits to the dermatologists, who never had time to explain what is wrong-or different-about my skin.

1. Thanks to this book I understood the differences between an allergy and eczema. These should not be confused.

2. The book combats the old common myth according to which eczema is a result of the psychological problems. The faulty genes are responsible for my skin disorder and not "ill weak soul" or something like that. But this chronic skin disorder might effect psychological health of the patient.

3. The book explained what itching is and how to better deal with this very uncomfortable symptom.

4. Most importantly, the book describes the treatments of eczema in terms of what they are and what contemporary (American) scientists know about their efficacy. The authors accept the fact that some treatments work well but there is no reliable scientific research explaining why these treatments work.

5. The book, basically, disillusions, but for the patient's good: there is no sense in rushing for fast miracle cures, none exists yet. Taking control over this disorder takes a big effort, and there is no guarantee it will be cured.

The illustrations like this one are especially helpful in clarifying complex itch-scratch-rash cycle.


If you are diagnised with eczema, this book is a must. You should make sure your parents or peers understand your condition, so ask them to read this book as well. The book also helped me to understand how my loved ones, especially, my parents feel when I have severe inflamation. They have tough times seing me suffering. This book helped me to realize how egoistic and negative I was thinking my loved ones did not make an effort to understand how I feel and still try to "act normal".

This book had a very positive anaesthetic effect on me. I highly recommend it.

---
Update November 1, 2010: I have published my brief review of this book on Amazon.com. It is slightly different. If you are interested, take a look.

Besides, I had a glimpse of The Eczema Community on Amazon: very useful if you want to purchase eczema treatment products in this on-line shop.

Teaching the Next Course: The Personal Historical Narratives about the Emergence and Rise of the American Politicosphere

For those interested, here is the brief description of my next course:
The history of blogosphere is very short, yet very complex. This course is an overview of the personal historical narratives about the emergence and rise of what is defined today as an American political blogosphere, the U.S. political Web or the U.S. politicosphere. So, what is a “blog”? Within blogosphere, it is asserted to be “common knowledge” that the term “weblog” was coined in December 17, 1997 by Jorn Barger of Robot Wisdom. In 1998, American webloggers became a self-conscious community (Rosenberg, 2009). In January 1999, Cameron Barrett of CamWorld published an essay called “Anatomy of a Weblog,” which adopted the term “weblog” and described the main technical features of the format. In 1999, Peter Merholz of Peterme announced about his decision to pronounce “weblog” as “wee’-blog”, “Or ‘blog’ for short.” Obviously, there is no dominant definition of what “blog” stands for. It has always been a matter of definition and a question of acceptance of this definition by bloggers-practitioners, who make up a community of communities. In September 1999, Brad L. Graham of The BradLands jokingly named this enormous collection of the interconnected communities as “blogosphere”. But what stands for “politicosphere”? And how different is it from “blogosphere”? And does it make any sense to distinguisg between the both? Despite the popularity of the term in the American on-line and off-line political news, the term has not been yet defined. This course invites you to read the personal historical narratives of the bloggers-educators and journalists (Blood, Barrett, Mead, Perlmutter, Davis, Rosenberg, Boehlert, etc.) and bloggers-politicians and political activists (Dean, Obama, Plouffe, Moulitsas, etc.) and share your thoughts, observations and research findings related to the topic of this course in a short blog-project.

Texts

1. Blood, Rebecca (2002). The weblog handbook: Practical advice on creating and maintaining your blog. Perseus Publishing: Cambridge, MA.
2. Blood, Rebecca (2002). Weblogs: A History and Perspective, in Rebecca’s Pocket, weblog. Also in John Rodzvilla (ed) (2002): We’ve got blog; How weblogs are changing our culture, Cambridge Massachusetts: Perseus PublishingBoehlert, Eric (2009) “Bloggers on the Bus/How the Internet Changed Politics and the Press”.
3. Davis, Richard (2009). Typing Politics: The Role of Blogs in American Politics, Oxford University Press.
4. Perlmutter, David (2008). Blog Wars: The New Political Battleground, Oxford UP.
5. Plouffe, David (2009). The Audacity to Win: The Inside Story and Lessons of Barack Obama's Historic Victory, Viking Adult.
6. Rosenberg, Scott (2009) Say Everything: How Blogging Began, What It's Becoming, and Why It Matters. New York: Crown Publishers.
7. Trippi, Joe (2004). The Revolution Will Not Be Televised: Democracy, the Internet, and the Overthrow of Everything, Regan Books.


Tentative Schedule

WEEK 1: First day of class, introduction, syllabus.


The Emergence

WEEK 2: The Emergence and Rise of the American Politicosphere I (PPT)
WEEK 3: The Emergence and Rise of the American Politicosphere II (PPT)
WEEK 4: Rebecca Blood (2002) “The Weblog Handbook/Practical Advice on Creating and Maintaining Your Blog”
WEEK 5: Ed. Rebecca Blood (2002) “We’ve Got Blog/How Weblogs Are Changing Our Culture”
WEEK 6: Ed. Rebecca Blood (2002) “We’ve Got Blog”
WEEK 7: Rebecca Blood (2002) “The Weblog Handbook” and Ed. Rebecca Blood (2002) “We’ve Got Blog”

The Rise

WEEK 8: Joe Trippi (2004) “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised”
WEEK 9: David Perlmutter (2008) “Blog Wars”
WEEK 10: Scott Rosenberg (2009) “Say Everything/How Blogging Began, What It’s Becoming, and Why It Matters”
WEEK 11: Richard Davis (2009) “Typing Politics/The Role of Blogs in American Politics”
WEEK 12: Eric Boehlert (2009) “Bloggers on the Bus/How the Internet Changed Politics and the Press”

The Fall (?)

WEEK 13: David Plouffe (2009) “The Audacity to Win: The Inside Story and Lessons of Barack Obama's Historic Victory”
WEEK 14: Blogging declining in popularity: selection of articles and reports from The Pew Research and The Economist about the trend.
WEEK 15: PRESENTATIONS of the blog projects
WEEK 16: Exam, Kaffee und Kuchen