Update on my activities for the week of September 27-October 1

Update on my activities for the week of September 27-October 1

After being home from Russia for less than two days, I was on a plane to New Hampshire to conduct a one-day NIF training on September 28 for librarians at the New England Library Association. Despite our poorly scheduled time (the last day of an exhausting conference) we attracted nineteen librarians who learned th basic theory of deliberation, participated in a forum on Americans’ Role in the World and learned moderating and convening techniques that will enable them to connect with the New England Center for Civic Literacy for additional moderator resources and training. This workshop was made possible by Cheryl Bryan, Assistant Regional Administrator for Southeastern Mass Regional Library System, who had participated in a similar one-day conference workshop I conducted at the American Library Association Conference in San Diego. The organizers were pleased despite the low turnout because every New England state was represented by an enthusiastic future advocate for NIF in the library.

On September 30, I was back in Texas as a guest on the Austin Interfaith Dialogue television program on our local cable television station – to be aired on October 10 at 8:00 a.m. I was joined by Pastor Landon Shultz from the Bluebonnet Hills Christian Church and an active member of Texas Forums. Rich Thompson conducted the interview.

On Friday October 1, I was a guest speaker for a class at a small private school including middle school and high school students being taught by a fellow Texas Forums member, Robyn Emerson. Robyn is using the NIF in the classroom curriculum to introduce these students to deliberation over the next school year. When given the option to limit this course to high school students only, Robyn courageously opted to include the entire school – less than thirty students representing the wide age range from middle to high school. This school, committed to creating global citizens, is a perfect testing ground for the role of deliberation in formulating international policy and Americans’ Role in the World is the first issue these students are tackling.

Before the class, I sat in on the school’s weekly town hall meeting led by students on a rotating basis. This particular forum was led by a middle school-aged student and focused on how students can communicate effectively with each other even when they disagree or when their fellow students engage in irritating behavior. At the end of the town hall meeting he laid out his objectives for convening the forum and was affirmed that his objective to create new understanding was achieved. It was a perfect lead-in to our discussion about the difference between debate (including a reflection on the previous evening’s presidential debate) and deliberation. Of course, my recent trip to Russia was core to the lesson of the day. As any classroom teacher can affirm, I came away with more lessons that I dispensed. Here’s what I learned:

I often use family decisions as a metaphor for understanding the role of deliberation in decision-making. When I asked the students what the family conversation would look like if mom or dad received a high paying job offer that would necessitate a move to Tulsa (with apologies to my Oklahoma colleagues!) I learned that the students would not have a voice. These bright students who are being sent to an expensive private school to learn how to think and act as global citizens would be shut out of an important decision that would have a huge impact on them. Furthermore, they stated with confidence that money would be the primary factor in their parents’ decision – not quality of life, not educational choices, not proximity to friends and family or any of the other values I know were critical to all of the moving decisions my family made. This example provided me with the opportunity to point out how it feels to be left out of important decisions and the relevance of public forums. I was also able to draw out the values that would drive their parent’s decision – more money, stability, the choices that money could provide, etc.. When one young man commented that he would love to move to Tulsa because that was an ideal place to pursue his dream to be a race car driver, we were able to discuss how different values could lead to the same decision and how similar values could lead to a different decision. It may seem like a stretch to some, but anyone who works with youth you take advantage of these teaching moments as they come!

Robyn asked me to talk about the recent Kettering Foundation trip to Russia. I opened the conversation by asking the students if anyone had ever asked them what they think about our relationship with Russia post Cold War (fortunately, they had read about the Cold War even though they had no actual memory of it!). Naturally, their response was a resounding “no”. I briefly recounted the circumstances of New Dartmouth and then challenged them that their involvement as future global citizens in these conversations was vital to defining and strengthening this relationship. I hope to hold a U.S. Russia relations forum at a future class.

As we solicited their summary of the four approaches in Americans’ Role in the World in preparation for their upcoming forum, one young man (young enough to have a lego-type play toy on the desk in front of him) stated, “Bush sucks” and described approach 1 as “the world domination approach where we kill anyone who disagrees with us.” After a brief prayer of thanks that I won’t be the moderator for this forum (good luck to Robyn and Carrie Stewart), I quickly challenged him and the group to dig deeper and to spend the week listening to positions they found offensive for a clearer understanding of the rationale behind those positions.

At the conclusion of the class, one young woman admitted that she was unsure of how to vote and confided that her paralysis was due to the burden she felt to make the right decision. She is taking her vote seriously because she feels accountable for the outcome of her vote – she feels responsible for the performance of the person she elects! I hope she does vote. I think we could use more voters who are that thoughtful.

One young man sought me out at the end of class and gushed, “I really like you, I think you are great. Thanks for coming to our class.” If I were thirty years younger and this school had a football team, I’m sure I’d be wearing his letter jacket by now! Since that is not the case, I interpret his comments to mean that he took my charge to heart and recognizes the important role of young people in crafting the future of this country. I don’t really need a thirteen year old boyfriend or a letter jacket. I’m content with the possibility that he might be my congressman during my old age.

On Friday afternoon, I came home and collapsed!

The next two weeks will be a busy for Texas Forums.

On Monday, October 4, Marsha will be presenting Texas Forums at the monthly Delta Kappa Gamma meeting.

On Tuesday, October 5, I will be speaking to the Lake Travis Democrats preceding the Vice-Presidential debate watch.

October 6-8, I’ll be in Illinois for the on-campus session of the change management course I teach at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. I’ll also be doing a presentation on the New Dartmouth Project.

Don’t forget that we have a moderator training session on October 15-16 at the Round Rock Public Library. We still have openings! If you would like to volunteer to help out, please let me know. We could use some help with registration and setting up for lunch. You are also welcome to sit in as a refresher, if you like, but be warned that you will be put to work!

Report from Russia

Report from the New Dartmouth Conference
Moscow, Russia
September 20-24, 2004
Filed by: Taylor L. Willingham

We just completed the second New Dartmouth Conference - our first New Dartmouth meeting in Russia. The U.S. delegation included:
· Dr, David Mathews (President of the Kettering Foundation)
· Brian Cobb (Treasurer and U.S. Russia Project Director, Kettering Foundation)
· Hal Saunders (Director International Institute for Sustained Dialogue and former Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs)
· Phil Stewart (Former Executive Director of the Dartmouth Conference)
· Former U.S. Ambassador to Russia Jim Collins
· Senator Les Ihara, Jr. (HI)
· Former Senator Scott Clemons (FL)
· Jim Thomas (former KF board member)
· Bill Walker (Alabama businessman)
· Melinda Gilmore (Editor, Kettering Foundation)

Our Russian colleagues included:
· Dr. Ektarina Genieva (Director of the All Russia Library for Foreign Literature)
· Svetlana Gorokhova (All Russia Library for Foreign Literature and former Kettering Fellow)
· Igor Nagdasev (Founder of the Russian Center for Civic Education, Former Kettering Fellow)
· Irina Mirnaya (Project Manager, Russian Center for Civic Education)
· Denis Makarov (Professor of Political Science, Foundation for Development of Civic Culture, former Kettering Fellow)
· Evgeny Bunimovich (Member of Moscow City Duma, Chair of the Moscow Duma Committee on Education.)
· Sergey Markov (Director, Institute of Political Research)
· Dr. Leontij Zbailov (Dean, Dept, of Political Science and Sociology at the Moscow State Pedagogical University.)
· Anton Lopukhin, Executive Director of the Association of Young Leaders

Throughout the meetings, beginning with the opening remarks, it was clear that a number of recent events were foremost in the minds of the participants. Perhaps the largest issue overshadowing the meetings was the recent terrorist attack on the school at Breslan. In his opening remarks, Moscow City Duma Deputy Evgeny Bunimovich who is the Chair of the Moscow Committee on Education and Honorary teacher of Russia spoke passionately of the damage that this event has done by striking at one of its most public institutions, during one of the country’s most honored community building traditions (first day of school), and striking at the country’s most vulnerable members – its future citizens. He continued with a heartbreaking description of the children of Chechnya who grow up with guns instead of books and are the lost generation. His remarks were a sober and humbling reminder of the important work before us.

The morning continued with a report (including video footage) from both the U.S. and the Russians on the forums held over the past several months. Each country convened forums using the initial frameworks from the first phase of our work together, but these follow-up forums included video excerpts from the forums being held in the other country. In other words, Americans deliberated our relationship with Russia AFTER they saw a video of Russians deliberating about their hopes and concerns for a future relationship with the U.S. while Russians deliberated after viewing excerpts from a U.S. forum. The findings of these forums will be documented in a forthcoming book chapter co-authored by Denis Makarov and Phil Stewart.

The overwhelming common theme from both sides was that citizens make a clear distinction between the “human” aspect of the relationship and the political aspects – drawing a line between governments and people. Russians initially saw the relationship as the competence of the government, but shifted to an emphasis on citizen to citizen interactions after deliberating. U.S. citizens were equally as emphatic about the need for citizens to interact with each other through exchange programs.

There is still fear and distrust between the two countries, but for very different reasons. As Hal Saunders noted in his synopsis, Americans fear anything that clashes with what they believe. Thus, any move Russia makes away from its current democratic path, will likely pose a serious concern to Americans. In contrast, Russia’s concern about the U.S. is a response to the aggressive stance of the U.S. in the world. They noted that America’s actions in particular situations – Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq - contradicts its proclaimed aims: fighting terrorism and supporting democracy.

One final theme is related to each country’s identity. Many Russians long for a return to the day when they were superpower, but are torn as to how to achieve this objective. Furthermore, they are concerned about the influx of western culture (particularly the U.S. pop media).


Throughout the remainder of the New Dartmouth conference, we were treated to a number of speeches and a meeting with members of the Duma. We attended a reception and concert at the U.S. Embassy featuring Andrey Makarevich and the Creole Tango band. Makarevich has been described as the Russian Paul McCartney, but based on his eclectic rhythms, exotic arrangements, and multi-ethnic sounds, he defies comparison with any single musician. We were treated to a gamut of musical styles ranging from swing, foxtrot, Dixieland, ballads, Latino, waltz, and even a Russian rendition of a popular 50’s tune that we all knew, but none of us could name! Rather than purchasing yet another blue and white porcelain serving dish, a matrushka doll, or a carved wooden box, I opted for half a dozen CDs (including three Makarevich’s) and three English Language subtitled Russian videos.

Also at the concert at the embassy were three U.S. Congressmen (including Representative Michael Burgess, 26th district, TX) who were there to extend U.S. sympathies to our Russian colleagues over the Breslan tragedy. I briefly met with Representative Burgess about Texas Forums and the New Dartmouth and will follow up with his staff at a later date.

The Deputy Director of the Moscow Duma hosted us for a tour of the old and the new Duma offices. We had a meeting with the Director of the Duma who also hosted us for lunch. These meetings were covered by the local press and according to Svetlana, our briefing in Moscow Duma was broadcasted on the Stoliza (Capital) TV channel and the notes have been transcribed and are being translated into English. In addition to this television coverage, New Dartmouth was also a subject of two radio interviews – one with Dr. Mathews and Denis Makarov, and another interview that also included Svetlana and Senator Les Ihara,Jr. We also met with two other members of the Moscow Duma – Vera Stepananko who is in charge of environmental issues and Evgeny Bunimovich, a member of the New Dartmouth Russian delegation.

Of course, foremost in our minds during these meetings was the recent announcement by President Putin that he would eliminate district elections that now fill half of the 450 seats in the Duma and instead would appoint these positions based on Moscow-based party lists. Members of our delegation were passing around the Sunday NY Times article (September 19, 2004 “Week in Review” section) on the plane going to Russia and throughout our visit, we received daily updates on the political responses in the Moscow Times. As reported in the Moscow Times, the response in Russia has been mixed. Those in favor cite this move as a demonstration of political will while the staunchest critics see this as a return to “czarist times” (The Moscow Times). According to one liberal member of Parliament, governors who question these policies understand that they will be subject to criminal investigation and states that fear keeps more from challenging Kremlin policies. In interviews with two of the U.S. Congressmen (including Michael Burgess) said in interviews that Putin’s plans deserve criticism and that Putin’s statements after Brelsan “could lead to a situation when our relations will become as bad as they were before.”

The NY Times reported that Putin’s move is probably just a formalization of the Kremlin’s already immense sway over regional leaders. On the day that we departed, the Moscow Times (September 24-26 Weekend www.themoscowtimes.com) reported that ten governors signed up for the Kremlin-backed United Russia Party and another 20 are prepared to join ranks continuing a trend that began more than a year after the Kremlin made it clear that regional leaders would need its blessing in order to win elections.

Interestingly, this type of move by Russian leadership is exactly what many Americans were concerned about in our deliberations. American’s see open elections in Russia as a critical criteria for expanding our friendly terms with Russia. While it is not the job of New Dartmouth to tell either country how it should operate, it is our responsibility to report the honest concerns and hopes for future relationship expressed by the citizens in our forums. We fulfilled our obligation.

One particular highlight of our trip was a visit by young people active in the Association of Young Leaders - an interregional non-profit, student-led organization of students and adults working collaboratively to help student leaders develop the understanding, skills and experience they need to positively impact their schools, their communities and their future. They are modeled after the California Association of Student Councils. They represent a new generation of business, political leaders who will be poised to introduce a deliberative practice to the decision-making they will be making as future business leaders, policy-makers, and parents. The Kettering Foundation has a particular interest in studying the perspectives of youth in each country toward policy-making and in ways to foster this interest within each country and between the youth of the two countries.

All in all, it was a productive and engaging meeting. Next steps are still to be developed. We will be exploring opportunities to study youth leadership in the two countries and the link between leadership, political office and policy-makers. We will also be looking at how we can continue and expand citizen-to-citizen dialogues and make their deliberative voices known to policy-makers. We have a book in production that includes a chapter co-authored by the Russian and American delegation, a review of the accomplishments of the old Dartmouth written by a member of the Russia team who is a trusted advisor to the Kremlin authorities, and a chapter by former Ambassador Jim Collins.

Clearly the old Dartmouth has not outlived its purpose; the New Dartmouth is just as vital in defining our relationship with Russia and in keeping the dialogue open.

Taylor