The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) was one of the first multilateral bodies where its members states, including the US, Russia, all other post-Soviet and European countries, agreed that democracy, rule of law, and human rights were an indivisible part of security. In the mid-1990s the star of the OSCE was on the rise: the organization deployed large multi-disciplinary field missions throughout the former Yugoslavia; it was involved in the protection of rights of ethnic minorities in the Baltics; it was designated to lead conflict-resolution efforts in the post-Soviet space. In addition, the OSCE was conducting election observation and democracy-promotion efforts in the region. With time, however, the consensus of the 1990s has eroded and the effectiveness of the organization is increasingly put into question by some of its member states. What can be learned from the OSCE's experiences? Can multilateral organizations effectively promote democracy in absence of consensus among its member states? The presenter will give a practitioner's perspective on these questions.

About the speaker
Dr. Vladimir Shkolnikov has served as the Head of Democratization Department in the Warsaw-based Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (ODIHR/OSCE) since spring 2004. He is responsible for direction and management of ODIHR's democracy-promotion technical assistance programs in areas of rule of law, parliamentary support, political party development, gender equality, and migration policy development in the former Soviet states and in Southeastern Europe. Prior to assuming his post he held positions of migration adviser and election adviser at the ODIHR. He has traveled extensively, including to most of the conflict areas in the post-Soviet space. Prior to joining the ODIHR he was resident research consultant at the RAND Corporation in Santa Monica, CA. He received his Ph.D. in public policy analysis from the Pardee RAND Graduate School of Policy Studies.

During the strategic modernization program that the Soviet Union undertook in the 1970s, it deployed a large number of multiple-warhead ballistic missiles. This deployment raised concerns in the United States about vulnerability of its land-based missile force and was one of the factors that contributed to the military buildup that the United States undertook in the late 1970s-early 1980s. The newly available documents that contain evidence of the Soviet missile programs demonstrate that the "window of vulnerability" did not exist and provide some insight into the Soviet modernization program.

Pavel Podvig joined CISAC as a research associate in 2004. Before that he was a researcher at the Center for Arms Control, Energy and Environmental Studies at the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (MIPT). He worked as a visiting researcher with the Security Studies Program at MIT and with the Program on Science and Global Security at Princeton University, and he taught physics in MIPT's General Physics Department for more than ten years.

Podvig graduated with honors from the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology in 1988, with a degree in physics. In 2004 he received a PhD in political science from the Moscow Institute of World Economy and International Relations.

His research has focused on technical and political issues of missile defense, space security, U.S.-Russian relations, structure and capabilities of the Russian strategic forces, and nuclear nonproliferation. He was the head of the Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces research project and the editor of a book of the same title, which is considered a definitive source of information on Russian strategic forces.

How has Iran become the most serious foreign policy issue in Indonesian politics? Since democracy was restored to Indonesia in 1999, governments there have had to balance public demands for a strong, independent foreign policy against the reality that the economic and political crises of the past decade have limited Jakarta's influence in global politics. Earlier in this period, presidents and foreign ministers faced little more than sporadic challenges over issues that stood little chance of affecting Indonesian foreign policy beyond Southeast Asia. More recently, however, Iran has actively courted Indonesian legislative and civil society leaders, and they, in turn, have pressed their government to oppose international efforts to curb Tehran's nuclear programs. They sharply criticized the Yudhoyono government for failing to oppose a motion in the International Atomic Energy Agency to refer Iran to the UN Security Council in 2006. This year they triggered a heated debate by opposing the government's decision to join a unanimous Security Council vote that broadened sanctions on Iran. Prof. Malley will examine these trends and assess their implications for Indonesian foreign policy and international security.

Michael Malley teaches comparative and Southeast Asian politics at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey. Before joining the School in 2004, he taught at Ohio University. He earned a PhD in political science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, an MA in Asian Studies at Cornell University, and a BS at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service.

This is the Southeast Asia Forum's fifth seminar of the 2006-2007 academic year.