The conference was opened with a keynote lecture by the director of JCRS, MARTIN LEINER (Jena) noting the important aspects of the study of reconciliation politics in transitional states. The epistemological aspect of his lecture concerned the problem of a definition and a name of any actor of reconciliation. Talking about the category “East Central Europe”, he argued, it is not sufficient to think of a geographical entity, but also and especially a cultural or civilizational concept. The strong need for reconciliation politics/policy for Eastern Europe states is determined by its historical profile of being on the crossroads of the “great interests”. As Martin Leiner noted, the idea to “forget about Germany and Russia” is very understandable, but they always had and have influence on East (Central) Europe.

Building on the idea of the state subjectivity and responsibility for reconciliation process, LILY GARDNER FELDMAN (Washington) presented during her lecture the main achievements and ideas of the reconciliation politics between West Germany and Poland as well as between Russia and Poland. Comparing these two seemingly similar processes she stated that they differ very much from each other. While the West German-Polish reconciliation process is based on the move to a close partnership of the two states, especially after 1990, the Polish-Russian relationship is often formed by enmity rather than by steps toward amity.

Discussing the individual level of reconciliation and the research field of emotions ALENA MINCHENIA (Vilnius) argued that a key feature of the actor who can initiate reconciliation is shame. Alena Minchenia used as an empirical base the emotional intensities of political protests in Belarus interpreting shame as a feeling of negation, a sign of failure and of the dialectics of exposure.

MIMOZA TELAKU (Beer-Sheva) analyzed the problem of post-conflict reconciliation focusing on the collective memories and narrations of Serbs and Albanians in Kosovo. The similar theme of dealing with a common violent past stood at the center of the lecture by JÖRG LÜER (Berlin) from the Roman-Catholic NGO “Justitia et Pax”. He argued that it is important to identify the actors of conflict: perpetrators, victims and bystanders, and to understand the different ways in which they remember and interpret their past.

A question closely linked to interpreting the past and post-conflict communication was raised by KERSTIN TOMIAK (Cardiff). She asked if media can change the dis-communication and make persons more tolerant. Using data from a sociological survey she stated a correlation between the use of social media and intercultural tolerance – not all kinds of media promote tolerance, but there is the idea that social media could help to create intercultural understanding also in post-conflict societies.

Despite the important role of the media and civil society that was mentioned during the Summer School, not only in the keynote lecture by INA ALBER (Marburg), but also in several discussions, the main role in the reconciliation process is still being played by political authorities. OLGA KONKKA (Bordeaux) demonstrated how the contemporary Russian history textbooks are often based on the idea of “we” and the “other”, which can be seen as a legacy of Soviet ideology. This Soviet tradition of the state feeling as the “besieged fortress” was enforced in the 2000-ies by V. Surkov’s concept of the “sovereign democracy”, that implies almost hostile attitude towards foreign, especially Western states. […]

Fore more informations please visit H/SOZ/KULT.