EU Day 2017

Learn about EU Day and the keynote delivered by David O'Sullivan, Ambassador of the EU to the U.S. on the 15th Annual EU Day on March 15.

Master of Arts in European Union Studies

The European Union Center at the University of Illinois offers the only Master of Arts in European Union Studies (MAEUS) program in the Western Hemisphere. Learn more here.

Language Shapes Opinion Towards Gender Equality

Dr. Margit Tavits discussed langauge and gender as a part of the EUC Faculty Lecture Series.

Conversations on Europe

Watch the collection of online roundtable discussions on different EU issues sponsored by the University of Pittsburgh.

Transatlantic Relationships after US Elections

Watch the EUC Sponsored Roundtable on Transatlantic Relations after the 2016 US Election with Moderator Niala Boodhoo

Videos of Previous Lectures

Missed an EUC-hosted lecture? Our blog's video tag has archived previous EUC-sponsored lectures.

Wednesday, April 19, 2017

Is Democracy on the Wane in Turkey?

Photo by L. Brian Stauffer
Is Democracy on the Wane in Turkey?

By Craig Chamberlain, Social Sciences Editor at the Illinois News Bureau

Originally published on the Illinois News Bureau on 4/19/17. Republished here with permission.

Once hailed as a model for Islamic democracy,Turkey plays a key role in both the Syrian refugee crisis and the U.S.-led fight against the Islamic State. On April 16, however, Turkish voters appear to have approved sweeping constitutional changes that many opponents and observers see as another big step in a years-long march toward authoritarianism under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. University of Illinois political science professor Avital Livny specializes in the study of Turkish identity politics and is finishing a book on Islamic-based activism in Turkey and the wider Muslim world. She spoke with News Bureau social sciences editor Craig Chamberlain.

What were the key changes approved in the April 16 referendum?

The constitutional changes ranged from more minor administrative tweaks to major changes to the structure of political power in Turkey. The president’s role has been greatly expanded while the prime minister’s has been eliminated – the president will now serve as both head of state and head of government. He will also now have complete authority to appoint and remove cabinet members, as well as the vice president, a new position.

At the same time, he can now maintain an affiliation with a political party, and presidential and parliamentary elections will now take place in tandem, to the likely benefit of the president’s party. And while presidential decrees are now subject to judicial review, the constitutional court has been shrunk from 17 members to 15, with the president having the power to appoint 12 and parliament the remaining three. Meanwhile, the entire system of military courts has been dismantled.

How were these changes justified and what are the fears of opponents?

These changes have largely been justified as a necessary corrective to the 1982 constitution, put into place during Turkey’s last period of military rule. But last year’s failed coup attempt has also loomed large: Erdogan has argued that the fracturing of power under a parliamentary system is inherently destabilizing and that the concentration of power in the president’s hands is a safer bet in terms of security, as well as economic growth.

Opponents of the reform package are concerned about the removal of so many checks on the president’s authority, especially at the expense of the judiciary. With the new constitution in place, Erdogan will likely remain unchecked at the helm of the Turkish state until at least the next presidential election in 2019, if not beyond.

What happens now, especially given that opponents are questioning the legitimacy of the vote?

It is difficult to predict the future, but it seems likely that this will remain a contested issue for some time yet. While President Trump seems to have accepted the vote, a number of international organizations have questioned its validity. Regardless, I expect Erdogan’s government will push ahead with the changes, and opponents will have little recourse but to go forward. Protests will likely continue, probably with renewed fervor. But the imprisonment of members of the Kurdish political movement in Turkey speaks to the risks involved in even peaceful opposition.

How did the Kurds figure into this vote?

The Kurdish vote was always expected to play a large role in the outcome. Whereas Kurdish political leaders had called for the boycott of a referendum in 2010, they were explicit in their support for voting “no” this time around. That said, there were concerns that the Kurdish community, clustered in the southeastern regions of Turkey, could be disenfranchised. An analysis of the preliminary vote tallies would indicate that this may have been the case. Turnout was exceptionally low in many of these areas, and there were fewer "no" votes than would have been expected given past electoral results.

President Erdogan and his AKP party are Islamic in their ideology, in a country that has traditionally kept religion out of politics. Some might see that as a key factor in their moves toward centralized control. But is that the case?

My reading of the situation is that Islam played a negligible role in the most recent campaign. Instead, it would appear to have been a pretty straightforward power grab. There were at least a handful of references to Islam during the campaign, but I have seen little evidence that the centralization of power is aimed at installing a more religiously based political system in Turkey. Sure, Erdogan's government will continue making religiously laden statements or even small policy changes aimed at appeasing the more conservative members of its base, but this is a far cry from shari’a law – even if it may feel like a big shift away from Turkey’s staunchly secularist past.

Many people have viewed Erdogan’s success as evidence of a religious resurgence in Turkey. But you argue in your upcoming book that this trend, surprisingly, has little to do with faith. Can you explain?

The success of an Islamic-based party in Turkish politics, along with the rise of Islamic-based economics, has been a shock to observers and participants alike. But I have found little evidence that religiosity is on the rise in Turkey, nor do the most-pious people seem to be the main constituents of these Islamic-based groups.

Instead, it seems that references to Islam are less about advancing some sort of an Islamic agenda and more about solving a quintessential collective-action problem: large-scale political and economic activity requires that individuals trust one another enough to be willing to work together. But levels of interpersonal trust in Turkey are remarkably low. By referencing an identity that most voters and consumers have in common, Islamic-based movements are able to tap into the feelings of trust that people naturally have in members of their own identity group, making political and economic cooperation possible.

To reach Avital Livny, call 217-265-6796; email

Friday, April 14, 2017

EUC Washington D.C. Trip 2017 - Part Six - Atlantic Council

By Sonam Kotadia

As a part of the professional development of our MAEUS students, the European Union Center offers students the opportunity for a trip to Washington D.C. in the Spring semester. This year's trip happened from March 21 to the 25. This article is Part Six of a series of posts written by different MAEUS students. In this article, Sonam Kotadia discusses the trip to the Atlantic Council. Previous entries in the series can be found here. Entries on previous DC trips can be found here.

Our second meeting of the trip was at the Atlantic Council. A leading think tank in the field of international affairs, the Council was founded in 1961 in the hopes of bolstering transatlantic ties. In the past few decades, it has expanded its focus beyond Europe to include all corners of the globe. Nestled in the heart of DC, just a block away from K Street – the infamous lobbying district – the Council was a short, pleasant walk from the EU Delegation.

We had the pleasure of meeting with two staff members. They first introduced us to the history of the organization and a few of its current projects, most notably the Future Europe Initiative. Understandably of the most interest to us, this relatively new program focuses specifically on European and transatlantic affairs. One of our hosts then gave us her top tips for living and working as a young professional in the capital. A native of Slovakia, she provided insight into how non-US citizens can maneuver through and be successful in DC. She stressed the importance of internships and networking, a theme we would hear echoed over and over throughout the week. Afterwards, our other host gave us a brief rundown of what he believes are the most pressing challenges facing the EU. We had the opportunity to ask questions, which sparked some interesting and insightful discussion. Before we knew it, we ran out of time and had to hurry to our next appointment!

The trip to DC was a fantastic opportunity to learn about what career paths are available with a MA in European Union Studies. It could not have happened at a better time: I have recently begun to question whether I still want to pursue my previous career goals. After hearing the experiences of professionals in a wide range of positions and expertise, I feel more confident that I will find the right path for myself.

EUC Washington D.C. Trip - Part Five - Pew Research Center

By Jessica Mrase

As a part of the professional development of our MAEUS students, the European Union Center offers students the opportunity for a trip to Washington D.C. in the Spring semester. This year's trip happened from March 21 to the 25. This article is Part Five of a series of posts written by different MAEUS students. In this article, Jessica Mrase discusses the trip to Pew Research Center. Previous entries in the series can be found here. Entries on previous DC trips can be found here

This spring break I had the great honor of joining my fellow MAEUS students and Professor Vander Most on a trip to the nation’s capital to explore an array of careers that may appeal to our particular area of study. While in D.C., we had the opportunity to meet with several organizations, including the EU Delegation,  the Department of State, and the Library of Congress, as well as state offices in the Capitol. However, I was most interested in our final visit on our first day of appointments. Our last stop of the day was at the Pew Research Center where Jacob Poushter, Senior Researcher, welcomed us. He introduced the facility as a nonprofit fact tank that does not take a position in any policies. At Pew, experts conduct global public opinion research and focus on transatlantic issues. Mr. Poushter then gave a presentation on how staff members conduct their research and how that research is published.

As of its most recent annual report (Spring 2016), Mr. Poushter reviewed some of the highlights from the center’s European Public Opinion Survey. In the survey, several current topics were touched upon. Mr. Poushter discussed the presence of refugees and other minorities in Europe and the importance of language in national identity. He then continued to address the statistics based on survey results concerning Brexit and the recent U.S. presidential campaigns. As this report was published before the triggering of Article 50 and the U.S. election results and inauguration, Mr. Poushter is looking forward to further research exploring how Europeans will feel come this spring and the next.

The Pew Research Center’s website contains salient topics on all areas of the globe and are fascinating for anyone who may be interested in further research. The website also includes interactive tools where visitors are encouraged to participate in online polls. Under the “Careers” link on the website, Pew has listed internships for anyone considering learning about working for a fact tank. Pew is a fantastic resource for MAEUS students in the process of writing their theses or for anyone who is curious about statistics on current EU sentiments.

The full article detailing Mr. Poushter’s 2016 research can be found at under “Europeans Face the World Divided.”

Thursday, April 13, 2017

EUC Washington D.C. Trip 2017 - Part Four - Library of Congress

By Rafael Rodriguez

As a part of the professional development of our MAEUS students, the European Union Center offers students the opportunity for a trip to Washington D.C. in the Spring semester. This year's trip happened from March 21 to the 25. This article is Part Four of a series of posts written by different MAEUS students. In this article, Rafael Rodriguez discusses the trip to the Library of Congress. Previous entries in the series can be found here. Entries on previous DC trips can be found here.

As described in my statement of purpose to attend the trip, it is important to take full advantage of all the opportunities to create networks and establish new points of reference whether for academic or professional purposes. The trip to Washington D.C. opened a new opportunity for the students of the European Union Center to connect even better with each other and the faculty participating in the trip. Beyond that, we all had the chance to connect with very interesting people with professional paths that serve as an example for our future professional paths.

On the third day of our visit and as the last meeting of the day, we visited the Law Library of Congress. We were received by Dr. Jenny W. Gesley, Foreign Law Specialist; Luis Acosta, Chief of the Foreign, Comparative, and International Law Division; and Dante Figueroa, also Foreign Law Specialist. After the proper introductions, Mr. Acosta took some time to kindly present the way in which the website has been shaped to provide easy access for the public to the files in the library. As the largest law library in the world with a collection of about 5 million items, they told us about the type of relevant requests that they sometimes receive from different nation states, that, due to internal conflicts, have their files destroyed. The presentation was a systematic orientation on how to properly use the search engine of the website and even to request research assistance on US, foreign, international, and comparative law.

We found it very interesting that the services provided by the library go beyond a simple book keeping process. The Law Library of Congress offers, as mentioned, research assistance, but also in-classroom and virtual orientations, courses, and information sessions regarding legal research. They also provide constant connection with their public through email newsletters, social networks like Facebook and Twitter, the bulletin of their Global Legal Monitor, the development of a mobile application, and programs and events organized annually to strengthen the understanding of global legal issues. One of those technological aspects that I found very relevant for today’s society, is their blog titled “In Custodia Legis”, in which several articles are posted regarding global legal matters, congress developments, and legal history with different international perspectives.

To conclude our visit to the library, Mr. Clifton Brown, an employee at the library for more than 30 years, gave us a tour of the basement of the library where most of the archives are. We could look at books more than 2 centuries old, and we saw the incredible level of organization that the library has gone through to keep records and easy access to the files. In summary, this was one of the most interesting meetings since we got to understand better the relevance of the Library of the Congress and some of the specifics of why it is currently the biggest law library in the world.

For more information on the different services offered by the library:

Wednesday, April 12, 2017

EUC Washington D.C. Trip 2017 - Part Three - State Department

By Katherine Brown

As a part of the professional development of our MAEUS students, the European Union Center offers students the opportunity for a trip to Washington D.C. in the Spring semester. This year's trip happened from March 21 to the 25. This article is Part Three of a series of posts written by different MAEUS students. In this article, Katherine Brown discusses the trip to the State Department.  Previous entries in the series can be found here. Entries on previous DC trips can be found here.

On the last day of our trip to DC, we had the opportunity to visit the State Department! As a student with a focus on international relations, this was the highlight of my trip! The State Department staff did not let us down. Along with our original contact for the trip, five other staff members sat in on our meeting and allowed us to ask questions. These staff members originated from both the Civil and Foreign Service, and focused on various issues such as Brexit, trade, public opinion and the Balkans. It was very impressive and definitely an honor to be in the same room with people who have spent so much time in the State Department serving our nation's foreign interests.

It was hopeful to hear the Foreign Service will still be a career path for students like me to take, and they encouraged us to take the test.  “It’s a lifestyle choice,” they said. They shared their own experiences in the Foreign Service, including their times spent living in Rwanda, Bosnia and Russia. They also advised us on several internships and fellowships available to graduate students. As a student looking to go into public service, I am convinced the Foreign Service is definitely something I would like to look into. I really enjoyed hearing from the Foreign Service officer who specializes in the Balkans, as it is a region I am very interested in. It was exciting to hear about the challenges and benefits that come with working on policies for that region.

The group that we met with was incredibly diverse, professional, and optimistic. It was quite different from how I imagined the State Department would be. All of the MAEUS students had the opportunity  to ask any question they want, and they assured us that the Foreign Service route is definitely a pathway into government that is still active, interesting, and secure. It was an honor, and I am so glad they were incredibly candid with us. It was an experience I will not forget.

The trip to DC was definitely exciting. I saw parts of DC I had never seen in my prior trips and met many experts willing to discuss their experiences.  I learned about fellowships and internships available to me and heard about what it is like to work in different sectors and to live in DC and abroad. I am much more confident in the career path I would like to take. I have plenty of career and networking advice that I need in order to be successful in applying to jobs available in DC and internationally.

Tuesday, April 11, 2017

EUC Washington DC Trip 2017: Part Two- Lewis-Burke Associates

By Victoria Bauer

As a part of the professional development of our MAEUS students, the European Union Center offers students the opportunity for a trip to Washington D.C. in the Spring semester. This year's trip happened from March 21 to the 25. This article is Part Two of a series of posts written by different MAEUS students. In this article, MAEUS student Victoria Bauer discusses the trip to Lewis-Burke Associates lobbying firm. Previous entries in the 2017 series can be found here. Entries about past DC Trips can be found here.  

For the week of March 21st, myself and a few of my fellow MAEUS students were in Washington DC to explore and interact with a few key people in different agencies both in the private and public sector. In our packed schedule, we met with the Lewis-Burke Associates, a lobbying firm, on our third day of the trip.

Of the meetings we had on our trip, this was one of my favorites. In case one is not familiar, lobbyists are people who influence legislators in the federal government to help their clients. Mainly Lewis-Burke works with tier 1 universities (UIUC is one of them) and other research institutions. Of those research institutions, the majority are for science, and I bonded with Lauren and Ben (whom we met) on how I grew up near one of their clients, FermiLab.

During the meeting, we asked Lauren and Ben about personal career advice, the difference of working in Washington in the private sector rather than the public sector and the impact of lobbyists in higher education. Before this trip, I never realized how important lobbyists and research were to higher education and other scientific research institutions.

What really stood out to me was that Lewis Burke Associates consider themselves advocates for their clients when asking the government to obtain funding for projects and programs. They are a firm that must research and know about the organization they are advocating for to the government so that the organization can obtain federal funding.  Thanks to them, universities like ours are able research and produce wonderful results we can share with the world.

Overall, this meeting was productive, and I enjoyed it not only because of what lobbyists can do for universities like ours, but because it gave me a sense that research is important, even the research I conduct as a MAEUS student.

Monday, April 10, 2017

EUC Washington D.C. Trip 2017: Part One- EU Delegation to the U.S.

By Marshall Janevicius

As a part of the professional development of our MAEUS students, the European Union Center offers students the opportunity for a trip to Washington D.C. in the Spring semester. This year's trip happened from March 21 to the 25. This article is Part One of a series of posts written by different MAEUS students. In this article, Marshall Janevicius writes about the trip to the EU Delegation to the United States. 

On March 22, 2017, a group of six MA students and Professor Neil Vander Most toured the EU Delegation to the United States in Washington, DC. We were fortunate enough to meet with Martin Caudron (Senior Communications Officers) and Marc Jay (First Secretary); we also met briefly with David O’Sullivan (Ambassador) who attended the EU Center’s EU Day in March 2017.

The EU Delegation to the United States opened in 1954 and now has around one hundred staff members working in the United States. The EU has 140 delegations around the world making it the fifth most internationally represented institution in terms of delegations. The EU-US relationship has grown over the years, along with the number and breadth of the EU Delegation’s missions. The EU Delegation takes part in all official dialogues between the EU and US. Some of the other duties of the delegation include EU-US summits (usually two per year), energy forums, cyber security working groups, official visits, and compiling grants and service contracts.

The EU Delegation works in tandem with many other agencies and delegations in Washington, DC. They have many contracts with local think tanks, like the European Institute think tank. The delegation has also been working closer with individual EU member state delegations in recent years. By working closely with member states, delegations for the EU and member states both can increase their bargaining power during negotiations.

Another responsibility of the delegation is to continually reinforce the importance and relevance of the EU to the US. There are many barriers and difficulties in promoting EU-US relations at times due to the lack of knowledge that people have of both institutions. Caudron explained that it is sometimes difficult to initiate this dialogue about their relationship, but once the dialogue begins, it is often quite easy to find and share similarities between the two.

The meeting with the EU Delegation was very beneficial for our group. It was a unique opportunity to have candid conversations with high-ranking individuals while also receiving a glimpse into the ever-changing environment of the delegation.

Friday, April 7, 2017

EU Day 2017 - "State of the European Union Address" with Ambassador of the EU to the US, David O'Sullivan

By Bethany Glock

On March 15, 2017 the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and the European Union Center had the pleasure of hosting David O’Sullivan, the Ambassador of the EU to the US. Before the ambassador’s address to a large crowd of students, faculty, and visitors to the University, he met with graduate students in EU Studies (MA in EU Studies) and the EU Center’s FLAS Fellows. During the meeting, he addressed a variety of topics, including the refugee crisis in Europe and how the 2016 US elections and Donald Trump’s presidency have altered the traditional ways of transatlantic relations. Because the meeting was off the record (“No tweeting!”), I will not go into detail on what the ambassador said. However, I will say that this was the most fascinating part of the day. Not only did we get to hear the ambassador answer our own questions, but we had a candid and frank discussion on a wide range of issues.

After forty-five minutes with the ambassador, we ended our private meeting to prepare for his main address. In that speech, he gave his views on the state of the EU today, seventy years after the Marshall Plan’s establishment. In short, today’s EU would have been almost unimaginable back then. However, though the EU has made great strides in promoting peace and unity in Europe, the EU has been deeply affected by the economic crisis, which exposed problems in the EU’s financial system, as well as the refugee crisis and Brexit. Nevertheless, the EU has overcome many challenges in the past and has adapted to each one, and the EU will continue to do the same in the future.

The day wrapped up with a reception for Ambassador O’Sullivan, several other dignitaries in attendance, faculty, staff, and students associated with the EU Center. All of these guests were mixed together at the tables. The conversation at my table ranged from my thesis, to what living in Washington, D.C. is like, to different styles of religious music. It was tremendously enjoyable to hear everyone share what they study and what brought them to EU Day.

EU Day is one of my favorite events of the year. The private meeting with Ambassador O’Sullivan was a great opportunity because we got to hear him answer our questions at length. His main address put the EU’s most pressing issues today into the context of where the EU has come from and where it hopes to go. The reception was a wonderful opportunity to both share what I am learning and hear about fields completely different from mine. The day was full of good food, good people, and perhaps the best opportunity of the year to hear about everything the European Union and the EU Center have to offer.

Friday, March 31, 2017

Conversations on Europe Videoconference Series wit the University of Pittsburgh: The Dutch Bellwether: What is the Forecast for a "Nexit" or "Frexit"?

By Rachel Johannigmeier

On March 21, 2017, the Jean Monnet European Union Center of Excellence at the University of Pittsburgh held a roundtable discussion entitled "The Dutch Bellwether: What is the Forecast for a 'Nexit' or 'Frexit'?."  Panelists included: Catherine de Vries (Professor in the Department of Government at the University of Essex), Jae-Jae Spoon (Associate Professor with the Department of Political Science at the University of Pittsburgh), and Rainbow Murray (Associate Professor in Politics at Queen Mary University of London).  Allyson Delnore (Interim Director of the European Studies Center at the University of Pittsburgh) served as moderator.

From the abstract of the roundtable discussion:

After the Brexit referendum in the UK and Trump’s election in the U.S. in 2016, political observers wonder what is in store for 2017. Join us to discuss the results of the March 15, 2017 elections in the Netherlands and the forecast for next month’s elections in France. How is populism fairing in Europe? What does Geert Wilder’s showing in the Netherlands suggest for Marine Le Pen’s prospects to become the next French president? Given the Euroscepticism expressed by both candidates and their popularity in recent polls, how likely is a Netherlands or French exit from the EU?
 A video of the conference can be viewed below or on YouTube:


Tuesday, March 14, 2017

The United Nations – Why does it matter?

Image courtesy of sanjibakshi
By Katherine Brown

On March 7, 2017, the Center for Global Studies in conjunction with the European Union Center, and the Department of Political Science welcomed Paul Diehl from the University of Texas-Dallas to discuss evaluating the United Nations. In a packed event, Paul Diehl discussed methods in which we evaluate the United Nations, and ways we can combat typical issues brought up in debates. One of the most interesting portions of his talk was the discussion of the issue of relevance, especially to nations who may not depend or require foreign aid, humanitarian programs, or blue or white helmets. Diehl argues that developed countries still view the United Nations as a useful program. He discussed the utilization of the UN budget and voluntary donations to the United Nations from many European nations. These nations, he argues, would not give more than what is expected of them if they did not believe in the program or find it useful.

A question I did not get to ask (though I think it is relevant) is the utilization of sending funds to the United Nations as a means of ‘back-channeling.'  Based on the discussion at the lecture, perhaps some countries could send funds to the United Nations so that they can help countries or regions that they might not be able to directly work with due to domestic politics. A popular topic at the event was U.S President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin who have both made interesting comments regarding the United Nations. With many people in the United States and Europe becoming disillusioned with the media and elites, addressing concerns about funds being sent to the United Nations is critical. Perhaps the United Nations is not too far gone, and perhaps the common critiques are simply due to a lack of good outreach to developed countries’ citizens. Citizens in developed countries need to feel comfortable with their governments sending money that may not directly benefit them, and academia in particular is in a unique position to promote that message. It is critical to note that it is not enough anymore to tell citizens that the United Nations is good for their country; we must be able to articulate why.

Katherine Brown is a first year MAEUS student at the European Union Center

Friday, March 10, 2017

Conversations on Europe Videoconference with the University of Pittsburgh: Transgender Europe (VIDEO)

By Rachel Johannigmeier

On February 21, 2017, the Jean Monnet European Union Centre of Excellence at the University of Pittsburgh held a roundtable discussion entitled "Transgender Europe." Panelists included Mat Fournier (Assistant Professor, Ithaca College), Tamás Jules Fütty (Trans Academic & Activist), and Tomas Vytautas Raskevičius (Policy Coordinator, National LGBT* Rights Association).  Todd Reeser (Professor, French & Italian; and Gender, Sexuality, & Women's Studies, University of Pittsburgh) served as moderator.

From the abstract of the roundtable discussion:

Join the ESC for a moderated "virtual roundtable" on the issues facing transgender men and wmen in Western and Eastern Europe today. This event will be co-sponsored by the Gender, Sexuality, and Women's Studies Program and moderated by the GSWS Director, Todd Reeser.
A video of the conference can be viewed below or on YouTube:


Wednesday, March 8, 2017

Conversations on Europe Videoconference series with the University of Pittsburgh: Calling Foul: Electoral Interference in the US and Europe

By Rachel Johannigmeier

On January 17, 2017, the Jean Monnet European Union Centre of Excellence at the University of Pittsburgh held a roundtable discussion entitled "Calling Foul: Electoral Interference in the US and Europe." Panelists included: John R. Deni (Research Professor of National Security Studies, Gen. Douglas MacArthur Chair of Research, Strategic Studies Institute), Florian Hartleb (Independent Scholar and Consultant, E-Estonia and digitization), Helga Druxes (Professor of German, Williams College), and William Dunn (Professor, Graduate School of Public & International Affairs).  Sean Guillory (Blogger and Podcaster, Affiliate with Center for Russian and East European Studies) served as moderator.

From the abstract of the roundtable discussion:

Have we entered a new age of cyber-sabotage? In this session of Conversations on Europe, our expert panel explored episodes of foreign state interference in electoral politics in Europe and the U.S. past and present. From state-sponsored hacking to Wikileaks, what do we know about who is calling the shots?
A video of the conference can be viewed below or on YouTube:


Monday, March 6, 2017

Conversations on Europe Videoconference with the University of Pittsburgh: Migrant Experience in Germany (VIDEO)

By Rachel Johannigmeier

On December 6, 2016, the Jean Monnet European Union Centre of Excellence at the University of Pittsburgh held a roundtable discussion entitled "The Migrant Experience in Germany auf Deutsch." Randall Halle (Chair of the German Department at the University of Pittsburgh) served as moderator of this roundtable, which was held completely in the German language.

From the abstract of the roundtable discussion:

What has been described in the media as a migration crisis in Europe is being characterized by many aid workers as a reception crisis.  The German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, has taken the lead among European heads of state in advocating for a safe and effective process of resettling migrants.  Taking Germany as an example, a panel of experts discusses the migrant experience in that country.  What are the legal processes for applying for asylum or settling as an economic migrant?  What is the pathway to citizenship?  What has been the public response?  How does Germany's experience compare with other European countries?  
A video of the conference can be viewed below or on YouTube:


Thursday, March 2, 2017

Conversations on Europe Videoconference with the University of Pittsburgth: Black Lives Matter: The Movement in Europe (VIDEO)

By Rachel Johannigmeier

On November 15, 2016, the Jean Monnet Centere of Excellence at the Centre of Excellence at the University of Pittsburgh held a roundtable discussion entitled, "Black Lives Matter: The Movement in Europe."  Panelists included: Felix Germain (Assistant Professor, Africana Studies), Toyin Agbetu (Community Educator, UK), and Kehinde Andrews (Assoc. Professor, Birmingham City University).

From the abstract for the videoconference:

In Europe, the Black Lives Matter movement in the U.S. has struck a chord with some.  Issues of procedural inequalities and police violence have been made more public in Black Lives Matter marches in cities throughout Europe.  How does the movement in Europe differ from its American inspiration? How do issues of ethnicity and religion inform understandings of race in Europe? And what has been the response of authorities?
A video of the conference can be viewed below or on YouTube:


Friday, February 24, 2017

EUC Lecture Series: "Leadership in Hard Times: How Angela Merkel Learned to Love the European Union" with Doctor Joyce Mushaben

Angela Merkel in Hamm, courtesy of Dirk Vorderstraße
By Rachel Johannigmeier

On February 16, 2017, the European Union Center sponsored a lecture with Doctor Joyce Mushaben on Angela Merkel and the impact and evolution of her leadership style.  Doctor Mushaben is the Curators' Professor of Comparative Politics & Gender Policies at the University of Missouri Saint Louis; her most recent area of research has been on Angela Merkel, Germany's first female Chancellor.  Doctor Mushaben's lecture focused on Chancellor Angela Merkel's leadership over the years within the framework of Merkel's identity as a woman, as a pastor's daughter, as a physicist, and as a citizen of East Germany.

Doctor Mushaben presented her research and results through the examination of three key events of Merkel's leadership over the years.  She preceded this exploration with information regarding the beliefs held about the differences between male and female leadership; men are often regarded as "rational" and "aggressive" in their leadership style while women are seen as "community-minded" and "nurturing."  However, these beliefs focus more on personality and behavior rather than leadership style, and it can lead to traditional, male leaders underestimating female leaders; for Angela Merkel, politicians underestimating her was incredibly useful in her growth as a leader.

Due to her experiences, Angela Merkel did not start her political career with instinctive understanding of the European Union and its institutions.  However, when in 2005 the EU faced a variety of challenges, Merkel used her skill as a fast learner to aid in these times of crisis, and she also adapted and changed her leadership style when needed.  Doctor Mushaben used the events of the EuroCrisis, the Fukushima Nuclear Disaster, and the 2015 Refugee Crisis to demonstrate how Merkel developed her leadership style within the EU with her transformational leadership style.  Transformational leadership, as Doctor Mushaben explained, requires proactivity and efforts to "motivate and empower" workers.

Before finishing the lecture, Doctor Mushaben made clear the "Merkel Method" of leadership, or the ability to lead with long-term goals in mind, is one of the main reasons for Merkel's longevity in politics.  I found the lecture to be very informative, and I left the lecture with a better understanding of leadership in the European Union.


Monday, February 20, 2017

Polish-Jewish Film Series: The Innocents

Image courtesy of IMDB

By Alexandra van Doren 

The most recent screening of the Polish-Jewish Film Series, sponsored by the Program for Jewish Culture and Society and the European Union Center, was The Innocents, directed by Anne Fontaine and shown in its original French with subtitles. The film depicts the true story of a Polish convent full of nuns who have been brutalized and sexually abused by Soviet soldiers occupying Poland in 1945 in the wake of the Second World War. The scars they were left with were not only psychological; the majority of the nuns were impregnated after the attack on the convent, and will soon be delivering. While trying to hide their pregnancies from the surrounding community, one sister seeks the help of a French Red Cross nurse, Mathilde, who befriends the nuns and even eventually helps them avoid another Russian “invasion” at the convent. The challenge then becomes what to do with all of the infants after delivery? The mother superior takes matters into her own hands and claims she has sacrificed herself to protect the sisters she supervises by leaving the infants out in the bitter cold while telling the mothers the babies have been taken to be raised by willing family members. Mathilde is ordered to leave Poland, but devises a plan to protect the rest of the babies who have not yet been taken from their mothers. The convent becomes an orphanage for Polish children whose parents were killed in the war and for the newborns, who will now require no explanation for their presence at the convent.

The introduction to the film, written by Priscilla Charrat and read by Claire Baytas, denoted Fontaine’s acute use of silence throughout this film, with very few scenes punctuated by a soundtrack. I was particularly attuned to the moments of silence after hearing these comments, and one observation that I raised during the discussion after the film was the use of silence in moments that were somewhat surprising. All of the labor scenes except the last at the very end were silent. The mothers did not cry and scream, though they were clearly in pain. The silence was broken in moments of violence. For example, Mathilde is almost gang-raped by Russian soldiers on her way home from the convent one evening, and perhaps for the first time we hear a woman (her) screaming to escape her assailants. The depictions of sexual violence and the physical and psychological aftermath made this film atypical in the canon of “Holocaust films,” if it even belongs to the category at all. It certainly grapples with the horrors of the war in Poland, but from the perspective of a woman’s suffering rather than Polish or Jewish suffering. The film is stirring, provocative, and certainly one worth watching for its honest and brutal portrayal of the female experience in a war-torn country.

Alexandra van Doren is a PhD Candidate in the Department of Comparative & World Literatures at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign.  She serves as an Associate Editor at the European Union Center.  

Monday, February 13, 2017

EUC Lecture Series: Language Shapes Opinion Toward Gender Equality with Margit Tavits

Image courtesy of Washington University
By Paula Jaime Agramon

Professor Tavits, a professor with the Department of Political Science at Washington University in Saint Louis, talked about her research study that planned to further study and prove how language shapes opinion toward gender equality. The motivation behind this study was that gender imbalances are still remarkably present in today’s world, and those imbalances can be seen even in highly developed societies. These imbalances are often traced to patriarchal attitudes and beliefs.

Professor Tavits argues that perceived gender equality depends on the language one speaks. She explained how people that speak gendered tongues such as Spanish (e.g. la luna ; el boligrafola luna is referring to the moon as a feminine noun ; el boligrafo refers to the pen as a masculine noun) use grammatical structures that train speakers to focus on gender; by doing this, speakers project gender features onto objects and individuals and it seems to also have an influence on younger speakers as they develop their own gender identity earlier than speakers of gender-less languages according to a recent study.

On the other hand, people that speak gender-less languages such as Estonian seem to promote equality. Ignoring gender seems to minimize the salience of gender as a relevant category.

The background behind this study argues that language affects cognition and that it sets a frame of mind for how people think. If language requires making certain distinctions between objects, then speakers are more likely to perceive these categories as real and relevant.

Three studies were conducted to prove that the hypotheses was in fact valid and that the first study was not an exception to the norm. The summary of the findings was that grammatical gender affects attitudes toward gender equality. The implications of these findings are:
  • Language may at least partially foster the persistence of gender imbalances
  • Social norms can curb language effects
  • Adopting gender-neutral terms in different languages may also affect attitudes about gender equality
Paula Jaime Agramon is a second year MAEUS student. She has studied Marketing and Management at East Tennessee State University where she also got her Masters of Business Administration.


Friday, February 10, 2017

A Visit to the European Union Delegation to Colombia: Opening Doors

From left to right: Viktoria Csonka, Rafael Rodriguez,
Raphaela Berding and Alber Lladó
By Rafael Rodriguez and Raphaela Berding

Building a network involves taking chances and seeing the opportunities that you may have at any given moment. During the Winter break, we traveled to Colombia, Rafael’s home country, and we received the opportunity to visit the EU Delegation in Colombia. After looking at their website, we contacted Albert Lladó, an intern from Spain who was working with the Delegation at the Press, Policy and Information Section. We introduced ourselves as a German student and Colombia student with the MAEUS program at the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign.

Mr. Lladó kindly replied to our email, letting us know the available time for our visit. On January 5th, after a strict security protocol to access the building, we met for one hour with Mr. Lladó and Victoria Csonka, the Junior Professional in Delegation Press, Policy and Information.

Once we were invited to the meeting,  we then presented Mrs. Csonka with the questions we prepared which mostly revolved around the relations between the EU and Colombia and the presence of the EU in Latin America. We began asking about the way the EU is represented in Colombia, and how the Colombian people can recognize the EU, and also how they perceive it. It was very interesting to hear the many ways in which the EU is showing its presence in Colombia. Members from the EU Delegation, for example, travel to universities to reach out to students through guest speakers and the promotion of volunteering opportunities and internships with the EU Delegation. It was also very interesting to hear that Colombians generally perceive the EU as something positive, mainly due to all the references of the media in Colombia about all the aid provided by the Union to the country.

Being curious about job opportunities after our studies, we also asked Mrs. Csonka and Mr. Lladó about their personal backgrounds and the way that led them towards working in the EU Delegation to Colombia. Mrs. Csonka was part of the Junior Professional in Delegation Programme established by the European External Action Service and the European Commission, which gives qualified junior professionals from the member states the opportunity to be appointed to one of the EU Delegations abroad, and work there for two periods of 9 months or 1.5 years in total. Mr. Lladó was an intern from Spain, and on the day of our meeting, he had his last day of work.

After our conversation, Mrs. Csonka gave us a tour of the office, and also introduced us to more members of the EU Delegation to Colombia including Ms. Rachel Brazier, the Head of the Political, Press and Information Section of the Delegation. We felt very welcome, and everyone was very enthusiastic about our visit, and our interest in the European Union.

Our visit to the EU Delegation was a success in many ways. We got interesting insights into the EU’s work in Colombia and became aware of the impact it has in the Latin American country. This is especially important now, when Colombia is finding itself at a significant moment of the country’s history and development due to the recent peace agreement signed between the Government and the guerrillas group FARC. Having studied the EU mostly in theory during our studies, it was very refreshing for us to see the practical side. However, the most valuable detail for us was the positive feedback we received from the members of the Delegation during our visit. This visit was a first step into building our network, and making use of the opportunities that one can find.

Rafael Rodriguez is a first year MAEUS student from Colombia with a Bachelor’s Degree in Education of Foreign Language Teaching. 

Raphaela Berding is a second year MAEUS student, and she received a Bachelor’s degree in Multilingual Communications with a focus on Translation and Interpreting from the University of Applied Sciences in Cologne, Germany in 2015

Learn more about the EUC's MAEUS program, the home of the only Master of Arts in European Union Studies in the Western Hemisphere.