Economic Entanglements in East-Central Europe (1949-1991)

Economic Entanglements in East-Central Europe (1949-1991)

14-16 novembre 2012



[See the call for papers on this website:]


14 November, 2012



4:00-4:45pm – Uwe Müller (Leipzig), East Central European Planned Economies in the Global Economy (1945-1990)

4:45-5:15pm – Coffee break

5:15-7:30pm – The Comecon. A Transnational Institution which Worked?

  • Simon Godard (Genf), Internationalism as Career? On the Working Culture of Comecon Associates (1949-1989)
  • Erik Radisch (Bochum), Soviet Concepts of the Comecon (1956-1971)
  • Jan Lomícek (Prag), Czechoslovak Participation in Transnational Projects within the CMEA in the 1970s and 1980s


15 November, 2012

Case Studies


  • Pál Germuska (Budapest), A Special Case of Branch-Cooperation. Military Industrial Collaboration in the Comecon
  • Mila Oiva (Turku), Competition and the Socialist Integration—Contradictory Concepts? The Case of Polish Clothing Exports to the Soviet Union

11:00-11:30am – Coffee Break


  • Zsombor Bódy (Budapest), Large-Scale Investment Project Ikarus. The Semantics of the Political Economy in International Business Relations as seen by the Planning and Realization of a Hungarian Large-Scale Investment Project in Bus Production (1957-1975)
  • Christopher Mady (Bochum), Hungarian Foreign Trade Relations in the Automobile Industry

1-2pm Lunch

Relations between the West and the East


  • Mikhail Lipkin (Moscow), The Perception of West European Integration in the USSR
  • Angela Romano (London/Firence), The European Community’s Perceptions of Socialist Integration, and Consequent Actions towards the Comecon
  • Suvi Kansikas (Helsinki), The Comecon and the EC Challenge (1969-1976)

4:15-4:45pm Coffee break


  • Johan Schot/Jira Janac (Eindhoven), Tensions concerning the Sovietization and the Europeanization of Railway Governance in East Central Europe
  • Peter Švík (Bratislava), Reflections on General Trends in the East-West Trade of Civil Aviation Technology in the 1960s and 1970s

7:30pm – Dinner


16 November, 2012


The Comecon in the Global Economy


  • Christian Gerlach (Bern), Reintegration into the Capitalist World Market? Grain Imports to East Europe in the 1970s and their Implications
  • Radek Soběhart (Prag), “Long Live General Muammar Gaddafi!” Czechoslovak-Libyan Relations (1974-1985). Reflections on the Global Cold War
  • Martin Dangerfield (Wolverhampton), Post-Comecon Economic Relations of Former Soviet Bloc Countries and Russia: Continuities and Changes

11.15-11.45 Coffee break



  • Christoph Boyer (Salzburg), Concluding Comments
  • Dagmara Jajeśniak Quast (Leipzig/Frankfurt-Oder), Closing Remarks: The Multiple International Dimensions of the Comecon. New Interpretations of Old Phenomena.



Practical information

Venue: Geisteswissenschaftliches Zentrum Geschichte und Kultur Ostmitteleuropas e.V. (GWZO) at the University of Leipzig; Speck’s Hof (Eingang A), Reichstr. 4-6, D- 04109 Leipzig.

Hosted by:

  • Research group “East Central Europe Transnational” at the Centre for the History and Culture of East Central Europe (GWZO)
  • Fachkommission Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften J.G. Herder-Forschungsrat
  • Centre for Interdisciplinary Polish Studies at the European University Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder) (ZiP)

Conference Organizers: Dr. Dagmara Jajeśniak-Quast & Dr. Uwe Müller


Emilia Robin

Histoire de la guerre froide, humanités numériques, linux, médiation scientifique

More Posts

The Fiat investments in the Soviet Union in 1960s and 70s

«Automobile multinationals, transfer of technology and East-West relations: The Fiat investments in the Soviet Union in 1960s and 70s»

28 mars 2012, 11h00-13h00



Lieu : Centre des recherches historiques-EHESS, Bâtiment Le France, 190-198 Avenue de France, 75013 Paris

Dans le cadre du séminaire «Histoire des entreprises automobiles en France et en Europe». Ce nouveau séminaire du GIS GERPISA (ENS-CACHAN) a comme ambition mettre à disposition de la communauté des chercheurs en sciences sociales et humaines de la région Ile-de-France les derniers travaux en cours sur l’histoire des entreprises automobiles. Le format est celui de la mise en commun des informations, sources et activités existantes dans ce domaine de la part des participants, ainsi qu’une discussion des travaux présentés tant par des membres du GERPISA, que par des grands témoins et acteurs des entreprises de l’automobile en France et en Europe.

Intervenante : Valentina Fava (University of Helsinki)

On 15th August 1966 in Moscow Vittorio Valletta, president of the Italian automobile company Fiat, and the representatives of the Soviet Government signed the agreement that led to the building of the VAZ -Volzhsky Avtomobilny Zavod, a gigantic automobile plant. The new factory, based in Tol’iatti, started its activities in September 1970 and was soon able to produce 660.000 Fiat 124 per year, ca 2.200 cars per day. The Fiat-Soviet agreement fostered the entrance of the Soviet Union in the “Automotive Century” and gave place to the first massive East-West transfer of technology and knowledge in the automobile sector of the Post World War II period. Starting from the “deal of the Century”, the paper intends to “review” the Fiat Group activities in the Soviet Union from the early 1960s to mid-1980s examining the changes in the function that the Soviet “market” had for the Italian company. In fact, the VAZ deal allowed Fiat to enter the Soviet “market” as a first comer and leading player but, paradoxically, the building of the Tol’iatti’s plant had less relevance than it might be expected- especially in terms of profits. In the two decades under examination, Fiat’s aims and strategies changed as well as the “products” to be exported towards the Socialist Great Power- in the 1970s Fiat- through Comau and UTS- was mainly providing machinery, tools and know-how only partially related to the automobile production. Furthermore, the conditions of the Soviet market changed significantly in the twenty years under analysis, and Fiat had to cope with the increasing competitive Japanese and American producers as well as the other European manufacturers.

In this framework the paper will try to answer to two different sets of questions: the first concerning the shifting reasons of Fiat’s interest in the Soviet Union: the 1960s action seemed to be actually “coordinated” with other Italian companies (ENI, Pirelli etc) and strongly backed by the Italian Government (and by parts of the American Administration) and embedded in a political project while in the 1970s the political “motive” and support had become less relevant and Fiat found increasingly difficult to make business in the USSR, especially with the outburst of the economic crisis. The second set of questions will concern the “channels” that Fiat used to enter in the Soviet “market” – and the “capabilities” that Fiat had to develop to deal with the Soviet context and environment; the paper will focuses especially on the role of Fiat’s agent, Novasider. In this perspective, the study of the Fiat “ice-breaker” function in the 1960s might contribute to shed some light on whether and how Western European corporations contributed to the breaking of the East-West trade limitations and to the end of the Cold War, working both as a economic actors as well as a political ones.

Contact : Tommaso Pardi (

Emilia Robin

Histoire de la guerre froide, humanités numériques, linux, médiation scientifique

More Posts

Per una storia del tempo presente (4/2011)

Per una storia del tempo presente, 4 (2011)


As never before, today oil is dripping-dry. It is in shortage, and a late search for alternative energy sources in under way. Notwithstanding, oil comes with a century long history: during the first half of the Twentieth century it was widely known at an early stage as the most important cheap energy to fuel a mass consumption growth model., and later on – in the course of the 1970s- as the main cause for the worldwide economic downturn. Thereafter, throughout the last thirty years, both in the academia and in the broader public discourse it was at the center of a compelling debate on environmental problems. In this respect it was thought of as at variance with our earth environment. In the light of the ongoing world energy crisis and the on stream debate on ‘the end of oil’, this books offers a long term historical account on the role and relevance of oil in the history of the Twentieth century through a tidy investigation of the relationships among the oil producing economies and the oil consuming industrialized countries.

Spanning from the Middle East to Western Africa, from the very periphery of the American continent to the Soviet Union, this work pinpoints the interplay between oil economics and the development of the international relations system throughout the century, its role in shaping the oil producing countries political and labour regimes, as well as its ratio to the ascendancy and failure of mass consumption models based on oil and hydrocarbon compounds.

Elisabetta Bini e Simone Selva : Introduzione

Indagini :

  • Katayoun Shafiee : «Il settore petrolifero iraniano tra conflitto industriale e irreggimentazione della manodopera, 1922-1951»
  • Rania Gghosn : «La pianificazione e costruzione di una infrastruttura energetica. il caso della trans-arabian pipeline (Tapline)»
  • David Webster : «Petrolio, imperi e nazionalismo economico. il Saskatchewan e l’Indonesia a confronto, 1944-1963»
  • Ferdinando Fasce : «Immaginare la benzina. mezzo secolo di pubblicità Erg, 1950-2000»
  • Ksenia Demidova : «La politica degli Stati Uniti nei confronti dell’influenza sovietica sull’Europa occidentale, 1973-1985»
  • Michael Watts : «Crimini dimenticati. Vita, morte e inganno nei giacimenti petroliferi della Nigeria»

Questioni :

  • Timothy Mitchell, «La democrazia del carbonio»
  • Andrea Prontera, «Petrolio e relazioni internazionali»

Sguardi :

Simone Misiani : «Il futuro democratico nella comunicazione dell’Eni di Enrico Mattei»

Letture :

  • Francesco Petrini : «Ascesa e declino dell’età dell’oro (nero). L’industria del petrolio tra interessi privati, conflitto sociale e relazioni internazionali»
  • Wilko Graf von Hardenberg : «La creazione del modello petrolifero: società, stato e ambiente agli albori di un’industria»


Emilia Robin

Histoire de la guerre froide, humanités numériques, linux, médiation scientifique

More Posts

Economic Entanglements in East-Central Europe and the COMECON’s Position in the Global Economy (1949-1991)

Economic Entanglements in East-Central Europe and the COMECON’s Position in the Global Economy (1949-1991)

14-16 November 2012, Leipzig

Deadline: 15 March 2012


The further incorporation of East-Central Europe into the Soviet sphere of influence in the wake of WWII had far-reaching consequences for the economic relations both between East-Central European countries and between the region and other parts of the world. The Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA/ COMECON), founded in 1949, shaped the socialist countries’ room to manoeuvre both economically and geographically for the next four decades. Since its dissolution more than 20 years ago, the CMEA has become an object of research in various branches of economic history. The historicisation of research on the CMEA and the continual opening of new resource material have brought forth new perspectives and questions. It therefore deserves consideration that, although the CMEA eventually proved to be a failed effort at supranational coordination of national planned economies, it was never reducible simply to a free trade zone as it initiated and coordinated joint projects in large economic and infrastructural areas. Therefore studying the wide range of bottom-up attempts at cooperation and integration offers new insights into the system and operation of central planned economies. Despite efforts at autarky both at the level of individual nations and the bloc at large, contacts with neutral and non-aligned states played an important role in CMEA countries’ foreign trade relations as early as the 1950s and 1960s. Changing global economical conditions in the 1970s brought about a revision of economic and political strategies in which relations with the “First” and “Third World” earned evermore significance.

The conference aims to take a provisional assessment of related enquiries and bring together economic historians, economists, political scientists and contemporary historians in an interdisciplinary dialogue.

In doing so, the following themes will receive special focus:

  1. Interrelationships within the parallel processes of Western European integration, and the economic relations of CMEA countries to Western, neutral, non-aligned and developing countries;
  2. Alternative forms of economic interaction within the CMEA, for example on sub-level sector-specific organisation or on the level of “enterprises”, as well as the role of individual actors (scholars, engineers, economists) and expert networks in transnational cooperation;
  3. Transnational projects in the areas of industry, (transportation) infrastructure, trade, research, and development both within the CMEA and with the “First” and “Third World”;
  4. The impact of the integration of East-Central European states’ commercial policies (pricing, terms of trade) and the effects of the CMEA economic policies (the creation of standing commissions at the end of the 1950s and the Complex Programme of 1971) on the economic development of the individual states and sectors.

The organisers will cover speakers’ travel costs and accommodation in Leipzig. We especially welcome proposals from early career scholars and are available to answer any questions.

Please send an abstract of your paper (maximum 3,500 characters) by 15 March 2011 to Dr. Dagmara Jajesniak-Quast ( or Dr. Uwe Müller (

Projektgruppe “Ostmitteleuropa Transnational” des GWZO Leipzig; Fachkommission Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften im J.G. Herder-Forschungsrat


Uwe Müller (

Geisteswissenschaftliches Zentrum Geschichte und Kultur
04109 Leipzig, Speck’s Hof, Reichsstr. 4-6


Emilia Robin

Histoire de la guerre froide, humanités numériques, linux, médiation scientifique

More Posts

New Outlooks on the Marshall Plan

FAURI, Francesca, et TEDESCHI, Paolo (dir.), New Outlooks on the Marshall Plan American Aid and European Re-Industrialization, Brussels, Peter Lang, 2011, 200 p.


This book brings together a selection of original and predominantly archive-based studies on the local-level impact of the Marshall Plan, both on the industrial structure of a set of European countries and on American firms themselves. The book’s uniqueness lies in the originality of the contributions, in many cases stemming from recently concluded long-term research projects. While historians have concentrated on analyzing the macro-economic effects of American economic aid, its impact on Western European industry has been largely neglected. This volume will fill this gap in Marshall Plan studies. Though the Marshall Plan did not change local development paths, and in fact probably could not have done so in regions such as Ireland or Southern Italy, it offered an opportunity for industrial renewal in regions and countries with a solid and longestablished industrial base, such as Northern Italy and France.


Vera Zamagni: Introduction. A New Approach to Industry in Europe – Bernadette Whelan: Ireland, Industry and the Marshall Plan – Francesca Fauri: The Marshall Plan in Italy. Industrial Renewal and Material Reconstruction – Paolo Tedeschi: Notes on the Marshall Plan in Lombardy. Technological Innovation and Vocational Training – Luigi Trezzi: SMEs in the Marshall Plan. Loans and Counterpart Funds – Valerio Varini: Technology and Productivity. The Impact of the Marshall Plan on Italian Industry: an Empirical Study – Dominique Barjot/Emmanuel Dreyfus: The Impact of the Marshall Plan on French Industries – Jacqueline McGlade: The Marshall Plan Realized? American Aims and European Re-Industrialization.


Francesca Fauri is an assistant professor in the Faculty of Political Sciences at the University of Bologna at Forlì, where she teaches contemporary European economic history. She has extensively published on economic and business history issues. Her research interests and publications focus on the impact of the Marshall Plan in Italy, Italian industrial policies during the 1950s, and the economic history of European integration.

Paolo Tedeschi is an assistant professor at the University of Milan-Bicocca where he teaches economic history and European integration history.  He is also chargé de cours visiteur at the Université catholique de Louvain-la-Neuve where he teaches economic history. His recent research topics and publications focus on the economic history of European integration, the economic history of Lombardy since the eighteenth century, the history of Lombard business organizations, and trade unions and friendly societies.

Emilia Robin

Histoire de la guerre froide, humanités numériques, linux, médiation scientifique

More Posts

La France face à la Chine populaire (1949-1964)

«La France face à la Chine populaire (1949-1964) : dimensions économique et financière»

20 juin 2011


M. ROBIN Thierry (Centre d’Histoire de Sciences Po) soutiendra sa thèse de doctorat (IEP de Paris) sur le sujet suivant :

«La France face à la Chine populaire (1949-1964) : dimensions économique et financière»

Jury : Hubert Bonin, Gilles Guiheux, Françoise Mengin (directeur de recherche), Elisabeth du Réau, Maurice Vaïsse (directeur de recherche).

La soutenance publique aura lieu le 20 juin 2011 à 14h30. Lieu : salle de réunion, 3e étage, 199 boulevard Saint-Germain, 75007 Paris.

Emilia Robin

Histoire de la guerre froide, humanités numériques, linux, médiation scientifique

More Posts

La France entre Guerre froide et intégration européenne 1975-1985

«La France entre Guerre froide et intégration européenne 1975-1985 : la deuxième moitié des années 1970»
20-21 janvier 2011

Colloque organisé par le groupe de travail IHA-RICHIE, en coopération avec l’Association Internationale d’Histoire Contemporaine de l’Europe (AIHCE) à l’Institut für Zeitgeschichte de Munich.


14h00-15h30 – Accueil par le directeur de l’IfZ, Horst Möller

Conférence inaugurale. Antoine Fleury (Université de Genève) : «La France d’outre-mer : atout et hypothèque dans la guerre froide»

16h00-17h00 – Réseaux et acteurs

Présidence: John Keiger (Université de Salford)

Discutant : Jean-François Fayet (Université de Genève)

  • Matthieu Osmont (Université d’Artois / Sciences-Po Paris) : «Les diplomates français à la croisée des questions de guerre froide et de coopération européenne»
  • Valentine Lomellini (Université de Padoue) : «Le double tournant : le PCF entre la fin de l’eurocommunisme e la fin de l’union de la gauche»

17h00-18h00 – Logiques transatlantiques

Présidence: Franz Knipping (Université de Wuppertal

Discutante : Bruna Bagnato (Université de Florence

  • Jenny Raflik (Université de Cergy-Pontoise) : «La France et l’OTAN sous Valéry Giscard d’Estaing»
  • David Burigana (Université de Padoue) : «La France et l’innovation technologique, l’histoire d’une politique étrangère? Réflexion et action entre dialogue compétitif transatlantique, nouveaux cadres communautaires et perspectives mondialisées»


9h00-10h00 – Les rapports Est-Ouest

Présidence : Evgenia Obitchkina (MGIMO-Université de Moscou

Discutant : Veronika Heyde (Institut für Zeitgeschichte München-Berlin

  • Angela Romano (Institut universitaire européen, Florence) : «Favoriser le progrès de la détente. La France, les Neuf et la réunion CSCE à Belgrade»
  • Christian Wenkel (Institut historique allemand de Paris) : «L’Ostpolitik française et la détente bilatérale»

10h00-11h00 – Les rapports Nord-Sud

Présidence : Maurice Vaïsse (Sciences Po Paris)

Discutant : Chantal Metzger (Université de Nancy 2)

  • Guia Migani (Université Louvain-la-Neuve/Université de Padoue) : «L’aide au développement européenne et les rapports Nord-Sud : la CEE à la recherche d’un nouveau rôle»
  • Verena Sattler (Institut für Zeitgeschichte München-Berlin) : «Valéry Giscard d’Estaing et le dialogue euro-arabe»

11h30-13h00 – Questions économiques

Présidence : Sylvain Schirmann (Université de Strasbourg)

Discutant : Jean-François Eck (Université Charles de Gaulle, Lille)

  • Marloes Beers (Université de Cergy-Pontoise) : «À la recherche d’une réponse européenne à la proposition soviétique d’une conférence pan-européenne sur l’énergie: la position française»
  • Emmanuel Mourlon-Druol (London School of Economics) : «Un outil confiné à la diplomatie économique et monétaire? La France aux G7 et Conseils européens, 1975-1979»

Conclusions : Franz Knipping (Université de Wuppertal)

Lieu :
Institut für Zeitgeschichte
Leonrodstr. 46b
80636 München

Contact : Christian Wenkel (

Emilia Robin

Histoire de la guerre froide, humanités numériques, linux, médiation scientifique

More Posts

Legacies of the Cold War

Legacies of the Cold War. Eighth international conference in the series “Between ‘Total War’ and ‘Small Wars’: Studies in the Societal History of the Cold War”

Hambourg, 24-26 août 2011

Date limite : 15 janvier 2011

Since it began in 2003, the conference series “Between ‘Total War’ and ‘Small Wars’: Studies in the Societal History of the Cold War” has successfully re-charted the historical coordinates of the Cold War, surveyed recent international research, and introduced new approaches and issues in Cold War studies to German discussions. This eighth and final conference will bring together retrospective and prospective analysis of the political, social, economic, and cultural continuities that persist after the end of the Cold War, the legacies and aftereffects that continue to shape the world of the twenty-first century, whether directly or in a different guise. Which of these aftereffects are genuine products of the Cold War; which are related to longer-term continuities but were altered or reconstituted in decisive ways during the Cold War? Our aim is, first, to identify significant legacies of the Cold War at the level of a “holistic” societal history and, second, pay equal attention to examining such phenomena in the West, the East, and the Third World.

We would like to suggest the following questions and conjectures as a basis for investigating the societal history of the legacies of the Cold War.

1. Political cultures

a. Has a key characteristic of the Cold War, namely, the global polarization of political models, simply disappeared? What has become of the ideological energies of the period? Is global capitalism now the dominant political model; that is, is the West the undisputed “victor”?  Or can we retrace the transformation of Cold War ideological energies into a variety of ideological concepts-the “end of history” and “democratic peace”, the “battle of cultures”, Islamo-fascism and “rogue states”, or political concepts promoted by the anti-globalization movement or by political forces rooted in protest movements denouncing the Cold War order (such as opposition to nuclear testing and weapons, to the Vietnam War, the Soviet invasion of Prague, or NATO missile deployment in Europe in the 1980s)?

b. The culture of security: The discourses and rhetoric of security became the centerpiece of political debate during the Cold War. Security was a promise that extended far beyond the realm of the military. In an age marked by the greatest military threat in history, the aim was to use planning and regulation to ensure the highest possible degree of security. A variety of different processes converged in the context of the Cold War: responses to the economic crisis and the Great Depression of the 1920s and 1930s and to National Socialism; the projects pursued by technocratic elites; the widespread conviction, in the East as well as the West and the Third World, that unharnessed capitalism was failing; and finally and most importantly, the competition between the two systems and their rival paths to achieving modernization and social security. The Cold War fused these processes to form a comprehensive (military, societal, political, and economic) culture of security and allocate huge resources to create and maintain it. What remains of this culture of security, which, according to Eric Hobsbawm, coincided with a “golden age”? Was this a historic “state of emergency”? Or did it constitute the most successful framework for modern political action ever created, as demonstrated most clearly in times of crisis? Are state interventions and state regulation now, after the end of the Cold War, delegitimated, or do security regimes continue to prove their usefulness? How did the promise of security influence mentalities and political cultures that have emerged since the end of the Cold War? How did the concept of security change during and after the Cold War? How is security functionalized politically? These questions reveal the ambivalent aspects of the culture of security: to what extent did this culture have a lasting effect on political modalities, especially by confirming the logic of inherent necessity and the dominant position of technocratic elites? Does the legacy of the security mindset mean that perceived threats to security are still confronted within the conceptual framework of the Cold War? Is the logic of suspicion that has shaped policy-making in diverse societies and contexts after 9/11 in fact a legacy of this promise of security?

c. Security institutions: The culture of security has also left its mark on political institutions. Among the most conspicuous legacies are the creation of huge security bureaucracies; the concept of national security; the “national security state”; the “politics of secrecy”, the linkage of party apparatuses, intelligence services, and the armament complex; and a psychology of power that is underpinned by the mass media. What are the ongoing effects of these institutional structures, and what transformations are they subject to? Have they caused long-term changes in policymaking and political practices? Have they promoted or impeded learning processes in society, for example, in dealing with new threats? Does the institutional framework contribute to creating monolithic concepts of the enemy that proved to be an inadequate basis for policy making? How are security institutions influenced by the public and by domestic controversies, and to what extent can they avoid these pressures and develop schemes for managing threat scenarios professionally?

d. Autocratic tendencies within the executive branches of government are one result of the politics of security during and after the Cold War; an important examples is the imperial presidency in the U.S., which was generally legitimated by security discourses and determined structurally by the inner dynamics of security institutions. Did the Cold War conserve and revitalize preexisting traditions of autocracy and extra-legality or did it contribute significantly to creating such tendencies? Are these specific answers to challenges that did not surface until after the end of the Cold War but drew on ways of thinking and political styles typical of that era? Did the global East-West confrontation delay political and social liberalization processes or accelerate them?

e. These tendencies correspond to political rituals, old and new forms of ruler cults. Among the phenomena that may deserve further attention in this context are the position of the Communist Party in China and the heritage of Stalin in Russia.

f. The ambivalence of the relationship between violence and politics as a legacy of the Cold War also warrants study. Did the Cold War pave the way to a pacification of politics in Europe? While war has been discredited in parts of the Western world, in many areas of the Third World-now often called the Global South-violence is an accepted and established means of political confrontation. This is best understood as the result of a shift promoted by the Cold War, in which specific forms of violence that were not only tolerated in the geostrategic wake of the bloc confrontation, from Indonesia to Colombia, but indeed fueled by the East and the West, to the point where they could escalate almost unchecked. Have autochthonal potentials for violence been ignited and multiplied by Cold War energies? In what ways do societies continue to suffer from the Cold War’s dynamic of violence, and what are the political consequences of these phenomena?

2. Military Resources

a. Prominent legacies of the Cold War are the economies of armament and the political, military, and academic complexes to which they are linked. The “militarization of the economy” with its structures, self-mobilization, internal dynamics, and self-interests played a significant role in perpetuating the Cold War and, in particular, the nuclear stand-off as the unique manifestation of the bloc confrontation.  Do these structures continue to exist under changing geostrategic conditions? Why has the “peace dividend” never been cashed in?

b. Is there a link between today’s global arms trade and the armament economy generated by the Cold War? Other factors to be considered are global terrorism and how states are dealing with the existing nuclear weapons arsenal, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and the risk of nuclear terrorism.

c. Armed forces and strategies: Has a military revolution that has overcome the Cold War really occurred? Or do Cold War concepts continue to determine the military’s strategic horizon as well as, for all practical purposes, its practices and armament priorities ? Is there evidence of a disarmament process that goes beyond the logic of the Cold War? Has the doctrine of “permanent preparedness” ever really been abandoned?

d. Are there indications of a shift in images of the military marked by enhanced recognition of what was formerly deprecated? What images of soldiers, of masculinity, and of the war of the future predominate in the military itself and in the mass media? Do these images reflect concepts that perpetuate Cold War military traditions-clandestine commando operations and “counterinsurgency”, which occur within a framework marked by a minimum of institutional legitimacy or democratic control?

e. Military rituals: Can we enhance our understanding of the aftereffects of the Cold War-as opposed to and at the same time drawing on pre-dated traditions of military symbolism-by investigating rituals such as memorial services for soldiers killed in action or military salutes? What do such practices reveal about how a specific society relates to the military? What lines of continuity and discontinuity, what transformations and reconfigurations emerge?

3. Ecology and economy

a. Some of the most enduring effects of the Cold War can be discerned in the environmental realm. To what extent are environmental disasters, famine, the destruction of people’s livelihood, or the impacts of climate change consequences of the Cold War? What are the social and economic effects of the dissemination of weapons such as land mines?

b. How is the ongoing proliferation of poverty connected to the dynamics of the East-West conflict, either directly or indirectly, by virtue of the way it shapes public perception and thus, for example, marginalizes problems like poverty or the environment? And what are the long-term demographic effects of the Cold War in the Third World?

c. Is the emergence of elites in the Third World connected to the Cold War? To what extent did new patterns in the formation of elites appear after the Cold War ended? What are the structural impacts on societies when Cold War armament aid is discontinued?

d. In what ways is the Cold War linked to the emergence of transnational advocacy networks that bridged the East-West and North-South divides of the Cold War? What is their legacy for the post-Cold War world? Has it resulted in the formation of a global civil society?

e. Can we find evidence of the ongoing existence of dominant developmental models that are adhered to by various actors? Does the Cold War still have an impact on today’s relations between Third World countries and the states of the former Western and Eastern blocs? Are new cooperative relations or new strategic rivalries (such as the role of China on the African continent) manifestations of such continuities?  Has the end of the Cold War brought a loss of self-regulation among economic actors, because capitalism’s opponent has disappeared? Does global market liberalism now believe that it must no longer fear the consequences of excesses and crises, because it does not have to take the political limits into account that were once set by its global competitor? Despite the deregulation tendencies that surfaced in the 1970s and 1980s, risk-adverse economic behavior remained a key characteristic of the Cold War. If the radical abandonment of economic restraint was therefore only possible after the bloc confrontation ended, what does this imply for our understanding of the relationship between economic activities and the competition between the two political systems? If it is true that the combination of “consumer capitalism”, “welfare democracy”, and “socially-committed markets”-and not the radical market model-was the winning formula in the Cold War, as Melvyn Leffler, a leading historian of the Cold War has argued, then what are the global consequences if the “victor” forgets that formula and loses his allure?

The conference language is English. The Hamburg Institute for Social Research will reimburse travel expenses (second-class train fare or economy-class air fare for long-distance travel) and provide accommodations during the conference for all invited participants.

Please send proposals (one to two pages) and a brief c.v. by 15 January 2011 to the Hamburg Institute for Social Research at

Organizer: Hamburger Institut für Sozialforschung, Bernd Greiner, Tim B.  Müller, Dierk Walter, Claudia Weber, Hamburg

Emilia Robin

Histoire de la guerre froide, humanités numériques, linux, médiation scientifique

More Posts

Arts et sociétés : nouveautés soviétiques

Le séminaire «Arts et sociétés», organisé par le Centre d’histoire de Sciences Po avec le soutien de la Fondation de France, vient de mettre en ligne un dossier sur l’art soviétique (Lettre du séminaire, no. 31; avril 2010). Trois contributions accompagnéees de documents :

  • Élisabeth Essaïan : «L’architecture et l’économie à la période stalinienne : une réalité au-delà des contraintes?»
  • Cécile Pichon-Bonin : «La place de l’économie dans la création picturale soviétique des années 1920-1930»
  • Valérie Pozner : «Pour une histoire économique du cinéma soviétique»

Éditorial de Françoise Bertrand-Dorléac : «Notre savoir de la Russie et de l’URSS n’est plus au point : c’est la conclusion infligée par trois chercheuses qui nous offrent un panorama historiographique de la peinture, du cinéma, de l’architecture et de l’urbanisme. Nous sortons avec elles d’une histoire centrée sur le décryptage de messages idéologiques imposés efficacement par l’appareil d’État. Il est question désormais de pratiques artistiques, de commandes, de marché, de vente et de revente, de distribution, de mode d’exposition, de publics, d’œuvres d’art qui échappent au modèle de la rhétorique propagandiste, notamment par soucis de rentabilité économique. Cette question économique pèse ainsi largement sur tout, y compris sur des domaines où l’on avait oublié cette dimension sous prétexte que le capitalisme était officiellement banni.»

Lien :

Emilia Robin

Histoire de la guerre froide, humanités numériques, linux, médiation scientifique

More Posts

Séminaires 2010-2011 de l’UMR IRICE

Nous signalons ici certaines séances dont le thème porte directement sur la guerre froide ou peut contribuer à éclairer l’histoire des relations internationales entre 1945 et 1990. Cette liste n’est probablement pas exhaustive et est constituée en fonction des informations disponibles en ligne le 11 octobre 2010. Veuillez vous reporter au site de l’IRICE, rubrique «Séminaires» (, pour des informations à jour.

13 octobre 2010 : “L’Europe centrale et orientale dans l’histoire européenne”. Débat ouvert par Marie-Élizabeth Ducreux autour de la sortie de l’ouvrage dirigé par les professeurs Jerzy Kloczowski et Hubert Laszkiewicz (Central East Europe in European History, Lublin, 2009), avec la participation des éditeurs et de certains auteurs.

Cadre : séminaire “L’Europe centrale. Populations, identités et territoires, XIXe-XXe siècles», animé par Christine Lebeau (Université Paris 1), Antoine Marès (Université Paris 1) et Marie-Elizabeth Ducreux (CNRS-CRH/EHESS). Lieu : Institut Pierre Renouvin, université Paris 1 (Galerie J.-B. Dumas, escalier L), 1 rue Victor Cousin, 75005 Paris. Programme détaillé :

16 décembre 2010, 14h00-16h00 : Corine Defrance (CNRS) et Juliette Denis (Paris Ouest-La Défense) : “Les réfugiés baltes dans les zones d’occupation allemandes, question nationale, sortie de guerre et enjeu de guerre froide”.

Cadre : séminaire “La Russie au XXe siècle : politique intérieure et influences internationales”, animé par Sabine Dullin (université Paris 1) et Sophie Coeuré (ENS). Lieu : Université Paris 1 Sorbonne, Bibliothèque d’histoire des Slaves (entrée place de la Sorbonne, galerie J.-B. Dumas, esc. L. salle F 604). Programme détaillé :

16 décembre 2010, 17h00-19h99 : Alexandre Moreli Rocha (doctorant à l’université Paris 1) : «Entre politique atlantique et rivalité émergente : les Anglo-Américains et les Açores à la fin de la Seconde Guerre mondiale».

Cadre : séminaire général de l’IRICE, animé par Robert Frank (université Paris 1) et Éric Bussière (université Paris IV). Lieu : Maison de la Recherche, 28 rue Serpente, 75006 Paris, salle D223. Programme détaillé :

17 février 2011, 17h00-19h00 : Jean-Yves Mollier (Professeur à l’Université de Versailles-Saint Quentin en Yvelines) : “Les littratures étrangères dans les politiques éditoriales de la France après 1945”.

Cadre : séminaire “Littérature(s) et musique(s) dans les relations internationales. Identits, transferts culturels et réception à l’époque contemporaine”, animé par Robert Frank, Marie-Françoise Lévy et Anaïs Fléchet. Lieu : Institut Pierre Renouvin, université Paris 1 (Galerie J.-B. Dumas, escalier L), 1 rue Victor Cousin, 75005 Paris. Programme détaillé :

24 février 2011, 17h00-19h00 : Anaïs Fléchet (maître de conférences  à l’Université de Versailles-Saint Quentin en Yvelines) : “Les festivals internationaux de musique dans les années 1960 et 1970 : enjeux politiques et culturels”.

Cadre : séminaire “Littérature(s) et musique(s) dans les relations internationales. Identits, transferts culturels et réception à l’époque contemporaine”, animé par Robert Frank, Marie-Françoise Lévy et Anaïs Fléchet. Lieu : Institut Pierre Renouvin, université Paris 1 (Galerie J.-B. Dumas, escalier L), 1 rue Victor Cousin, 75005 Paris. Programme détaillé :

2 mars 2011 : Thomas Angerer (Université de Vienne), « Relations politiques, économiques et culturelles de l’Autriche et les PECO durant la Guerre froide»

Cadre : séminaire “L’Europe centrale. Populations, identités et territoires, XIXe-XXe siècles», animé par Christine Lebeau (Université Paris 1), Antoine Marès (Université Paris 1) et Marie-Elizabeth Ducreux (CNRS-CRH/EHESS). Lieu : Institut Pierre Renouvin, université Paris 1 (Galerie J.-B. Dumas, escalier L), 1 rue Victor Cousin, 75005 Paris. Programme détaillé :

Emilia Robin

Histoire de la guerre froide, humanités numériques, linux, médiation scientifique

More Posts