This idea was further discussed by the participants of the roundtable discussion in the afternoon. Historian Attila Pók took the view that today Central Europe was only a part of the collective European historical memory and an aspect of Central Europeans’ cultural identity. However, the 21st state of the region is not identical with the entity that Jenő Szűcs described in his high-impact essay in the 1980s.

On the contrary, Géza Jeszenszky former Minister of Foreign Affairs argued that the reality of Central Europe was still relevant today and the experience of the supranational organisation of the former Austro-Hungarian Monarchy could be used by the countries of the European Union. Ambassador Ellison-Kramer brought up several practical examples where Central European bonds are present in diplomacy. She mentioned the Maria Theresa year, the anniversary of the Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867 and the scholarship programs. By representing the Russian perspective, Lyubov Shishelina from the RAS Institute of Europe in Moscow stated that Central Europe constituted a link to the countries of East Europe.

KRAFT Conference 2017 – Hillary Brown, professor of Architecture (City University New York): An Exemplary Town in its Bioregion: Oberlin, OhioMEP György Schöpflin drew attention to the fact that the concept of democracy, that was at the heart of the Western political values, was varied and was reflected in diverse forms as far as practical implementations are concerned. It can only lead to misunderstandings if those discussing democracy do not agree beforehand on the meaning of specific expressions. Valér Veres, professor of the Babes-Bolyai University in Cluj-Napoca presented sociological data of European identity patterns in comparison with the countries of the particular sub-regions of Europe. The farther people with a European identity live from the core countries of Europe, the stronger Europe’s force of attraction is.

In the evening, Mónika Mátay introduced Katalin Bogyay’s book, where Ambassador Bogyay explained the way she managed to make those interviews public in the UN that were conducted by the Danish martyr diplomat Povl Bang-Jensen with refugees of 1956.
Following the book’s introduction, Bang-Jensen expert Bo Lidegaard explained how the coalition between the U.S. and the Soviet Union established unexpectedly during the Suez Crisis contributed to the suppression of the Hungarian Revolution.
On the next day, discussions addressed the issues threatening global security. In her ambitious lecture, Katalin Bogyay talked about the UN reform aiming at the development of understanding and cooperation among member states to eliminate threats posed to world peace.

James Skelly, iASK research fellow addressed the contradictions of U.S. global military engagement while Lidija Georgieva, head of the UNESCO Chair in Intercultural Studies and Research at the University of Skopje reflected on the chances of preventive diplomacy in today’s world.

The issue of migration was discussed by a separate panel chaired by Jody Jensen. Invited speakers shared primarily their personal experience. Individual concern made personal narratives emotionally charged where the implicit meaning of the greatest 21st-century challenge was present. In the evening Nikola Ivanovski’s short film was presented by one of the panelists.

On 23 August, economists held their discussion in the morning session that centred around the key maxim of the neoliberal economics doctrine, namely the use of drastic means to ensure a balanced budget. László Andor drew up several related options for a balanced budget. Stuart Holland advocated investments in the field of infrastructure, healthcare and education which do not constitute budget deficit when financed by bonds of the European Investment Bank. In his witty lecture, Nikos Fokas reflected on the social implications of the restrictive policy forced on the Greek.

In the afternoon, the topic of democracy prevailed again that invigorated the Europe panel of Monday morning. Approached from the perspective of democratic deficiency, it was easier to understand that democracy is merely an empty expression without constitutional state, free publicity, fairness of election and respect for human rights and rights of minorities regardless of any attributes used to label democracy. Dimitar Nikolovski, Igor Stipic and Radaslow Markowski introduced the case of Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Poland, respectively.

On the fourth day of the first week, environmental sciences came to the forefront. The lectures of András Gelencsér, András Szöllősi-Nagy and János Bogárdi made it clear that the deterioration in the quantity and quality of parameters of water and air available on the Earth was caused by social reasons rooted in inequality, poor governance and particular business and political interests overshadowing global interests.The major causes of migration tensions include environmental catastrophes in Africa exacerbated by demographic explosion. The European continent is the ultimate endpoint of escape routes moving across the Mediterranean Sea.

In the afternoon, discussions focused on the future of the natural sciences. The session was organised by Eörs Szathmáry who invited outstanding young representatives of physics, astronomy and evolutionary biology from the Hungarian natural scientific sphere and asked them to look into an imaginary magic ball and predict the future of natural sciences. Renowned Austrian natural scientist and scientific manager Peter Schuster and Harold de Vladar from the Parmenides Foundation Munich also joined participants. All of them agreed that the future held the unification of disciplines and achievement of practical results that might increase life span and enhance the quality, speed and efficiency of research and calculation tools.

The morning session of the last day of the week started with the most passionately debated issue among social sciences, namely ‘social gender’. The panel was chaired by Izabella Agárdi and Andrea Pető, Weronika Grzebalska and Jody Jensen participated in the session.

In the afternoon, the relationship between culture and popular politics was addressed, which made it inevitable to return to the topics of previous lectures and panels on political science including publicity, democracy, participation, human and civil rights.

The morning session on Monday, second week was organised by Dezső Boda who invited two industrial actors, a natural scientist and two social scientists. Norbert Kroó talked about the spirit of the 4.0 technological revolution, the essence of which is the natural science paradigm of quantum physics. Tamás Siszer and Zoltán Kántor introduced the radically new products and services of the 4.0 industry that can only evolve in full economic and social interconnection. László Z. Karvalics introduced the processes unifying the new technological world and society that eventually transform life on Earth by gradually following the evolutionary logic and leaving several failed inititaves behind. György Csepeli gave a concise SWOT analysis of the 4.0 revolution. From among dangers, he emphasised the ‘loss of meaning’ that might occur if we forget life when muddled by the opportunities provided by the 4.0 industrial revolution.

On 29 August, an international conference was organised within the framework of the Summer University, the topic of which was closely related to the interdisciplinary perspective represented by the Institute of Advanced Studies. Creative, sustainable urban development is one of the key research topics of the Institute. In 2017, the third international KRAFT Conference was organised in Kőszeg. This year it constituted the presidency of the Association of Pannon Cities. The Pannon Cities are arenas for concepts and projects developed in the spirit of KRAFT project. Ferenc Miszlivetz held the keynote speech of the international conference. Then, Péter Ágh, member of the Hungarian National Assembly talked about the fact that the future of Western Hungary could not do without socialisation of innovation, integration and creativity.

Lectures demonstrated the great power of urban social fabric through the examples of diverse European and North-American cities if cooperation is driven by the dynamism of sustainability and creativity. Hillary Brown demonstrated the sustainable implications of environmental community and urban development through the example of the city of Oberlin, Ohio State. On the contrary, Daniel EsGuevillas introduced Los Angeles as an example showing multiple deficiencies since authorities and residents are unable to face dangers resulting from unsustainability. In his historical and urban sociological lecture, Rudolf Klein analysed very genuinely the ethno-sociological logic behind the development of large cities and the style of buildings in the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy.

Surviving Crises: A practical Guide from Central Europe

Topics:

• The Crisis of European Narratives – Where is Central Europe?
• New Wars – Security, Terrorism and Technologies of Surveillance
• Europe, Greece, Turkey and the Balkans
• Central Europe and the Illiberal State
• Water, Migration and Human Rights
• Austerity vs. Social Cohesion in Europe
• Changing Gender Dynamics in Central Europe: States and Civil Rights
• Politics and Popular Culture
• Central Europe 4.0 – the New Industrial Revolution in the 21st Century
• III International KRAFT (Creative Cities – Sustainable Regions) Conference
• The Future of Science in Central Europe
• The Future of Universities
• Water, Migration and Human Rights
• Austerity vs. Social Cohesion in Europe