Lado Papava: I did not see anyone who would say at least one good word about IMF
EKA LOMIDZE
Georgian Strategy and International Relations Research Fund with the membership of Lado Papava, Archil Gegeshidze and Eka Metreveli has visited the Stanford University in the United States of America.
The two-week meeting of the mentioned Fund and International Relations Institute of the Stanford University was arranged in accordance with the agreement that provides for exchange of teachers, professors and scientists. The visit was of mixed nature. It comprised lectures as well as work in different faculties of the University and participation in different seminars. Three representatives from Georgia had the opportunity to read lectures. Archil Gegeshidze’s lectures dealt with the pre-history of the “Roses Revolution” and further political development of the country; Eka Metreveli’s lectures touched on the existing conflicts of Georgia, the ways of resolving the conflicts and the possible conflicts that might occur in Georgia.
Lado Papava’s lectures concerned transition economy in the example of Georgia. Lado Papava speaks to us:
– Our lectures have caused great interest in the Stanford University as after the “Roses Revolution” people know Georgia not as it was before ? country of Stalin and Shevarnadze, but as a country that became flagship of democratic transformations in the South Caucasus and post-Soviet area. Several interesting meetings were held. I would like to mention meeting with John Malkhaz Shalikashvili that at that time arrived at the Stanford University to lecture on the subject of military operations performed by Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq during anti-terrorist campaigns. Georgian by nationality, he got interested in us and arranged a cordial meeting. I would also like to accentuate my meeting with Kenneth Arrow, Nobel Prize winner in economy. He won Nobel Prize already in 1972. He is a quite famous scientist now over 80 years old. The meeting was very important for me. Economists of the Stanford University paid great attention to the materials and books on Georgian economy that I brought to the University. Special interest was caused by my book on the International Monetary Fund published in the USA last year. Most of discussions touched on this very book. I met many prominent economists in Stanford. I did not see anyone among them who would say at least one good word about IMF. True, they did not swear as Marxists, Greens and other aggressively inclined anti-globalists, but they were scientifically critical to the negative dependence of IMF and its programmes. From this point of view, sharing Georgian experience was of great interest. I was even requested to send the book to the Kuver library and archive.
The project will continue in the future and some professors of the Stanford University are expected to arrive in Georgia. We prepare programmes for them to make a speech before the young people. We will also arrange meeting with different specialists, politicians, experts, and political scientists. Such project is of much significance to Georgia.
Almost every day the Stanford University holds some very interesting lectures that are worth attending, yet it is physically impossible. In fact, almost the whole world is represented here. I can say without exaggerating that I was in the place called the Science Mekka. Visit to such place is very important for future activities of any scientist. I have great hope that we will have the chance of continuing the project in the future. The project duration is two years. If it is successful, we have in view to organise joint scientific research. The Stanford University has distance learning method, i.e. when the Stanford provides the package of programmes for distance teaching. We have in view to realise this plan in Georgia. In any case, there are noteworthy ideas and we ourselves will spare no efforts.
-What was the principal subject of your lecture.
The audience was interested in economic state and events that occurred in Georgia. They knew that Shevarndaze was a successful politician. Inter alia, he has great authority and respect in the US even now. At the same time, they see that the ex-president failed to exercise real control over the country. They want to know what happened in Georgian economy, i.e. positive and negative events, achievements, failures, mistakes, reasons of the corruption the victim of which was Shevarnadze who created this very corruption environment and who later fell prey to it. They wonder what were the grounds for the new government’s rise to power and what were Mikhail Saakashvili’s intentions and ideas as he is a politician who must govern economy in the country. They wonder at the impediment of economic reforms in Georgia, at our intentions and plans. Naturally enough, my lecture was not designed merely for information and narration, rather it was based on the analysis of real facts in Georgia. The facts were analysed as measures directly taken by the Georgian Government as well as by international financial institutions. The audience also wished to know what were the mistakes, what was not realised and finally, what the “Roses Revolution” caused from the perspective of economy and what problems the country faces nowadays . From this point of view, the audience was interested in details of the events The lectures were held in open audience and attended by students, post-graduate students as well as professor-teachers. Each lecture ended in approximately one-hour long discussions. These were questions as well as exchange of opinions. Very often discussions continued in the corridor after the end of lectures. Today there is great interest towards Georgia, towards the state that they call ambitious. They think that only ambitious nations can do what Georgians did in November in order to establish democracy. They see certain positive model in Georgia to be applied in the further development of post-soviet area. I can not say what extent the model is spread to. However, Georgia itself gives much ground for discussion.