Center for Policy Studies
International Policy Fellowships
Nador utca 11, H-1051 Budapest,
Hungary (36 1) 327 3863, fax (36 1) 327 3809
MENTOR
CRITIQUE FORM
Your thoughtful and honest
appraisal will be most helpful. We appreciate your input and will try to
implement as many of your ideas as possible. Continue comments on the back if
necessary.
The IPF program pairs each
Fellow with one or two mentors who are Soros foundations network-affiliated
(usually Open Society Institute and Central European University), as well as
one ‘external’ mentor who is an expert in the field working outside the Soros
foundations network. Mentors should:
1) Work with Fellows to devise a brief policy paper in their field(s) of
expertise based on a lengthy research paper written over the course of the
fellowship year, 2) Maintain contact with Fellows at least once every six weeks
or so by telephone, fax or e-mail to discuss the development of projects, 3) If
feasible, meet with Fellows at least once during the fellowship year to discuss
the project, 4) Facilitate Fellows’ contact with other relevant experts and
participation in appropriate meetings (IPF has discretionary funds to support
Fellow attendance at relevant events), 5) Complete brief mid-term and final
critique forms supplied by IPF to provide the program with feedback regarding
the Fellow’s progress.
Grigol
Beradze, professor, Acting Director, Institute of Oriental
Studies,
Name of Fellow you have
assisted: George Tarkhan-Mouravi
1. What,
in your opinion, have you and your Fellow/program/project gained from your
cooperation thus far?
Mr Tarkhan-Mouravi is a researcher with remarkably broad vision, analytical depth and intellectual independence. My communication with him was always a pleasure and added to my understanding of the regional security problems, based on his ability to express clearly and explicitly the most complicated matters specific for the area.. At the same time I hope that he too gained from what I knew about such important external actors in the region as is Iran. He was always eager to learn about my experience with this country, its ideology and agenda. In general, our exchange of experience and ideas has been helpful for better understanding of regional realities, identifying problems and their possible solutions.
2. Do
certain areas of this Fellow’s work need improvement? Which areas?
I believe that the research work could gain from more stress on
comparative analysis with other regions such as Balkans. At the same time, it
might be helpful if he could be given an opportunity to visit the area with
particular attention to models of arrangement their and to observe how the
Stability Pact works, or fails to do so, there. At the same time, this may
require much more time, hardly available during one-year research.
3. In your opinion, does
your Fellow’s project make a significant contribution to the field?
Yes, as far as I am aware this was the first systematic attempt to
analyse critically the existing ideas about regional security arrangements
(CEPS model) and to suggest alternative vision of the issue in question.
However, there still a lot to be done in this direction, as the task is
formidable.
4. Would the project be
important to other countries in the CEE/fSU region?
Yes, I am sure that the project is important not only to the other
countries in the South Caucasus, which is natural due to the focus of the
project, but to any other region with similar aggregation of problems, and the
Balkans in the first place, but also sucg regions as Moldova.
5. Could the proposed policy
research make an impact on the policy environment in specific countries or
regions? (Policy makers, experts and policy research community)
Yes, definitely so. Experts and policy makers in the region should be
informed about the project, and public debate around it would be the most
useful. I also think that if published, the findings of the project will
attract much broader audience
6. Is the timetable for the
project realistic?
Yes and no. One year appeared sufficient to carry out this important
research work, but I highly recommend to continue the research and especially
reflection on the ways of implementing its findings n order to maximise the
outcome.
7. Could the project benefit
a large number of people?
Yes, if its recommendations are taken into account.
8. Does the Fellow show
evidence that he/she can think strategically about the relevant project and/or
field?
Yes, as I have stressed above, I believe that Mr Tarkhan-Mouravi is ehighly capable of identifying and analysing
focal issues of a problem and of suggest feasible, realistic strategies for
coping with them. He combines creativity, vision and independence of thinking
with deep understanding and scientific responsibility.
9. If the Fellow were to
re-apply for continued OSI funding for follow-up work associated with the
project, would you support continued funding?
Yes, I would strongly support such decision.
10. Are there other
appropriate funders that may support the project?
I think that other donors may include the Carnegie Corporation and the
Ford Foundation, who show interest toward the search of peace and stability in
the region. I also believe that the Caucasus is attracting gradually more and
more attention of the European Union and such major donors as
Folkswagen-Stiftung and Berthelsmann foundation may support it. d.
Recommendations
for other potential senior contacts for this Fellow:
I would highly recommend him to get in contact with the
TESEV research center in Turkey which works currently on the same issues.
Tbilisi, March 20, 2002
Grigol Beradze