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.
Gela
Charkviani, Chief Advisor to the President of Georgia
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?
In the years following the collapse of the USSR my Fellow and I have had rather different experiences, since I have worked for the executive branch of the political leadership, while he has been exposed to the emerging civil society. Therefore, our cooperation can hardly fail to be mutually enriching and, indeed, we have already gained a lot by combining our perspectives to see a bigger picture.
2. Do certain
areas of this Fellow’s work need improvement? Which areas?
I would recommend a greater emphasis on idiosyncracies of the Caucasian
cultures, whose certain elements, if neglected might impede the development of
processes leading to an improved security situation.
3. In your opinion, does
your Fellow’s project make a significant contribution to the field?
In spite of the various initiatives, some sui generis, others emanating
from sources outside the Caucasus, there still is an actual vacuum of comprehensive
ideas pertaining to possible models of security in the area. Given the existing
reality my Fellow’s project can provide many of the hitherto missing answers
and, consequently, be of very special significance.
4. Would the project be
important to other countries in the CEE/fSU region?
The FSU nations stand to benefit from the project, largely owing to
similarities in mentality. 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)
If properly placed and promoted the proposed policy research can make a
considerable impact on policy makers and experts, as well as stimulate the
policy research communities in the countries of the South Caucasus to further
investigate security potential of the area.
6. Is the timetable for the
project realistic?
Absolutely.
7. Could the project benefit
a large number of people?
The entire population of the Caucasus.
8. Does the Fellow show
evidence that he/she can think strategically about the relevant project and/or
field?
He, definitely, does.
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?
I would fully support continued OSI funding for follow-up work
associated with the project in question.
10. Are there other
appropriate funders that may support the project?
I find it hard to answer this question..
Recommendations
for other potential senior contacts for this Fellow:
Tbilisi, February 26, 2002 Gela
Charkviani