Two university degrees
Foreign Investment Analyst in a Ukrainian company

Since 2002 I have been engaged in accounting and auditing, somewhere as an accountant, somewhere as an analyst.

I hope to go into politics in the future or help rebuild my country.

A partner with Future Trends Group. Past project coordinator for the Austrian embassy in Beijing and then in Shanghai

I did my master's degree at Fudan University in Shanghai.

Consultant for politicians and businesses.

Love culture of different countries, traveling.

A professional in international relations

I'm in Kyiv, in Ukraine. So I experienced the whole war thing on myself.

I had diplomatic experience, currently dealing with the national minorities issues overall in Ukraine.

Lawyer, with a deep interest in economic processes

I’m a lawyer, working with contracts and representing clients in court.

Even though my background is in the humanities, I really enjoy economics and love working on logical puzzles.

The school gives you instruments which you can use to analyze different political situations and topics, and provides the opportunity to listen to first class lecturers. The course always makes sure to approach political issues from different angles.

I was also curious to explore different aspects of analysis. For instance, I’m not particularly strong in economics or similar areas, and I had never gone too deep into those topics. But after the lectures, I found myself wanting to understand more. It really helped that I could rewatch the lectures afterward — some of the material was challenging for me, especially since I’m not a mathematician or economist.

It revealed to me that there are so many instruments you can use for forecasting and political analysis. Frankly speaking, I didn’t know about some of them — I mean, the practical tools that are actually used in political forecasting and analysis.

The course is valuable not only for political scientists, but also for anyone working in forecasting, since we actually developed political forecasts. Naturally, economic aspects were also included. I believe marketers and economists would also benefit.I myself am a lawyer, I work with contracts and legal representation.

My own profession is law — I deal with contracts and legal representation — far removed from international analysis. Yet I found myself applying the same risk assessment tables when preparing for court hearings: anticipating possible questions and preparing responses. The context is different, but the logic overlaps.

I’m not a diplomat, but I think both diplomats and those working with artificial intelligence would find the course highly useful. In fact, many AI specialists may not even realize that they already operate with similar data and models.

To better understand how models work, I additionally studied statistics and probability theory on my own. At the beginning I worked with formulas for recurring events — and I think a deeper treatment of this topic within the course would be very beneficial. I myself would certainly greatly profit from his.

Who is this course suitable for? First of all, those who receive an academic education in the field of political science or related disciplines - political scientists, future politicians.

I believe that even our, let's say, not deputies, but people in responsible positions would be very useful to take such a course. Get acquainted with world publications, with leading experts, listen to what is really happening in the world. Because, frankly, many of them, it seems to me, do not even understand how global politics works – and in general, how they hold their positions sometimes remains a mystery.

Historians will also be interested in this. In general, the course is definitely suitable for politicians, political scientists, historians, analysts - anyone who wants to understand modern processes more deeply.

I think that this course will be very useful for both diplomats and politicians. They will be able to apply the knowledge gained here in their professional activities.

This kind of platform is incredibly important today — and honestly, it always has been. Even from the beginning, it was clear there weren’t enough spaces for real intellectual exchange. ICEUR has played a vital role in bridging that gap between the post-Soviet space and Europe, offering a rare chance to hear the perspectives of high-level thinkers from the other side. And I believe it’s helped many academics realize that, often, you’ll find more common ground with another academic — even across borders — than with your own government.

Disagreements or differing opinions were anticipated and handled in a civilized, even friendly way.

It wasn’t just about being polite — the atmosphere was genuinely welcoming. People were encouraged to ask questions, and no one ever felt talked over or dismissed.

There were definitely eureka moments — especially when it came to Russia and China. It was incredibly valuable to get the economic statistics and all the detailed context. But what I appreciated even more was what wasn’t in the statistics — the deeper, more complex layers of their economic relationship. That kind of insight really helped broaden the picture for me.

Almost all of the lecturers were very engaging — many of them I might have heard elsewhere, but in this course they spoke with much more candor. The great advantage was the opportunity to ask questions that they would likely never answer in a normal public lecture.This gives the course great added value.

Although my field is humanitarian, I have always loved economics and logical problems. When I saw these network models, I realized how much I enjoyed working with them. Building predictive models is truly fascinating. I am very grateful to Professor Heinrich for extending my access to the program — I was very satisfied.

The professor’s feedback was especially valuable — he showed me how to build a dynamic network and, as an example, demonstrated how Putin reacted.

The lectures overall were well-designed and diverse — though in the economic part, I would have liked to see more data on Ukraine.

It was especially interesting to communicate with politicians – although, rather, not even with politicians, but with people who are engaged in analytics, prepare serious materials. And these were participants not only from the CIS countries and the former USSR, but also from Germany, Britain, the Baltic States, from Russia – and from Ukraine, of course.

There is a lot of information today, especially in telegram channels and news resources, and everyone presents it in their own way, with a different vision. Therefore, it was especially valuable to discuss these issues with the teachers, who gave various, often contradictory, information during the lectures. It was interesting to listen to them, compare, and reflect.

I did not even imagine that I would have the opportunity to personally ask questions to economists who are known all over the world, who used to work in Russia or are now working in Europe.

It was really interesting for me to ask questions, to listen, to observe, to participate in all of this. I felt like I was part of some big, global process.

I think what excited me most was seeing how many different sides and perspectives were brought together in this program. That’s something I truly valued and appreciated. What stood out to me especially was how every speaker made a clear distinction between when they were trying to be objective and when they were sharing a subjective opinion.

Most of the media I consume is a scattered mix — Western sources, Chinese sources, and sometimes just random things I come across. So it was amazing to hear from people I had never heard of before, sharing insights that even top-tier media in China or the West would never offer.

And with John Lough, what stood out was his honesty. As someone who worked for NATO, he could have just repeated the standard narrative. But he didn’t. It was refreshing to see that he made a real effort to go beyond the official line — not just copy-paste from NATO’s homepage. It was the opposite, and that made it so much more engaging.

My expectations were definitely met. I had looked through the list of lecturers beforehand, and I was genuinely thrilled to hear from some of them — they’re truly top-level professionals. I was also curious to explore different aspects of analysis. For instance, I’m not particularly strong in economics or similar areas, and I had never gone too deep into those topics. But after the lectures, I found myself wanting to understand more. It really helped that I could rewatch the lectures afterward — some of the material was challenging for me, especially since I’m not a mathematician or economist. I had to listen to certain parts several times, but it was worth it. It was demanding, but very useful.

I was listening to people who are truly great at what they do, and I was trying to understand how they approach different topics. For me, political analysis stood out — and forecasting as well. That’s an area I find really important. I’ve studied international relations and some political analysis, and now I work in an environment where it’s crucial to detect conflict — or the potential for it — at an early stage. So this part of the course really resonated with me.

MENU

CONTACTS

Breitenseer Strasse 19/24 - 26A, Wien 1140

+43 676 4543149

school-2@iceur-vienna.at