Strengthened by his “will” and “determination”, the first among them challenges the “world,” a word he tirelessly revisits throughout his speech. This establishes a direct relationship, laying a bridge between the country he leads and the rest of the planet. The second focuses his discussion primarily on tightening bilateral ties between his nation and the country he is officially visiting. An active strategy from the national to the global for the first, a form of retreat from the global to the bilateral for the second. The words of the first open up to an expanded international vision: they mention an “arc of crisis from the Middle East to Pakistan,” developing a globalized approach that connects the various conflicts in this region. The first addresses the “world leaders,” appeals to the “need of everyone,” “the leaders of the planet.” He sees 2009 as a “founding year of a new world order,” a perspective stated with almost relish inspired by the exhilarating scope of tasks to be accomplished. From the crisis “that affects everyone,” the second seizes the opportunity to construct an argument favoring the closeness of cultural values between two countries, surprisingly mentioning—given this political leader known for his more physical demeanor—”the strength and optimism” induced by “classical music.”
Considering the opportunities presented by 2009 to “shift the power hierarchy,” daring to question a “new architecture of international institutions,” the first, a head of state, proposes to make his country “the advocate, the spokesperson, the interpreter” of a claim aimed at reforming the United Nations Security Council, through an “interim reform” in order to “unmire a file that not only does not advance but regresses.” The second, a head of Government, in turn, talks about “life in a common house,” sharing a “common destiny,” daring—perhaps in historically poor taste—to evoke a “Zivilisationsraum,” a common civilization space. The first again calls to “everyone,” finding it “unbelievable” that there are no representatives from the African, Latin American, or Indian continents on the UN Security Council. The second praises the “colossal potential” of efforts that could be combined by the two countries, the one he visits and the one he governs.
Aware of his “ambitions,” the first does not hesitate—just as consciously—to chastise his audience, demanding the opposite of the “traditional diplomatic reasoning” that relies on time to advance matters. The second, on the other hand, clearly seeks to pamper his audience, a mix of music lovers and politicians, confessing his “particular emotion” of being in this city, a “European cultural center,” one of his former strongholds as a KGB officer. In a flight filled with lyricism, he blends Bach, Schumann, Wagner with composers Glinka, Rachmaninov, and Shostakovich. And he recalls a text by the famous writer Thomas Mann that mentions the Russian inspiration in his “literary spirit” which he balances with a thought from Fyodor Dostoevsky about his two “Heimat,” Russia and Germany.
The first ends on a world that must “talk about individuals” and promote “efficiency and democracy.” The second concludes with the idea of a “Zusammenschluss Europas,” the integration of his country into Europe. Both receive sustained applause. Respectively, those from the Diplomatic Corps to which the first presented his wishes and those attending the opening ceremony of the “Semperopernball” where the second was the guest of honor. One spoke in French from the Elysée Palace, the other, in the language of his hosts at the Dresden Opera, capital of the State of Saxony. Were Nicolas Sarkozy and Vladimir Putin really talking about the same world? And what does the new American president think?
