John Lewis on keeping 'the genie in the bottle'
With a Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives and anticipation building in Beijing for a change in leadership in 2012, domestic politics in both countries are playing a major role in the bilateral relationship. On the eve of his own milestone—his 80th birthday—John W. Lewis, one of the world’s foremost China scholars and the director of CISAC's Project on Peace and Cooperation in the Asian-Pacific Region, discussed the direction of the U.S.-China relationship, the importance of dialogue between the two powers, and the potentially rocky road ahead. Excerpts:
CISAC: The conventional wisdom seems to be that relations between the two countries are not very good and getting worse. Can you provide some context?
Lewis: There have been many, many times when the relationship has been worse. The fundamentals in U.S.-China relations, in my view, have over time gradually gotten better. Both sides recognize that there is a complementarity in their relations in the Pacific. There is a kind of synergy that is very important, and when things get bad, as they are now certainly—or not good—both sides try to keep the genie in the bottle. Several things are important: even though the Chinese think we made the Taiwan problem worse with the sale of $6.4 billion worth of advanced weapons, the Cross-Strait relationship is actually pretty good. That ingredient in our relationship with China is not a serious problem. The issues that we have are not abnormal in big power relationships.
What is so sad at this point is that the militaries on both sides—the Pentagon and the People's Liberation Army—they both want to have a serious engagement with each other. They want to have a security relationship with us, but we have these constant issues such as the South China Sea and the Yellow Sea. It changes every day, but now they say they want to put the USS George Washington in the Yellow Sea, or what the Koreans call the West Sea. It's stupid militarily and it's provocative from the Chinese point of view, and you can't defend it other than that the South Koreans want it. And from the Chinese point of view, they cannot imagine why during the calm periods with North Korea, for example, we don’t try to take advantage of that, why we don’t try to make progress in the Six-Party talks. So they see this constant set of problems that project into China that do affect U.S.-China relations. Add into that the political rhetoric in this country, the loss of jobs to China, for instance. It's a big political deal in the United States now. With China, there are endless things we could do. But politically Obama will not do it because he’s going to take a hit domestically. The anger against China is so strong in Washington, and perhaps in the rest of the country, whether it’s because of human rights or questions related to their currency exchange rate. But again, the fundamentals are quite different. They are actually pretty sound.
CISAC: China is gearing up for a major transition of power. How will this affect the relationship?
L: Now that Xi Jinping has been made vice chairman of the Central Military Commission it’s pretty clear that the jockeying is already moving in the direction [that he will succeed President Hu Jintao]. Can something happen? The Chinese always worry, as any politician would, about the next round. So they’re not going to make any mistakes, and they’re not going to do anything that gets themselves off track. They cannot back down [on foreign policy]. No one can back down against the United States or anyone else, particularly now with the Japanese. They’re going to come right at the Japanese.
CISAC: So the transition makes things more difficult?
L: Absolutely, and it’s true in the United States. Obama's looking at the election and he's going to do everything he can to move to the right and look like he’s really tough on all the things the Republicans can hammer him on. That’s going to shape how the Chinese pick their leadership in 2012. Their selection will come at about the same time as ours in 2012—the campaigns will be simultaneous—and it’s too bad. If we become very nationalistic, it’s going to look very hostile to them. And we’re going to be wagged by the Japanese and South Korean dog, and this great power, the United States, is going to look helpless to them. China is offering opportunities to solve problems and we are not prepared to take them, and they're saying, ‘are you not willing to talk to us?’?
David Kinley discusses relationship between global finance and human rights
Engagement with North Korea and Opportunities for Progress on Human Rights
Dr. Robert R. King became the Special Envoy for North Korean Human Rights Issues in November 2009 following confirmation by the United States Senate.
Prior to his appointment, Ambassador King worked on Capitol Hill for 25 years – 24 of those years as Chief of Staff to Congressman Tom Lantos (D-California). Ambassador King was heavily involved in the planning and conduct of Lantos’ human rights agenda, including the establishment and supervision of the Congressional Human Rights Caucus, (which recently became the Tom Lantos Congressional Human Rights Commission). Dr. King traveled with Congressman Lantos to North Korea and played a key role in the passage of the 2004 North Korean Human Rights Act. He was concurrently Staff Director of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the U. S. House of Representatives (2007-2008), Democratic Staff Director of the Committee (2001-2007) and held various professional staff positions on the Committee since 1993.
Prior to his service on Capitol Hill, Ambassador King served on the National Security Council Staff as a White House Fellow during the Carter Administration. He was Assistant Director of Research and Analysis at Radio Free Europe in Munich, Germany. Ambassador King holds a Ph.D. in International Relations from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and has authored five books and some 40 articles on international relations.
Philippines Conference Room
Principle, Pragmatism or Prostitution? Speaking Human Rights to Global Finance
Professor David Kinley holds the Chair in Human Rights Law at University of Sydney, and is the Law Faculty's Associate-Dean (International). He is also an Academic Panel member of Doughty Street Chambers in London, the UK's leading human rights practice. He has previously held positions at Cambridge University, The Australian National University, the University of New South Wales, Washington College of Law, American University, and was the founding Director of the Castan Centre for Human Rights Law at Monash University (2000-2005). He was a Senior Fulbright Scholar in 2004, based in Washington DC, and Herbert Smith Visiting Fellow at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge in 2008. He is author and editor of eight books and more than 80 articles, book chapters, reports and papers.
He has worked for 15 years as a consultant and adviser on international and domestic human rights law in Vietnam, Indonesia, South Africa, Thailand, Iraq, Nepal, Laos, China, and Myanmar/Burma, and for such organizations as the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the World Bank, the Ford Foundation, AusAID, and the Asia Pacific Forum of National Human Rights Institutions, and a number of transnational corporations, and NGOs. He has also previously worked for three years with the Australian Law Reform Commission and two years with the Australian Human Rights Commission.
His latest publications include the critically acclaimed Civilising Globalisation: Human Rights and the Global Economy (CUP, 2009), Corporations and Human Rights (Ashgate 2009), and The World Trade Organisation and Human Rights: Interdisciplinary Perspectives (Edward Elgar, 2009) Another edited collection entitled Principled Engagement: Promoting Human Rights in Pariah States will be published by UNU Publications in 2011. He is currently working on another book investigating the interrelations between human rights and global finance.
David was born in Belfast, Northern Ireland and brought up there during the 1960s and 70s. He studied in England in the 1980s at Sheffield Hallam University and the Universities of Sheffield and Cambridge, and after obtaining his doctorate from the latter in 1990 he moved to Australia. He now lives in Sydney with his wife and three children.
Encina Ground Floor Conference Room
Teaching Human Rights Workshop #1
"Teaching Human Rights" is a series of events beginning at Stanford during the 2010-11 academic year. The series is organized by the Program on Human Rights of the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law and supported by the Center for Teaching and Learning.
The series will:
- Complement the growing attention to human rights across academic disciplines and professional schools with a practical, multidisciplinary discussion focused on the classroom.
- Help Stanford-affiliated graduate students and teaching assistants/fellows prepare to teach human rights topics during their graduate career and beyond. For example, the series will address the issue of balancing the tremendous breadth of conceptual and historical material a human rights course could potentially cover with opportunities for active learning and students' reflections on their own values.
- Provide Stanford faculty with pedagogical support for incorporating human rights themes into courses in various disciplines, and encourage a classroom-centered dialogue between the disciplines and schools.
Reuben W. Hills Conference Room
Kim Jong-un will be like his father: ambitious, aggressive and ruthless
The North Korean leader Kim Jong-il and his youngest son and presumed successor, Kim Jong-un, jointly attended military maneuvers on an unspecified date. This was the first official outing of the 27-year-old youngest son of the "Dear Leader." These maneuvers were held just before the Sunday celebration of the 65th anniversary of the founding of the Workers Party of Korea. David Straub, associate director of the Korean Studies Program at Stanford University, discussed the informal transfer of power that took place last week.
What was learned last week about
the succession to Kim Jong-il in North Korea?
The maneuvers confirmed with near certainty the past few years of speculation
that the third son of Kim Jong-il has been informally designated as his
successor. This process is now public. This is the first time that the name of
Kim Jong-un has been published in North Korea. However, as long as his father
is alive and can govern, he will remain in power. But, clearly, his health is
not good. This official outing of the son seems in preparation for the
possibility that Kim Jong-il may die suddenly. Kim Jong-il suffered a stroke in
2008, after which he disappeared for several months. Upon his return, he had
lost weight and appeared stiff and impaired on his left side.
Was Kim Jong-un touted as the successor?
There were no signs until a few years ago. First, it was Kim Jong-nam, the
eldest son, who was favored. Officially, he fell out of the race when he was
caught entering Japan with a forged passport. At the time, he told Japanese
officials he wanted to take his son to Tokyo Disneyland [the target of an attempted
contract killing by Kim Jong-un in 2008, the eldest now lives happily in Macao,
ed.]. It is then the second son, Kim Jong-chol, who was poised to be the
successor. But in Pyongyang, it was thought that he was not sufficiently
ambitious and aggressive. Then, all eyes turned to Kim Jong-un, who has the
personality of his father: ambitious, aggressive, and ruthless.
The main question then was how Kim Jong-un would be promoted. Most observers were betting on a gradual process. In this sense, it is not really surprising. He was appointed as a four-star general, which is a mostly symbolic distinction. He was also made vice-president of the Central Military Party. This underscores how strong the military is in North Korea. What surprised me most is that the younger sister of Kim Jong-il was also appointed as a four-star general. In line with the predictions of observers, Kim Jong-il has mobilized his immediate family to create a sort of regency capable of supporting his son in the event of his sudden death.
What is known about Kim Jong-un?
He was probably born in 1983 or 1984. However, the regime may try to say he was
born in 1982. In Chinese culture-and also in North Korea-numbers are
significant. Kim Il-sung, his grandfather, was born in 1912. Kim Jong-il was
born in 1942. That would put Kim Jong-un in a kind of celestial lineage. It is
almost certain that he attended school in Switzerland, where he was a quiet
student. He had a false name, Pak-un, and one or two close friends. He also
liked basketball. He then returned to Pyongyang. Some unconfirmed reports say
he studied at a military university. A few years ago, it was said he had been
appointed to the office of the Workers Party and the office of National Defense
Committee, which is the highest organ of power in North Korea.
Who now heads North Korea? What is the
power structure like?
The general view is that Kim Jong-il is the supreme leader-an absolute
dictator-and he has tremendous latitude. He bases his legitimacy on the fact
that he is the son of the founder of the regime. But nobody can run a country
alone. He must therefore take into account various factors. In North Korea in
recent decades, the military has played a growing role and seems to occupy a
dominant place today.
A university professor based in South Korea believes that the regime in Pyongyang has greatly copied Japanese pre-war fascism, even though Korea fought against imperialism. The scheme is based on a totalitarian structure, relying in particular upon the military. Information is very strictly controlled and the population is monitored, as in East Germany. The structure remains very closed, and the leadership is afraid to open up to the outside world and receive investment or foreign aid. Finally, family occupies an important place. North Korea is part of China's cultural sphere, with a strong presence of Confucianism. The notion of the state is close to the family structure model. The king is seen as the head of the family.
Does a period of transition put the
regime in danger? What took place before?
It is inevitable that one day a regime that is so rigid and incapable of
transformation will suffer major changes. However, we cannot say when or what
form this will take. But it is clear that unusual things can happen during a
period of change like this. The last transition was very similar to the current
process. The difference is that Kim Jong-il had been clearly designated as the
successor by his father and he had decades to gradually gain experience and
consolidate his power within the system. Kim Jong-il managed most affairs of
state since 1980, when the last Workers Party meeting was held. He was the de facto leader for 14 years. When his
father died in 1994, however, he took three years to formally become established
as the leader. The difference today is that Kim Jong-il suffered a stroke in
2008. Some people in North Korea are afraid that his son had not had enough
time to prepare for power. Kim Jong-un must particularly ensure that the
military is loyal to him. That is why he was made a general.
What legacy does he leave his son Kim
Jong-un?
Although North Korea has said for decades that it follows the principles of juche or self-sufficiency, it largely
sustained itself during the Cold War by trade with the USSR and its satellite
states, and China. It received much help. Now that the USSR has collapsed and
China has turned to a market economy, the economic situation in North Korea has
become untenable. The country suffered a terrible famine in the mid-1990s.
Nobody knows for sure how many people died, but it was certainly several
hundred thousand. Some say that there were more than one million deaths, out of
a total population of 22-23 million people. The government then had to loosen
its grip on the system. This has helped the country recover. Today, access to
basic resources is much better in North Korea than it was fifteen years ago.
The country was also helped by foreign aid from Japan, South Korea, the United States, and China. Now, because of the crisis over its nuclear program, the only foreign aid that comes into Pyongyang is from China. The North Korean regime faces a dilemma: its only resource is its workers. It fears opening up to accept foreign capital and technology, which would expose the people to outside reports that fundamentally contradict the regime's decades-old claims. That is why the few commercial contacts are with ideologically similar countries, like Syria or Iran. As for the industrial project in Kaesong near the border between North and South, it is very closely monitored by the authorities.
What is the situation at the diplomatic level?
North Korea has no close allies in the world. It cooperates with Cuba, Syria, or Iran, but these countries are isolated. Their relationship is either rhetorical or in connection with the nuclear program. As for its neighbors, North Korea does not like them. The South is seen as an existential threat; it is another Korean state, comprising two-thirds of the Korean nation, and has been a phenomenal success. The situation is different with China. Officially, both countries are driven by an eternal friendship, but this is based primarily on strategic considerations. Nevertheless, China provides a lifeline to North Korea.
Finally, I think in the last two decades, Pyongyang has toyed with the idea of a strategic alliance with the United States to counterbalance Chinese influence. But for domestic political reasons and because of the situation of human rights in North Korea, the Americans have never pushed this idea further. The North Koreans have realized that this strategic relationship was probably a dream.
The fundamental problem behind all of this is due to an accident of history. After the liberation of the peninsula from Japanese occupation in 1945, the division between the Soviets and Americans-for practical reasons-was not intended to be permanent. Today, there are two states, each of which thinks that it best represents the Korean nation and that it should be in charge of the affairs of the peninsula in its entirety. It is a zero-sum game. All issues about the current succession flow from this.
Making Gov 2.0 Work in Africa: The Case of Kibera
The Gov 2.0 movement, centered on open public data and low cost communications tools, is making an impact on public life in the US and UK. To what extent do these tools matter for the increasing proportion of the world's population living in urban poverty? This talk explores the case of Map Kibera, a project in Nairobi's largest slum, that utilizes open data combined with new and traditional advocacy tools, to fight for improved social services and increased accountability for public officials. Map Kibera helps us think about the role a robust Gov 2.0 eco-system can play in supporting grassroots leaders as the fight for the future of their communities.
Joshua Goldstein (@african_minute) is a PhD candidate at Princeton's Woodrow Wilson School, where he works with the Center for Information Technology Policy. He serves on the Board of the Ugandan software consultancy Appfrica Labs, and has worked extensively in East Africa, most recently consulting with UNICEF Innovations, and working on projects such as Map Kibera and Apps4Africa.
While completing his masters degree at the Fletcher School, Tufts University, he interned with Google Inc. on technology policy in Africa and with Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet & Society, exploring the effect of Internet on democracy. Before graduate school he worked extensively in Uganda.
Wallenberg Theater