A Winning Gambit
CISAC Co-Director Siegfried Hecker explains why nuclear arms states stand to gain more than they lose by ratifying the Comprehensive Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). He explains why it is crucial to prevent states from testing nuclear weapons, with the strongest barrier to testing being the CTBT.
Fran Moore
Y2E2 building
E-IPER, room 226
473 Via Ortega
Stanford, CA 94305-4020
Frances C. Moore is a PhD student in the Emmett Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources at Stanford University. She is working with David Lobell and Larry Goulder to study how farmers are likely to adapt to climate change so as to reduce its negative effects. Understanding the likely rate and effectiveness of this autonomous adaptation is important for accurately estimating the future impact of climate change on agricultural production and food security. Fran is combining experimental, statistical, and field-based methods from economics, anthropology and psychology with climate data and models in order to better model adaptation in agriculture.
Fran’s previous work focused on the negotiation of international climate agreements and she has published several articles on the mitigation potential of short-lived greenhouse gases in developing countries and on the negotiation of international adaptation policy. Fran is a Stanford Interdisciplinary Graduate Fellow, a former Switzer Foundation Fellow and a former NSF Graduate Research Fellow. She holds a Masters of Environmental Science from the Yale School of Forestry and Environmental Studies and a B.A., summa cum laude, in Earth and Planetary Science from Harvard University.
Students simulate White House war-room drama in class born of Ethics & War series
The president, surrounded by his Cabinet members and senior national security and foreign policy advisors, appears grim as he declares: “This is certainly the greatest crisis I’ve ever faced as a president.”
He has ordered the deployment of U.S. forces into Syrian territory to protect civilians and establish safe zones. His Cabinet must now determine whether to order a pre-emptive strike against Syrian troops on word from the CIA that the Bashar al-Assad regime appears ready to use chemical and biological weapons stored in underground bunkers east of Damascus.
After a military briefing by the commander of CENTCOM, the president cautions those assembled at the classified briefing: “Remember, history will judge us, in part, by how thoroughly we discuss all the options today.”
With imagined top-secret memorandums from the CIA and the White House – as well as the real-deal Obama Nuclear Posture Review – some 20 Stanford undergraduate and law students dressed in suits and armed with laptops and position papers spend three hours debating the merits of an attack on Syrian forces.
Scott Sagan, a political science professor and senior fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC), plays Obama in the class co-taught by Allen Weiner, director of the Center on International Conflict and Negotiation at the Law School.
The Ethics and Law of War class presents law and political science students with some of the political, legal and moral consequences of war. For their final simulation, they must stay in character, grill one another as policymakers and world leaders might do behind closed doors – and then defend their final decisions.
“Instead of simply learning abstract just-war theory or international law doctrine, the simulations encourage students to apply what they've learned to real problems,” says Weiner, once a legal adviser at the State Department. “This provides for much deeper awareness of the subject matter and richer appreciation of the nuances and complexities.
Image
![]() |
Scott Sagan as President Obama |
Ethics & War
The class grew out of Stanford’s hugely successful, two-year War & Ethics lecture series, which concluded last month. Philosophers, writers, journalists, historians, social scientists, human rights activists and policy makers came together several times a month to grapple with the complex ethical equations of war. Co-sponsored by a dozen centers and departments across campus, the series drew big names and big crowds.
Vietnam War veterans and award winning authors Tobias Wolff – a Stanford English professor – and Tim O’Brien told a sold-out audience that writing about war was both therapeutic and heartbreaking. O’Brien was a Pulitzer Prize finalist for “The Things They Carried,” a harrowing string of stories about a platoon of American soldiers in Vietnam.
How do you write about war? “You do it sentence by sentence, line by line, character by character, even syllable by syllable,’ O’Brien told a mesmerized audience. “You dive into that wreck and try to salvage something.”
Journalist Sebastian Junger spoke at the screening of “Restrepo,” his documentary about the Afghanistan War. Stanford students and faculty performed in George Packer’s play, “Betrayed,” which illuminated the U.S. abandonment of young Iraqi interpreters who risked their lives for Washington during the Iraq War. For the final event, Debra Satz, a philosophy professor and director of the McCoy Family Center for Ethics in Society, Sagan, and Charles Dunlap, a retired Air Force general who now leads the Center on Law, Ethics and National Security at Duke University, debated the future ethical challenges of war.
Sagan, an expert in nuclear policy and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction who worked at the Pentagon and was a consultant to the Secretary of Defense, said the lecture series enriched his students by forcing them to pay attention and question the moral and legal underpinnings of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“I was stretched, intellectually, by this series,” he said. “It encouraged me to read and discuss both fiction and philosophy that raises the same ethical issues – from a very different perspective – that we analyze in political science.”
Back to class
Weiner, as stand-in for Vice President Joe Biden, tells those assembled they must consider that within 24 hours, 6,000 American troops will be in danger. The CIA has a “high degree of confidence” that Assad has ordered the removal of the chemical weapons from the underground bunkers and transport trucks have been spotted at the sights.
“As we head into an election cycle, the difficulties of the decision that we make today will be placed under even greater scrutiny,” Weiner says.
That decision will be to make one of these hard choices:
- The U.S. military withdraws its troops and avoids a military confrontation, but risks further civilian deaths and the condemnation of Arab Spring allies;
- Obama orders conventional airstrikes against Syrian troops, which could lead to thousands of inadvertent civilian casualties;
- Washington takes extraordinary measures and uses nuclear weapons to destroy the underground storage bunkers for its weapons of mass destruction. This last option likely would eliminate any chance of Syrian troops using chemical weapons, but it would open a Pandora’s box for the Nobel Peace Prize president who has pledged to work toward a nuclear-free world.
Image
![]() |
U.S. Army Col. Viet Luong as CENTCOM Commander Gen. James Mattis |
The students know Americans are weary of war after the WMD fiasco in Iraq and a decade-long war in Afghanistan, both of which have claimed countless lives and a trillion-plus in taxpayer dollars. Their decision – as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, among others – is weighted by the concern that Americans likely won’t re-elect a president who drags them into another costly warm, and by the fear that a successful president cannot let American troops be exposed to deadly chemical attacks.
The mock military briefing by Gen. James Mattis – played by visiting CISAC military fellow, U.S. Army Col. Viet Luong, himself a commander in Afghanistan – lays out the risks and probabilities of casualties under each scenario.
A student asks Luong which military option he would recommend.
The general prevaricates: “I’m a military guy; I tend to lean toward success and then I also consider civilian casualties. But I’m also very concerned about putting my soldiers at risk.”
Clinton, voiced by international policy student Micaela Hellman-Tincher, says she’s concerned about mission creep. “Consider the international implications of us entering into conflict,” she says.
The fake Samantha Power of the National Security Council, played by Ashley Rhoades, urges diplomatic measures and a stand-down from military conflict. “I’m not advocating in any way for inaction,” she says. “There are several diplomatic solutions. We ask that you give us 24 hours to be able to work on these diplomatic options and multilateral diplomacy.”
Such as what? Such as calling on Moscow to mediate or seeking a U.N. envoy.
The legal team from the law school lays out their arguments for why a preventive strike would be illegal under certain conventions; while a pre-emptive strike based on imminent and unavoidable threats of attack might be permissible.
Then Stanford law student Alex Weber – playing Avril Haines, legal advisor to the National Security Council – addresses the elephant in the room: the nuclear option.
“If you use a nuclear weapon, regardless of whether the Syrians use chemical weapons against our troops, you are, as Colin Powell said in the 1991 Gulf War, opening a Pandora’s Box, particularly because Syria has no nuclear weapon,” Weber says. “You are the nuclear nonproliferation president. There is a psychological button that you push that will prompt the media to take the ethical debate to new levels.”
In the end, consensus appears to be growing around an immediate preventive strike against the storage bunkers using conventional forces. The Cabinet knows this could lead to deaths on both sides, but allowing the Syrians to use chemical weapons could lead to even more.
“You can’t cut and run, Mr. President,” insists student Torry Castellano, playing White House Chief of Staff Jacob Lew.
Obama says he will take their advice under advisement and all rise as he leaves the war room.
More photos of the student simulation are available at CISAC's Facebook page.
AMENDS Inaugural Conference - Meet the Leaders of the New Middle East
Image
![](https://fsi9-prod.s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/styles/500xauto/public/evnts/7135/Flyer_JPEG.jpg?itok=OJayIoKj)
Summit Schedule
Day 1: Wednesday 11 April |
||
2:00 – 5:30 PM Paul Brest Hall |
“Technology, Social Media, and Innovation” AMENDS Talks Speakers:Aymen Abderrahman, Selma Chirouf, Rawan Da’as, Elizabeth Harmon, Sonya Kassis, Heather Libbe, Ifrah Magan, Sherif Maktabi, Brian Pellot, George Somi |
|
6:30 – 8:30 PM |
Innovation and Entrepreneurial Leadership Dinner Co-Sponsored by TechWadi By Invitation Only |
Day 2: Thursday 12 April
2:00 – 5:30 PM Paul Brest Hall |
“Building Civil Society” AMENDS Talks Speakers: Firas Al-Dabagh, Abdullah Al-Fakharany, Marwan Alabed, Cole Bockenfeld, Nadir Ijaz, Selma Maarouf, Matthew Morantz, Alaa Mufleh, Fadi Quran, Nada Ramadan |
Day 3: Friday 13 April
9:00 AM- 12:00 Gunn-SIEPR Building |
“Peace and Conflict Resolution” AMENDS Talks Speakers: Sherihan Abdel-Rahman, Sam Adelsberg, Mohammad Al-Jishi, Abdulla Al-Misnad, Yahya Bensliman, Ilyes El-Ouarzadi, Sandie Hanna, Priya Knudson, Megan McConaughey, Gavin Schalliol |
|
1:30 – 5:00 PM Gunn-SIEPR Building |
Speakers and Panelists Sami Ben Gharbia Tunisian political activist, Foreign Policy Top 100 Thinker Professor Allen Weiner Co-Director of Stanford Univeristy Center on International Conflict and Negotiation Radwan Masmoudi Founder and President of the Center of the Study of Islam & Democracy |
|
6:30 – 8:30 PM Paul Brest Hall |
Networking Dinner By Invitation Only |
Day 4: Saturday 14 April
9:00 AM- 12:00 Bechtel Conference Center, Encina Hall |
“The New Middle East”
AMENDS Talks Speakers: Firyal Abdulaziz, Lubna Alzaroo, Hoor Al-Khaja, Ali Al-Murtadha, Jessica Anderson, Seif Elkhawanky, Micah Hendler, Salmon Hossein, Ram Sachs, Rana Sharif |
|
1:30 – 5:00 PM Bechtel Conference Center, Encina Hall |
Speakers and Panelists Rami Khouri Director of the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International Affairs at the American University of Beirut Ahmed Benchemsi Moroccan journalist and pro-democracy activist Professor Aaron Hahn Tapper Founder of Abraham’s Vision Nasser Weddady Civil Rights Outreach Director, American Islamic Congress |
Day 1 - Paul Brest Hall
Day 2 - Paul Brest Hall
Day 3 - Gunn-SIEPR Building
Day 4 - Bechtel Conference Center, Encina Hall
Brenna Powell
Encina Hall
Stanford, CA 94305-6055
Brenna Marea Powell received her PhD in Government and Social Policy from Harvard in 2011. She is interested in comparative racial and ethnic politics, conflict and inequality. Her research includes security and policing in divided societies, as well as racial politics in Brazil and the United States. She has been a graduate fellow at Harvard's Wiener Center for Inequality and Social Policy, and Stanford's Center for International Security and Cooperation. Prior to her graduate study, she spent five years working with the Stanford
Center on International Conflict and Negotiation on grassroots dialogue and community-based mediation programs in Northern Ireland. Brenna speaks Portuguese and received her BA from Stanford in Comparative Studies in Race and Ethnicity.
At CDDRL, Brenna is working with the Global Commission on Elections, Democracy and Security supported by the Kofi Annan Foundation and International IDEA. She is also working on a book project about post-conflict policing in Northern Ireland.
Use of Climate Information in International Negotiation for Adaptation Resources
Adaptation of vulnerable areas to climate change is---and will continue to be---an important subject of negotiations taking place in several international forums, including the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change; the Major Economies negotiations; and the G-8 talks. Ideally, adaptation assistance to any given nation would be commensurate with the social and economic impacts of future climate change and the cost of the required adaptation measures. Instead, neither is known.
The Trilateral Process: The United States, Ukraine, Russia and Nuclear Weapons
When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, Ukraine had the world’s third largest nuclear arsenal on its territory. When Ukrainian-Russian negotiations on removing these weapons from Ukraine appeared to break down in September 1993, the U.S. government engaged in a trilateral process with Ukraine and Russia. The result was the Trilateral Statement, signed in January 1994, under which Ukraine agreed to transfer the nuclear warheads to Russia for elimination. In return, Ukraine received security assurances from the United States, Russia and Britain; compensation for the economic value of the highly-enriched uranium in the warheads (which could be blended down and converted into fuel for nuclear reactors); and assistance from the United States in dismantling the missiles, missile silos, bombers and nuclear infrastructure on its territory. Steven Pifer recounts the history of this unique negotiation and describes the key lessons learned.
Efficiency of Land Allocation through Tenancy Markets: Evidence from China
Tenancy markets provide an opportunity to trade land between labor-scarce farmers, that is those who engage in off-farm employment, and land-scarce farmers, that is those who want to expand agricultural production. For emerging middle-income countries where rural to urban migration is active, facilitating a well-functioning tenancy markets is important to increase farmer's income and improve agricultural productivity. Although the existing literature argues that high transaction costs are the major source of market failure, the nature of transaction costs is seldom explored. We hypothesize that the search and negotiation costs and the expected loss of land, due to weak property rights, are the major components of the transaction costs in tenancy markets and that they lead to smaller numbers of rental transactions. We also find empirical evidence in support of these hypotheses using farm household data from China.
Erik Jensen and students shaping rule of law in Afghanistan
Armed only with law textbooks, six Stanford law students and faculty advisor and senior research scholar Erik Jensen landed in Kabul, Afghanistan on Feb. 6 on a mission that would last six days.
The group made up Stanford's Afghanistan Legal Education Project (ALEP), a student-led law school project funded by the U.S. State Department that creates textbooks on Afghanistan's legal system specifically for the instruction of Afghani students.
Stanford students in the Afghanistan Legal Education Project (ALEP) meet with Supreme Court Chief Justice Abdul Salam Azimi during their six-day visit to Kabul. (Courtesy of Daniel Lewis)
Working with the American University of Afghanistan (AUAF), the project is creating a new generation of lawyers to shape Afghanistan's future.
Since it was founded in 2007 by Stanford law alums Alexander Benard J.D. '08 and Eli Sugarman J.D. '09, the project has published four textbooks. These include an introductory text to the laws of Afghanistan and textbooks on commercial, criminal and international law. Students are currently writing a textbook on constitutional law.
"The whole project is indigenously oriented," Jensen said. "The textbooks are written in response to needs and demands of Afghan students, and we try to contextualize our work as much as we can to the politics, economics and social order in Afghanistan."
The purpose of the recent trip to Kabul was to explore the future and progress of the project. Students attended classes that are currently taught using ALEP textbooks, got feedback from Afghani students and professors and interacted with administrators at the AUAF to see where the project is headed.
"Sitting in on the classes and meeting with the students was for us a priority, because that's the best way we can get feedback on our books and make the project better," said Daniel Lewis LAW '12 and ALEP co-executive director.
After meeting with the president of AUAF, the group agreed that the ultimate goal for the project is to build a complete law school curriculum.
"The time frame is uncertain, but we're expanding really quickly," Lewis said.
In addition to rolling out the new textbook, ALEP plans to introduce new classes in the fall on Islamic law and the informal justice system in Afghanistan, taught by a collaborating Afghan professor and an affiliated postdoctoral fellow. Workshops on practical skills such as negotiation and writing are also on the horizon, as well as translations of the books into Dari and Pashto.
The group met other notable Afghan and American officials, including the dean at the Kabul University School of Law, university professors from the most populated provinces and Ambassador Hans Klemm, coordinating director of rule of law and law enforcement at the Embassy of the United States in Kabul.
"All the high officials we met with were extraordinarily supportive of the project," Jensen said.
"We'd gone over there expecting it wouldn't really be easy getting our books out there [past AUAF], or that there would be some hostility," Lewis said. "But that really wasn't the case. The feedback was that they were excited to have another resource that was new and updated."
Other universities are not the only other audiences attracted to the project's textbooks, which are available publicly, and for free, online.
"Over the past year or so, people have been downloading them [the books] and using them, some of which we know about and some of which we don't," said Rose Ehler LAW ‘12, another ALEP co-executive director.
The U.S. military has also used the textbooks to familiarize officers with Afghani law. According to Jensen, retired Gen. Stanley McChrystal was "very familiar" with the textbooks.
The Afghan Ministry of Justice, leading judges and legal academics have also expressed interest in the project, according to Lewis.
"It was fascinating to be [in Kabul] as Stanford law students talking to these really important people in Afghanistan...in a knowledgeable way," Lewis said.
But strengthening the AUAF law school and spreading legal education are only the beginning of ALEP's goals.
"The development of the rule of law is historical process. It takes time; there are fits and starts," Jenson said.
"The problem is when you are at Afghanistan's level of development, it will go through years and years of fits and starts...and as society goes through these episodes, it will need a new cadre of leaders to lead to positive episodes," he added.
ALEP seeks to contribute to the formation of these future leaders, not only in the legal profession but also in the country as a whole. By using analytical methods to teach students critical thinking, they hope to bridge the gap between American style legal education and the Afghan reality.
"They [the Afghan students] will see opportunities that we can't see from Stanford, but they can see on the ground in Afghanistan," Jensen said, describing the project as one that is about imagining alternatives so as to prevent oppression.
The law students' person-to-person contact with the Afghani students made it clear that this project extends far beyond what can be seen on paper.
"The passion that we all saw in the students in Afghanistan just increased our passion for the project at Stanford...the heart and soul of the Stanford group is derived from the heart and soul of the Afghan students."
"Everybody on the trip came away saying, ‘Wow, we're actually doing something that's useful here,'" Lewis said.
The trip left the group optimistic about the project's future.
"Student demand is high; we've been successful at retaining some of the best faculty, and we hope that that the [AUAF] law school becomes a center of educational excellence," Jensen said.
Despite the fact that ALEP is no longer the "sole source" of Afghan law textbooks, Jensen is confident about the books' prospects.
"I look forward to the marketplace of competition...I think our books will show themselves to be the best."