Stanford University

Deterrence without Bombs

-

Abstract: Deterrence is one of the most central concepts in international relations scholarship. Countries can dissuade changes to the status quo, according to the logic of deterrence, by threatening an opponent with pain (deterrence by punishment) or by reducing the probability that an opponent will achieve its aims (deterrence by denial). In the realm of international security, most deterrence theorists assume that states need military capabilities to deter by punishment or denial. Deterrence works, based on this line of thinking, because states can use military power to destroy cities, bomb critical military targets, or blunt land invasions. It is also possible, however, to punish an adversary without invoking destruction militarily. Yet deterrence through non-military means remains poorly understood in international relations. This project develops a theory to identify the conditions under which countries can deter opponents without using threats of military force. I explore the implications of this theory in one particular context: the development of dual-use nuclear technology. Having the capability to build nuclear weapons — a condition known as “nuclear latency” — may provide countries with deterrence benefits that we normally associate with having a nuclear arsenal. When states achieve nuclear latency, they (implicitly) threaten to develop nuclear weapons at some point in the future. The threat here is to pursue a policy that others would find undesirable, not to physically destroy things of value on another state’s territory, as in traditional deterrence theory. Does this kind of threat discourage others from meddling in a country’s affairs? This study presents the results of an analysis designed to identify the effects of nuclear latency (and nuclear arsenals) on the onset of international conflict from 1945 to 2000, drawing on a new dataset of sensitive dual-use nuclear plants in 32 countries.

About the Speaker: Matthew Fuhrmann is an associate professor of political science and Ray A. Rothrock `77 Fellow at Texas A&M University. He was named an Andrew Carnegie Fellow in 2016 by the Carnegie Corporation of New York. He is the author of Atomic Assistance: How “Atoms for Peace” Programs Cause Nuclear Insecurity (Cornell University Press, 2012) and the coauthor of Nuclear Weapons and Coercive Diplomacy (Cambridge University Press, 2016). His work has been published or is forthcoming in peer-reviewed journals such as American Journal of Political Science, British Journal of Political Science, International Organization, International Security, International Studies Quarterly, Journal of Conflict Resolution, Journal of Peace Research, and Journal of Politics. He has also written opinion pieces for The Atlantic (online), The Christian Science Monitor, Slate, and USA Today. He is a term member of the Council on Foreign Relations. You can follow him on Twitter @mcfuhrmann.

Encina Hall, 2nd floor

Visiting Associate Professor CISAC
Seminars

Economic Development and the Spatial Allocation of Labor

-

Abstract:

Low-income countries are less productive than their high-income counterparts. Is one reason because labor in high-income countries can more easily move to where it is most productive? We use detailed individual data combined with a spatial general equilibrium model of worker selection to study the determinants of labor productivity growth in Indonesia and the United States over the last 40 years. We find that while improvements in in situ labor productivity and the spatial allocation of human capital resources account for about 55% of Indonesian labor productivity growth, improvements in spatial mobility, due to lower costs of movement and improvements in the amenity of high productivity locations, account for nearly as much: 45%. In a comparison to the US, higher costs of movement in Indonesia account for 10% of the labor productivity gap between the two countries. These results suggest an important role of migration to explain aggregate productivity gaps both across and within countries.
 

Speaker Bio:

melanie morten

Melanie Morten is an Assistant Professor of Economics at Stanford University. Her research focuses on migration in developing countries, including analyzing how migration changes informal financial safety nets and understanding the costs and potential productivity benefits of migration. She has worked on projects in India, Brazil, and Indonesia. She has a PhD in economics from Yale University.

Melanie Morten Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, Stanford University
Seminars

Relic: The Constitution and Ineffective Government

-

Abstract:

American government is incapable of dealing effectively with the challenges of modern society. Why the dysfunction? The usual suspects include polarization and the rise in campaign spending. But William Howell and Terry Moe argue—in their new book, Relic—that the roots of dysfunction go much deeper: to the Constitution itself. The framers designed the Constitution some 225 years ago for a simple agrarian society. But the government they created, a separation of powers system with a parochial Congress at its center, is ill-equipped to address the serious social problems that inevitably arise in a complex post-industrial nation. We are prisoners of the past. The solution is to update the Constitution for modern times. A promising step forward, the authors argue, is a simple reform that pushes Congress and its pathologies to the periphery of policymaking, and brings presidents to center stage.

 

Speaker Bio:

terry moe
Terry M. Moe is the William Bennett Munro Professor of Political Science at Stanford University and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. He has written extensively on public bureaucracy and the presidency, as well as the theory of political institutions more generally. His articles include "The New Economics of Organization," "The Politicized Presidency," "The Politics of Bureaucratic Structure," "Political Institutions: The Neglected Side of the Story," "Presidents, Institutions, and Theory," “The Presidential Power of Unilateral Action” (with William Howell), “Power and Political Institutions,” “Political Control and the Power of the Agent,” and “Do Politicians Use Policy to Make Politics? The Case of Public Sector Labor Laws” (with Sarah F. Anzia). His most recent work is Relic: How Our Constitution Undermines Effective Government--And Why We Need a More Powerful Presidency (with William Howell, 2016)." He has also written extensively on the politics of American education. His newest books are The Comparative Politics of Education: Teachers Unions and Education Systems Around the World (edited with Susanne Wiborg, forthcoming 2017) and Special Interest: Teachers Unions and America’s Public Schools (2011). His past work on education includes Politics, Markets, and America's Schools (1990) and Liberating Learning: Technology, Politics, and the Future of American Education (2009), both with John E. Chubb, and Schools, Vouchers, and the American Public (2001).

Terry M. Moe William Bennett Munro Professor of Political Science at Stanford University
Seminars

The United States, China, and Global Security

-

RSVPS ARE NO LONGER BEING ACCEPTED AS WE HAVE REACHED VENUE CAPACITY. PRESS FILMING IS PROHIBITED.

Seating is first come, first served.

 

amb he cropped
A Panel Discussion Featuring

Ambassador HE Yafei

Former China Ambassador

to the United Nations

 

Panelists:

Ambassador Michael H. Armacost

Shorenstein APARC Distinguished Fellow, former U.S. Ambassador to Japan and the Philippines

Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry

Director, U.S.-Asia Security Initiative; former U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan

Professor Jean C. Oi (Moderator)

Director Shorenstein APARC China Program; William Haas Professor of Chinese Politics

 

Ambassador HE Yafei served as Vice Minister of the Overseas Chinese Affairs Office of the State Council of the People’s Republic of China.; Counselor of the Chinese Permanent Mission to the United Nations; Deputy Director General of the Arms Control Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Minister Counselor and Minister of the Embassy of China in the United States; Director General of the America and Pacific Department; Assistant Minister and Vice Minister of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; and Representative and Ambassador of the Permanent Mission of China to the United Nations Office at Geneva and other international organizations in Switzerland.

 

Co-sponsored by the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center’s U.S.–Asia Security Initiative and the China Program

Seminars

Indonesia in the World Today: Seizing Opportunities, Tackling Challenges

-

Since its formation in 2014, the administration of Indonesian President Joko Widodo (“Jokowi”) has faced opportunities and challenges in many sectors and on many issues: security and economy, terrorism and radicalism, maritime resources and incursions, not to mention foreign-policy dynamics with the US, China, and the rest of Southeast Asia. How has Indonesia responded to these chances and concerns? How will it manage them going forward? Few Indonesians are better equipped to address these questions than retired Brig. Gen. Pandjaitan, who has dealt with them daily since joining Jokowi’s administration in 2014 as the president’s chief of staff and in subsequent cabinet positions.

luhut panjaitan
Luhut Binsar Pandjaitan began his current ministership in July 2016 after serving as Coordinating Minister for Political, Legal, and Security Affairs in 2015-16. Earlier civilian positions include vice-chair of the Golkar Party’s advisory council (2008-2014); founding president of a resources company (2004-2014); trade and industry minister (2000-01); and ambassador to Singapore (1999-2000). His Indonesian army service dates back in time from an assignment as training and education commander (1997-99) through a series of leadership positions to his award as the best graduate of the army academy (1970). Other honors include Ernst & Young Entrepreneur of the Year (2011) and a national best coaching award related to his work on behalf of karate in Indonesia (2001-2010). In 1990-91 he studied in Washington DC at the National Defense University and George Washington University, earning an MPA from GWU (1991), and he is an alumnus of the Indonesia Army Staff College (1983).

 

Download pdf
Presentation slides
Luhut B. Pandjaitan Coordinating Minister for Maritime Affairs, Republic of Indonesia
Seminars

Security Perceptions and ISAF’s Legitimacy in Afghanistan

-

Abstract:

Does the perceived provision of security affect the empirical legitimacy attributed to ISAF in Afghanistan, and vice versa? By asking this question, the paper generates new insight on the relationship between effective and legitimate governance for Afghanistan as an area of limited statehood. The study applies multilevel analysis to an empirical foundation of newly assembled survey data from Northeast Afghanistan for 2009–2013. It thereby contributes evidence to a debate where empirical results remain scant and sheds light on several open questions. People who attributed their security to ISAF were more likely to view ISAF as legitimate. Afghans who viewed ISAF as legitimate were also more likely to feel secure. Nevertheless, the results partly challenge established assumptions on the relationship between effective and legitimate governance. Additionally, factors such as respondents’ liberal values and foreign aid deserve attention when analyzing ISAF’s legitimacy and security perceptions in Afghanistan.

 

Speaker Bio:

eric stollenwerk
Eric Stollenwerk is a Pre-doctoral Fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law. He is also a Research Associate at the Collaborative Research Center (SFB) 700: Governance in Areas of Limited Statehood at Free University Berlin. His work concentrates on questions of effective and legitimate governance in areas of limited statehood with a focus on Sub-Saharan Africa and Afghanistan. Combining quantitative survey research with qualitative field research, his work analyses the interplay between governance actors’ legitimacy, state capacity and governance effectiveness. His research is funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG). With a B.A. in Political Science and German Literature from Georg-August-University Göttingen and an M.A. in Political Science from Free University Berlin, his PhD in Political Science from Free University Berlin is expected in 2017. Further, Eric is the Managing Director of the Collaborative Research Center (SFB) 700: Governance in Areas of Limited Statehood at Free University Berlin and a Research Associate at the Berlin Graduate School for Transnational Studies (BTS). Practical experiences include consulting for the German Federal Foreign Office and several NGOs.

Eric Stollenwerk Pre-doctoral Fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law.
Seminars

History and Democracy in Contemporary India

-

Abstract:

Sunil Khilnani’s new book, Incarnations, tells India’s history through 50 biographical essays, ranging from the Buddha to a contemporary billionaire. Building on rich recent scholarship about Indian history and culture, Khilnani’s work ventures to integrate the fragmented character of disciplinary knowledge of India, and to suggest an alternative to both popular religious and secular nationalist accounts of India’s past. Recovering the stories of remarkable individuals, his talk will highlight experiments in living and radical, dissenting ideas as drivers of Indian history, and contend that many of India’s choices about its future depend on which historical lessons get drawn from its past.

 

Speaker Bio:

Sunil Khilnani is currently Avantha Professor and Director of the India Institute, established by him at King’s College London in 2011. From 2002 to 2011 he was Starr Foundation Professor and Director of South Asia Studies at the Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University, in Washington D.C.; and before that, Professor of Politics at Birkbeck College, University of London. He received his BA and PhD from the University of Cambridge, and he has been a Fellow of Christ’s College Cambridge; the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars; the Institute for Advanced Study in Berlin; and the American Academy in Berlin, as well as holding a Leverhulme Fellowship.

His publications include: Arguing Revolution: The Intellectual Left in Postwar France (Yale, 1993), The Idea of India (Penguin/FSG, 7th edn. 2016), and several collaborative volumes, including: Civil Society: History and Possibilities (Cambridge, 2000); NonAlignment 2.0: a Foreign Policy for India in the 21st Century (Penguin, 2013); An Indian Social Democracy (Academic, 2013); and Comparative Constitutionalism in South Asia (Oxford, 2013). His most recent book is Incarnations: A History of India in Fifty Lives (Penguin/FSG 2016), accompanied by his 50-part BBC radio and podcast and radio series.

Sunil Khilnani Avantha Professor and Director of the India Institute, King's College, London
Seminars
CDDRL Special Events

Mobilizing Without the Masses in China

-

How do weak organizations engage in mobilization under duress? Based on ethnographic work inside labor organizations in China, this talk makes the case that in a repressive environment, civil society organizations can mobilize through a counter-intuitive mechanism. Instead of amassing the crowds to take to the streets, groups can mobilize without the masses. Rather than citizens forming groups in order to trigger larger-scale contention, they form groups in order to better contend as individuals or as small bands of the aggrieved. The clear advantage of this strategy is that it lowers the cost of activism in an authoritarian state. Because it is highly risky for civil society groups to organize large-scale contention, they must devise ways to work around this constraint. Civil society groups coach citizens to adopt a grammar of contention that effectively threatens local social stability and challenges the moral authority of officials. However, at the point of contention, these groups disperse. By sending out only a sole contender or a limited number of contenders to confront state authorities, organizations minimize their risk of being targeted by authorities.

 

Diana Fu is an assistant professor of Asian Politics at the University of Toronto. Her research examines the relationship between popular contention, state power, and civil society, with an emphasis on contemporary China. Her book manuscript, Mobilizing Without the Masses in China examines state control and civil society contention under authoritarian rule. Based on two years of ethnographic research that tracks the development of informal labor organizations, the book explores counterintuitive dynamics of organized contention in post-1989 China.  

Prior to joining the Univeristy of Toronto, Professor Fu was a Walter H. Shorenstein Postdoctoral Fellow at the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, Stanford University and a Predoctoral Fellow at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Political Science. She holds a D.Phil. in Politics and an M.Phil. in Development Studies with distinction from Oxford University, where she studied as a Rhodes Scholar. 

Diana Fu <i>Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Toronto</i>
Seminars

Why Presidents Fail and How They Can Succeed Again

-

Co-sponsor by Stanford in Government (SIG)

Abstract:

elaine kamarck
From the botched attempt to rescue the U.S. diplomats held hostage by Iran in 1980 under President Jimmy Carter and the missed intelligence on Al Qaeda before 9-11 under George W. Bush to, most recently, the computer meltdown that marked the arrival of health care reform under Barack Obama, the American presidency has been a profile in failure. In Why Presidents Fail and How They Can Succeed Again, Elaine Kamarck surveys these and other recent presidential failures to understand why Americans have lost faith in their leaders—and how they can get it back. Kamarck argues that presidents today spend too much time talking and not enough time governing, and that they have allowed themselves to become more and more distant from the federal bureaucracy that is supposed to implement policy. After decades of “imperial” and “rhetorical” presidencies, we are in need of a “managerial” president. This White House insider and former Harvard academic explains the difficulties of governing in our modern political landscape, and offers examples and recommendations of how our next president can not only recreate faith in leadership but also run a competent, successful administration.

 

Speaker Bio:

elaine kamarck cr
Elaine C. Kamarck is a Senior Fellow in the Governance Studies program as well as the Director of the Center for Effective Public Management at the Brookings Institution. She is an expert on American electoral politics and government innovation and reform in the United States, OECD nations, and developing countries. Kamarck is also a Lecturer in Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. She has been a member of the Democratic National Committee and the DNC’s Rules Committee since 1997. She has participated actively in four presidential campaigns and in ten nominating conventions—including two Republican conventions. In the 1980s, she was one of the founders of the New Democrat movement that helped elect Bill Clinton president. She served in the White House from 1993 to 1997, where she created and managed the Clinton Administration's National Performance Review, also known as the “reinventing government initiative.” At the Kennedy School, she served as Director of Visions of Governance for the Twenty-First Century and as Faculty Advisor to the Innovations in American Government Awards Program. In 2000, she took a leave of absence to work as Senior Policy Advisor to the Gore campaign. Kamarck received her Ph.D. in political science from the University of California, Berkeley.

Elaine Kamarck Senior Fellow in the Governance Studies program as well as the Director of the Center for Effective Public Management at the Brookings Institution
Seminars
American Democracy Events
Program on American Democracy in Comparative Perspective

Negotiation in War

-

Abstract: What role do negotiations play in the midst of interstate wars? Extant scholarship has largely treated negotiations as being irrelevant to understanding a conflict's trajectory, or as being a direct reflection of hostilities on the battlefield. Neither view is supported by historical readings or empirical patterns of intra-war diplomacy. I present an alternative view of negotiations as being instrumental. Diplomatic bargaining not only occurs in response to battlefield outcomes, but is also used deceptively by disadvantaged belligerents to stall for time, manage political pressures, and regroup militarily. Using two new daily-level datasets of battles and diplomatic activity, I show that negotiations in post-1945 wars extend conflict when the war initiator has an advantage in fighting, occur in response to lop-sided battle outcomes, dampen the intensity of combat, and are associated with subsequent improvements in the war target's success on the battlefield. This framework of instrumental negotiations shows that the effect of intra-war diplomacy is conditional on the state of hostilities, and has substantial implications on our understanding of war termination and conflict resolution.

About the Speaker: Eric Min is a CISAC Predoctoral Fellow for 2016-2017 and a Ph.D. candidate in political science at Stanford University. His research is focused on interstate diplomacy, information gathering and sharing during crises, and applications of machine learning and text analysis techniques to declassified documents related to conflict and foreign policy. 

His dissertation develops a theory regarding the strategic use of negotiations as a tool of war. Utilizing two new daily-level datasets of battles and diplomatic activity across all interstate wars since 1816, digitized versions of military operations reports and negotiation transcripts from the Korean War, and a series of case studies, he shows that states dynamically weigh costs and benefits with respect to “instrumental” negotiations. His findings demonstrate when, why, and how diplomacy is not only used to settle wars, but also to help win them. These conclusions have substantial implications on academic and policy-making approaches to conflict resolution.  
Eric is a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellow. He has also received support from Stanford's Institute for Research in the Social Sciences (IRiSS) and the Center for International Cooperation and Negotiation (SCICN). Eric received his undergraduate degree in International Relations and Spanish/Linguistics at New York University, where he was valedictorian of the College of Arts and Science.

Encina Hall, 2nd floor

Eric Min Predoctoral Fellow CISAC
Seminars
Subscribe to Seminars