This panel is open to the public and tea and cookies will be served. Please check back soon for more details.

Lunch served to those who respond to Okky Choi by Wednesday, February 26 by 12:00 noon. You can reach Okky at 650-724-8271 or via email at okkychoi@stanford.edu.

Lunch served to those who respond to Okky Choi by Wednesday, January 29 by 12:00 noon. You can reach Okky at 650-724-8271 or via email at okkychoi@stanford.edu.

Lunch served to those who respond to Okky Choi by Wednesday, January 14 by 12:00 noon. You can reach Okky at 650-724-8271 or via email at okkychoi@stanford.edu.

The following papers will be presented. Dinner will be served. "Selling the Chinese State: Bureaucratic transformation in the Post-Deng Era" Martin Dimitrov, Ph.D. candidate, Department of Political Science, Stanford University "The Unmaking of the Chinese Proletariat: Xiagang, Its Origins, and Effects" William Hurst, Ph.D., Department of Political Science, University of California, Berkeley "Political Office, Kinship, and Household Wealth in Rural China" Andrew Walder, Director, Shorenstein APARC; Professor of Sociology, Stanford University

During the past decade, multinational companies (MNCs) have made radical institutional changes: instead of generating research and development (R&D) knowledge solely in central laboratories in home countries, they have shifted their strategy to developing the capability to absorb and utilize cutting-edge technologies worldwide. Based on over 80 interviews with mainly electronics and pharmaceutical companies in Europe, Japan and the United States, this presentation addresses the question: How have MNCs developed their capability to evaluate, internalize, and utilize external R&D knowledge from abroad? Still a work in progress, this research provides an understanding of the evolutionary process of internationalization of R&D as well as the various strategies of Japanese and European high technology MNCs to absorb new technologies from US and Europe.

Biography: Seiko Arai is a doctoral student at the University of Oxford, UK, and currently a visiting scholar at Shorenstein APARC, Stanford University. She obtained a bachelor's degree in law and political science from the University of Tokyo, Japan, and a Masters in public policy from Harvard University. She has worked for the Japanese government and the headquarters of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), France, in the areas of science and technology and education policies.

PLEASE NOTE: Limited seating, RSVP required via email to Conan Carey About the speaker:

Over the last two years in Southeast Asia, acts of terror done in the name of Islam have divided analysts into two broad camps. Academic specialists on Islam in Southeast Asia have tended to emphasize the moderation of the vast majority of Muslims in the region and the local roots of so-called jihadist violence there. While not denying the moderation of most Muslims, Western journalists and officials have relied more on intelligence reports and detainee confessions to situate Southeast Asian jihadists within a global terrorist network organized and inspired by Al Qaeda. Compared with Western journalists and officials, scholars have also tended to portray Islam as a basically tolerant religion and to seek nonreligious explanations and motivations for seemingly Islamist violence. If the scholars have had faith in explanatory contexts--distinctively local, historical, cultural, socioeconomic, and political--their counterparts in media and policy circles have been more inclined to showcase conspiratorial texts: interrogation transcripts, recordings of clandestine conversations, and the selectively Koranic rhetoric of militant Islamists urging global jihad. Which of these contrasting perspectives is superior, analytically and as a basis for counter-terror policy? Are the perpetrators of apparently Islamist terror in Southeast Asia thinking and acting locally? Or globally? Is there a demonstrably Al Qaeda network in the region? If so, what sort of a structure is it? How does it operate? Can a "war" against it succeed? If not, what might be a better approach? Zachary Abuza is an assistant professor of political science and international relations at Simmons College. His most recent book is Renovating Politics in Contemporary Vietnam (2001). Foreign-affairs journals that have published his work include Asian Survey and Contemporary Southeast Asia. He has spoken on Southeast Asian subjects before Congress, at the State Department, on Jim Lehrer's "NewsHour," and in the pages of the Wall Street Journal and Time, among other media. He received his Ph.D. from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy in 1998. In 1995-96 he was a visiting researcher at the Institute of International Relations in Hanoi.