International Relations

FSI researchers strive to understand how countries relate to one another, and what policies are needed to achieve global stability and prosperity. International relations experts focus on the challenging U.S.-Russian relationship, the alliance between the U.S. and Japan and the limitations of America’s counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan.

Foreign aid is also examined by scholars trying to understand whether money earmarked for health improvements reaches those who need it most. And FSI’s Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center has published on the need for strong South Korean leadership in dealing with its northern neighbor.

FSI researchers also look at the citizens who drive international relations, studying the effects of migration and how borders shape people’s lives. Meanwhile FSI students are very much involved in this area, working with the United Nations in Ethiopia to rethink refugee communities.

Trade is also a key component of international relations, with FSI approaching the topic from a slew of angles and states. The economy of trade is rife for study, with an APARC event on the implications of more open trade policies in Japan, and FSI researchers making sense of who would benefit from a free trade zone between the European Union and the United States.

Authors
Amy Zegart
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine looks like a horrific Cold War throwback. Once again, a strongman rules in Moscow, Russian tanks are rolling across borders, and a democratic nation is fighting for its survival, street by street, day by day, armed with little more than Molotov cocktails and a fierce belief in freedom. For all the talk of emerging technologies and new threats, the violence in Ukraine feels raw and low-tech, and the world suddenly looks old again.

And yet, amid all these echoes of the past, Russia’s invasion has ushered in one development that is altogether new and could dramatically change geopolitics in the future: the real-time public disclosure of highly classified intelligence.

Read the rest at The Atlantic

Hero Image
Two hands, one with US flag and one with the Russian flag Yaorusheng/ GettyImages
All News button
1
Subtitle

Never before has the United States government revealed so much, in such granular detail, so fast and so relentlessly about an adversary, Amy Zegart writes. What are the implications of this new strategy?

News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Russian president Vladimir Putin is keeping the world guessing as western intelligence says the invasion he ordered of Ukraine has not been as successful or as swift as he had hoped.

Nearly a week into the largest military campaign in Europe since World War Two, Russian forces have encountered fierce resistance from Ukraine while global condemnation has spurred sanctions that have roiled the Russian economy.

Read the rest at Newsweek

Hero Image
map of ukraine GettyImages
All News button
1
Subtitle

Russian president Vladimir Putin is keeping the world guessing as western intelligence says the invasion he ordered of Ukraine has not been as successful or as swift as he had hoped.

Shorenstein APARC
Stanford University
Encina Hall E301
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

(650) 497-2678
0
CheryllAlipio_2023_Headshot Ph.D.

Cheryll Alipio joined APARC in 2022 and serves as Associate Director for Program and Policy. Previously, she was the Program Director for Government Services and Engagement at the University of Maryland, College Park's Institute for Governmental Service and Research as well as Assistant Research Professor of Anthropology.

An economic and medical anthropologist, she has held teaching and research positions at York University in Canada, the University of Queensland in Australia, and the Asia Research Institute of the National University of Singapore. Her previous experience also includes roles with the Luce Scholars Program at The Asia Foundation and the Washington State Parks Foundation, among others.

Cheryll has extensive experience performing and administering qualitative, mixed methods, applied, and community-based research on contemporary Southeast Asia, Inter-Asia engagements, and Asia-U.S. relations. In addition, she has international and interdisciplinary research expertise and public service experience with nonprofits and NGOs.

She holds a Ph.D. and M.A. in Anthropology from the University of Washington and a B.A. in Anthropology and Psychology from the University of California, Davis. She is co-editor of Money and Moralities in Contemporary Asia (Amsterdam University Press, 2019), The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science's special issue on "Transitioning to Adulthood in Asia" (2013), Children's Geographies' special section on "Asian Children and Transnational Migration" (2015), and the Journal of Modern Slavery's special issue on "New Research on Modern Slavery, Forced Labor, and Human Trafficking" (2022). In addition, she has authored several articles and book chapters on migration and development, transnationalism and diaspora, labor and governance, care work and health, and children and youth.

Associate Director for Program and Policy

This event is open Stanford affiliates online via Zoom.

Register for Zoom  

The Russia-Europe Working Group and The Europe Center are hosting a conversation with panelists from the Kyiv School of Economics regarding the unfolding events in Ukraine. 

Nataliia Shapoval is the Chairman of KSE Institute and Vice President for Policy Research. She guided and conducted policy research on public procurement, cost of HIV disease, the financial burden of health care costs, private-sector driven growth strategies. She served as a contributor to the Ukraine reform monitoring project of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Also, Shapoval is a member of the Editorial Board of VoxUkraine.

Tymofiy Mylovanov is a President of Kyiv School of Economics and an advisor to Ukraine's presidential administration. During his professional career, he has taught at a number of European and American universities, including Rheinische Friedrich–Wilhelms–Universität Bonn, the University of Pennsylvania, and University of Pittsburgh. Tymofiy’s research interests cover such areas as theory of games and institutional design. He has been published in leading international academic journals including Econometrica, American Economic Review, the Review of Economic Studies.

Tymofii Brik is the Head of Sociological Research at the Kyiv School of Economics. In 2018, he received the N. Panina “best young sociologist of Ukraine” award. He received his Ph.D. in social science at the University of Carlos III (Madrid) and obtained a Master’s degree in Sociology and Social Research from Utrecht University. In 2018 and 2019-2020 he was a visiting researcher at Stanford University and New York University, respectively.

Anna Bulakh is an expert and advisor on international security and technologies. Currently she is part of the Hybrid warfare Task Force at Kyiv School of Economics and Ukrainian tech community. Anna has 10 years of experience in security and defence policies. She is a former Research Fellow at the International Centre for Defence and Security in Tallinn and Prague Security Studies Institute. Since 2019 she has also be part of the IT community in AI, cyber and information security. Anna was a policy adviser to Reface, an AI powered app on synthetic media. Anna is a Co-Founder of Cappture.cc, a start-up funded by the Startup Wise Guys accelerator program, and former Program director at Disinfo.Tech. Both companies focused on developing solution to help combat online threats and disinformation. In her work she is dealing with issues such as tech impact of national security, information and cyber security, broader national security policies and resilience building.

Online via Zoom for Stanford affiliates.

Nataliia Shapoval Charmain of KSE Institute and Vice President for Policy Research Panelist Kyiv School of Economics
Tymofiy Mylovanov President of Kyiv School of Economics Panelist Kyiv School of Economics
Tymofii Brik Head of Sociological Research Panelist Kyiv School of Economics
Anna Bulakh Research Fellow Panelist International Centre for Defense and Security
Panel Discussions
Authors
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Trying to justify Russia’s unjustifiable invasion of Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed that Kyiv sought to develop nuclear weapons. That is a glaring untruth, as he well knows. 

Thirty years ago, Ukraine had on its territory the world’s third-largest nuclear arsenal. Kyiv gave those weapons up—in large part because Russia said it would respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity and not use force against it. The country has never sought to reacquire nuclear arms. Read the rest

Originally for Aviation Week

Hero Image
Vladimir Putin Adam Berry / Stringer accessed through GettyImages
All News button
1
Subtitle

Trying to justify Russia’s unjustifiable invasion of Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed that Kyiv sought to develop nuclear
weapons. That is a glaring untruth, as he well knows.

-

For winter quarter 2022, CISAC will be hosting hybrid events. Many events will offer limited-capacity in-person attendance for Stanford faculty, staff, fellows, visiting scholars, and students in accordance with Stanford’s health and safety guidelines, and be open to the public online via Zoom. All CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone. 

                                                                                           

About the Event: Freddy Chen has developed a domestic political theory to explain the consequences of economic shocks for foreign policy. He argues that political leaders have incentives to improve their perceived competence by linking economic grievances to foreign countries. This linkage, in turn, increases public desire for more hawkish foreign policy. Nonetheless, leaders’ ability to make such connections depends on whether they can successfully manipulate information about the culpability for economic shocks. Therefore, the extent to which leaders can control the information environment determines whether an economic shock leads to more aggressive foreign policy. Survey experiments fielded on the American public and a unique sample of U.S. foreign policy analysts show that the information environment shapes elites’ expectations about leaders’ political behavior, public perceptions of leader competence, perceived culpability for the economic shock, and public preferences over foreign policy. Moreover, a cross-national analysis demonstrates that an economic shock tends to increase foreign policy hawkishness if the shock is more foreign-related or if the public has less access to a potential voice of the opposition. This article advances our understanding of the relationship between economic shocks, foreign policy, and public opinion as well as the interactions between domestic politics and international relations, with important implications for both political science research and policymakers.

About the Speaker: Frederick Chen is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Department of Political Science at the University of Wisconsin–Madison and currently a Pre-doctoral Fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University. His research focuses on how economics and security can interact to influence international relations, particularly through domestic political mechanisms. His work has appeared in the Journal of Politics and Conflict Management and Peace Science. He received the David A. Lake Award for best paper from the International Political Economy Society. He earned his M.A. in International Relations from Peking University (2016) and B.A. in International Politics from Tsinghua University (2013).

Virtual to Public. Only those with an active Stanford ID with access to William J Perry Conference Room in Encina Hall may attend in person. 

Frederick R. Chen CISAC
Seminars
Authors
Oriana Skylar Mastro
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

This essay was originally published in Foreign Affairs magazine.

As Russian President Vladimir Putin intensifies his assault on Ukraine, a growing number of U.S. military and foreign policy analysts are voicing concern that China may be emboldened by Russia’s example and try to take Taiwan by force. “If Russia can grab chunks of Ukraine or install a puppet regime and withstand economic sanctions, that could embolden nationalists in China to look to Taiwan and think they could do the same,” Ian Johnson, a China expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, has argued. Representative Michael McCaul, Republican of Texas, made a similar argument in an interview last month, as did retired Army General Jack Keane, who said that Chinese President Xi Jinping sees “weakness in the West and how that can advantage him in terms of his national objectives as well.”

Xi is certainly watching events in Ukraine, but his calculus for whether to use force against Taiwan is shaped primarily by domestic factors, not foreign ones. As I have argued in Foreign Affairs, Chinese leaders are considering “armed reunification” with Taiwan more seriously than at any time in the last 50 years. But Xi will assert Chinese control over the island only if he is confident his military can conduct a successful amphibious invasion and if he believes the timing is right for his own career.


Sign up for our newsletters to receive in-depth analysis from our experts.



Shifts in the international environment would be important for Taiwan if they changed Xi’s thinking on either count. But the war in Ukraine has not. Xi’s views about U.S. power and resolve and about the likely international response to an invasion of Taiwan probably remain unchanged. If anything, China’s desire not to invite comparisons with Russia at a time when the world is united against Moscow will lengthen its timeline for taking control of Taiwan, not shorten it.

Too Big to Sanction?

The economic sanctions that the United States, Canada, and many European countries have imposed on Russia give China little reason for pause. To the contrary, these punitive measures simply confirm Beijing’s previous assessments of the possible economic repercussions of using force against Taiwan. Chinese leaders expect the economic costs of an invasion to be heavy but acceptable—partly because of how the international community has responded to Chinese provocations in the past and partly because Beijing’s foreign policy is designed to convince countries to stay out of China’s “internal” affairs, such as the status of Taiwan.

That is not to say the economic measures Washington and its allies have imposed on Russia in recent days are insignificant. The United States and European countries have blocked Russia’s access to most of its foreign currency reserves, making it impossible for Moscow to intervene to prop up its collapsing currency. They have frozen the assets of senior Russian officials, including Putin himself. And they have moved to exclude big Russian banks from SWIFT, the global financial messaging system.

China’s ability to retaliate against the West with economic sanctions of its own is much greater than Russia’s.
Oriana Skylar Mastro

But the United States and its allies could do more to punish Russia. They could bar all transactions with Russia, whether trade or financial. They could seize all Russian assets within their jurisdictions. Washington could announce secondary sanctions on anyone using U.S. dollars for any transaction with Russia. Most important, the United States could use these and other measures to prevent Russia from exporting oil and gas. Letting Russia continue to export oil and gas would be like letting China sell consumer electronics even after it had taken Taiwan by force.

If the United States and its allies have been cautious in their response to Russia, they are likely to be even more restrained when responding to China — and Beijing knows it. China’s ability to retaliate against the West with economic sanctions of its own is much greater than Russia’s. Singapore, which announced trade and banking restrictions against Moscow, trades about $2.5 billion worth of goods with Russia each year — but $57 billion worth of goods with China. China’s leaders likely do not fear U.S.-led economic sanctions in the event of a Taiwan takeover because they probably think that China’s own productive capacity, resources, and friendly partners will allow them to survive on their own, especially since China will soon be the world’s largest economy. They are probably right. China could absorb the types of sanctions being imposed on Russia. And given China’s ability to inflict pain on Western countries, any measures levied against Beijing would likely be softer than those imposed on Moscow.

Taiwan Is Not Ukraine

The Western military response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine will have an even smaller impact than sanctions on China’s thinking about Taiwan. True, neither the United States nor NATO has deployed troops to fight on Ukraine’s behalf. And U.S. military assistance to Ukraine has been modest: late last month, President Joe Biden instructed the State Department to release up to an additional $350 million worth of weapons from U.S. stocks to Ukraine.

But Russia would have to invade a NATO ally without provoking a U.S. military response for Chinese leaders to seriously question Washington’s commitment to defending Taiwan. Biden has made clear from the beginning of the crisis that his administration will never send troops to Ukraine—a stark contrast with his rhetoric on Taiwan. Just last week, Biden stated unequivocally that the United States would defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese attack. As a show of support, he also sent to the island a delegation of former U.S. officials led by Mike Mullen, a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Chinese planners largely assume the United States would intervene militarily on behalf of Taiwan.
Oriana Skylar Mastro

In any case, Chinese planners largely assume the United States would intervene militarily on behalf of Taiwan. What some of them question is whether the United States could amass enough forces fast enough to blunt a Chinese assault on the island. Ironically, if the United States had launched a military operation in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Chinese leaders would have had further reason to question Washington’s ability to thwart a Chinese assault on Taiwan. The United States does not have the resources to fight the Russians in Europe and prepare adequately for a great-power war in Asia.  

Of course, these facts have not prevented China from trying to manipulate the narrative to undermine Taiwan’s resolve. Chinese state media has been flush with stories about how the United States did not come to Ukraine’s aid and therefore won’t come to Taiwan’s either. Like much of what appears on Chinese state media, however, these stories reflect what Chinese leaders want the world to believe—not what they believe themselves.

Not the Right Time

Chinese leaders are without a doubt considering an attack on Taiwan, but now is not the right time. China’s military is still honing the capabilities it would need to take and hold the island. And Xi is unlikely to take a dangerous gamble on Taiwan before the next Party Congress in late 2022, when he is widely expected to secure a third term as general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party. Xi is also working hard to lessen China’s technological dependence on the West, thus minimizing the impact on any further decoupling after a possible war. For all these reasons, an assault on Taiwan before 2025 is unlikely.

If anything, the crisis in Ukraine creates an additional incentive for China to wait. Beijing does not want the world to equate the two scenarios. From China’s perspective, Ukraine is an independent country engaged in a border dispute with Russia. Taiwan, by contrast, “has always been an inalienable part of China’s territory,” as China’s ambassador to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Deng Xijun, put it late last month. In other words, linking the two issues would undermine China’s claim to the island.

China also understands that moving against Taiwan now would solidify fears in the West of an axis of autocrats. The United States may not have the resolve to fight a protracted war to defend Taiwan. But suddenly faced with a need to defend freedom and democracy against an authoritarian alliance, Washington could muster a greater military response and convince its allies to do the same. Partly for this reason, China has desperately tried to maintain some semblance of neutrality during the Ukrainian crisis.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has certainly changed aspects of the international order. It has rallied European countries against Russia, prompted Germany to increase defense spending, and even convinced historically neutral countries such as Finland, Sweden, and Switzerland to take a stance against Moscow. From China’s perspective, however, nothing Russia or its adversaries have done meaningfully alters the calculus on Taiwan. 

Headshot of Oriana Skylar Mastro

Oriana Skylar Mastro

Center Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies

Read More

Army Reserve members during practice
Commentary

Ukraine Is a Distraction from Taiwan

Getting bogged down in Europe will impede the U.S.’s ability to compete with China in the Pacific.
Ukraine Is a Distraction from Taiwan
President Xi and Kim Jong Un meet on a TV screen
Commentary

North Korea Is Becoming an Asset for China

Pyongyang’s Missiles Could Fracture America’s Alliances
North Korea Is Becoming an Asset for China
Chinese military propaganda depicting the Second Taiwan Strait Crisis of 1958.
News

Reassessing China’s Capabilities and Goals for Strategic Competition

On the World Class podcast, Oriana Skylar Mastro argues that in order to set effective policy toward China, the United States needs to better understand how and why China is projecting power.
Reassessing China’s Capabilities and Goals for Strategic Competition
Hero Image
Protesters display placards in front of the Representative Office of the Moscow-Taipei Coordination Commission to protest against Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine on February 25, 2022 in Taipei, Taiwan.
Protesters display placards in front of the Representative Office of the Moscow-Taipei Coordination Commission to protest against Russia’s military invasion of Ukraine on February 25, 2022 in Taipei, Taiwan.
Lam Yik Fei/ Getty Images
All News button
1
Subtitle

Russia’s War in Ukraine Doesn’t Presage a Chinese Assault on Taiwan

Date Label

This paper examines the post-financial crisis decline in the electoral success of social democratic parties. It argues that two core shifts in the economy have put pressure on social democratic economic policy: social, economic and geographic sorting by high productivity workers in a context of increasing stagnation created by declining birth rates and generic economic slowdown, have created sharper tradeoffs between skill groups and geographic areas. This sorting has a well-known geographic component, with high-skilled work increasingly concentrated in cities, and a social component, as high productivity workers not only co-locate, but make social choices (schooling, marriage) that are increasingly homogamous. This paper argues that these two features of the contemporary economic structure create (yet another ) set of tradeoffs for social democrats aiming to create an electoral coalition around equity producing policy. While Kitschelt’s (1994) seminal contribution theorized the divergence of class based preferences in part through the lens of increasing productivity divergence across firms, increasing geographic and social sorting next to diverging paths of stagnation hardens these tradeoffs, by increasingly creating not just a social conflict - but also an economic conflict - between new urban voters and suburban and rural voters. The paper develops these arguments theoretically, showing that growing geographic divergence matters for electoral outcomes, even in proportional electoral systems. It then shows that these changes create regional and skill based tradeoffs for social democratic parties in terms of their competitive stances. It tests these propositions using fine grained electoral data in 20 countries, and an analysis of thirty years of combined individual level election studies in 16 countries.

Image
Jane Gingrich

Jane Gingrich is a professor of comparative political economy in the department of politics and international relations at the University of Oxford. Her research focuses broadly on the politics of education and welfare policies, examining the politics of shifting policy in response to changing economic and political alignments. She is the PI of the ERC research project SCHOOLPOL, and is completing a book length project on social democratic parties. She is a member of the CIFAR Innovation, Equity and the future of Prosperity working group.

Jane Gingrich speaker Magdalen College, University of Oxford
0
narayan_headshot_-_ashray_narayan.jpg

Ashray Narayan is an M.A. candidate in International Policy at Stanford’s Freeman Spogli Institute whose work bridges technology policy, media, and democracy. He previously managed programs at Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation with Professor Andrew Grotto, led marketing and launch strategy for the Sequoia‑backed startup Rox, and held senior creative roles at Buck Mason and Bode. Earlier experiences include the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs and research at UC Berkeley. Ashray earned a B.A. in Economics from USC. 

Master's in International Policy Class of 2027
Date Label
Paragraphs
3D mockup cover of APARC's volume 'South Korea's Democracy in Crisis'

Like in many other states worldwide, democracy is in trouble in South Korea, entering a state of regression in the past decade, barely thirty years after its emergence in 1987. The society that recently had ordinary citizens leading “candlelight protests” demanding the impeachment of Park Geun-hye in 2016-17 has become polarized amid an upsurge of populism, driven by persistent structural inequalities, globalization, and the rise of the information society. 

The symptoms of democratic decline are increasingly hard to miss: political opponents are demonized, democratic norms are eroded, and the independence of the courts is whittled away. Perhaps most disturbing is that this all takes place under a government dominated by former pro-democracy activists.

The contributors to this volume trace the sources of illiberalism in today’s Korea; examine how political polarization is plaguing its party system; discuss how civil society and the courts have become politicized; look at the roles of inequality, education, and social media in the country’s democratic decline; and consider how illiberalism has affected Korea’s foreign policy. 

Table of Contents

Introduction
Korea’s Democratic Decay: Worrisome Trends and Pressing Challenges
Gi-Wook Shin and Ho-Ki Kim

1. Why Is Korean Democracy Majoritarian but Not Liberal?
Byongjin Ahn

2. Uses and Misuses of Nationalism in the Democratic Politics of Korea
Aram Hur

3. The Weakness of Party Politics and Rise of Populism in Korea
Kwanhu Lee

4. The Politicization of Civil Society: No Longer Watchdogs of Power, Former Democratic Activists Are Becoming New Authoritarian Leaders 
Myoung-Ho Park

5. The Politicization of the Judiciary in Korea: Challenges in Maintaining the Balance of Power
Seongwook Heo

6. Two Divergences in Korea’s Economy and Democracy: Regional and Generational Disparities
Jun-Ho Jeong and Il-Young Lee

7. Democracy and the Educational System in Korea 
Seongsoo Choi

8. Social Media and the Salience of Polarization in Korea
Yong Suk Lee

9. Illiberalism in Korean Foreign Policy
Victor Cha

10. The Democratic Recession: A Global and Comparative Perspective
Larry Diamond

Epilogue
Korea’s 2022 Presidential Election: Populism in the Post-Truth Era
Ho-Ki Kim and Gi-Wook Shin

Media Coverage

To celebrate the publication of South Korea's Democracy in Crisis, APARC held a book launch seminar in Seoul on June 14, 2022. The event received extensive coverage in Korean media, including the following:

Desk, examination, or review copies can be requested through Stanford University Press.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Subtitle

The Threats of Illiberalism, Populism, and Polarization

Authors
Gi-Wook Shin
Book Publisher
Shorenstein APARC
Subscribe to International Relations