Stanford University

Security

FSI scholars produce research aimed at creating a safer world and examing the consequences of security policies on institutions and society. They look at longstanding issues including nuclear nonproliferation and the conflicts between countries like North and South Korea. But their research also examines new and emerging areas that transcend traditional borders – the drug war in Mexico and expanding terrorism networks. FSI researchers look at the changing methods of warfare with a focus on biosecurity and nuclear risk. They tackle cybersecurity with an eye toward privacy concerns and explore the implications of new actors like hackers.

Along with the changing face of conflict, terrorism and crime, FSI researchers study food security. They tackle the global problems of hunger, poverty and environmental degradation by generating knowledge and policy-relevant solutions. 

FSI International Conference: Transitions 2009

-

Join us for an engaging day of debate and discussion about the profound opportunities for change offered by the U.S. presidential election and historic transitions abroad.

8:30 AM REGISTRATION AND BREAKFAST
9:15 AM - 12:00 PM MORNING SESSION
9:15 AM - 10:45 AM PLENARY I
TransitionS 2009: Where Have We Been? Where Are We Going?
  • Coit D. Blacker, Olivier Nomellini Professor in International Studies; Senior Fellow and Director, Freeman Spogli Institute
  • Gerhard Casper, President Emeritus of Stanford University; Peter and Helen Bing Professor in Undergraduate Education; Professor of Law; Professor of Political Science, by courtesy; Senior Fellow, FSI
  • Alan M. Garber, Henry J. Kaiser, Jr. Professor; Professor of Medicine; Professor, by courtesy, of Economics and of Health Research and Policy; Senior Fellow, FSI; Director, Center for Health Policy and Center for Primary Care and Outcomes Research
  • Stephen D. Krasner, Graham H. Stuart Professor of International Relations; Senior Fellow, FSI; Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution; former Deputy Director, FSI and former Director, Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law
11:00 AM - 12:00 PM CONCURRENT BREAKOUT SESSIONS
  • Combating HIV in Low Resource Countries: Who’s Surviving, Who’s Dying, and Why? Alan M. Garber, Chair
  • Rethinking the War on Terror. Martha Crenshaw, Chair
  • The European Union and Prospects for the Promotion of Democracy and Human Rights. Amir Eshel, Chair
  • Towards Regional Security in Northeast Asia. Daniel Sneider, Chair
12:30 PM - 2:00PM LUNCHEON
Keynote Address:
Beyond the West? New administrations in the United States and Europe face the challenge of a multipolar world
Timothy Garton Ash, Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution; Professor of European Studies, University of Oxford; Isaiah Berlin Professorial Fellow, St. Antony’s College, University of Oxford
2:30 PM - 5:30 PM AFTERNOON SESSION
2:30 PM - 4:00 PM PLENARY II
Power and Responsibility: Building International Order in an Era of Transnational Threat
  • Stephen J. Stedman, Director, Ford Dorsey Program in International Policy Studies;
    Professor of Political Science, by courtesy; Senior Fellow, FSI
  • Bruce Jones, Research Professor of Politics; Director, Center on International Cooperation, New York University
  • Carlos Pascual, Vice President and Director of the Foreign Policy Studies Program, the Brookings Institution
4:30 PM - 5:30 PM CONCURRENT BREAKOUT SESSIONS
  • Promoting Democracy: Should We, Can We? Kathryn Stoner-Weiss, Chair
  • Is African Society in Transition? Rosamond L. Naylor, Chair
  • The World Is Not Flat: Working in a Global Economy. Joshua Cohen, Chair
  • Overcoming Barriers to Nuclear Disarmament. David Holloway, Chair
5:30 PM - 6:30 PM COCKTAIL RECEPTION

KEYNOTE

Download pdf
Download pdf

Frances C. Arrillaga Alumni Center

Conferences
FSI International Conference

Domestic Politics of U.S.-Korea Relations

Kim argues anti-Americanism belongs to a category of political opposition which may be divided into orthodox dissent and unorthodox dissent: the former involving "efforts to improve the existing system in keeping with its underlying ideological values," while the latter is mainly concerned with the change in political and socioeconomic structures.

In the South Korean context, orthodox dissent is the conservative-rightist whereas unorthodox dissent the progressive-leftist. While sometimes criticizing the U.S. on selected issues, the conservative-rightist accounts cooperation with the U.S. crucial for keeping North Korea from provoking military actions against the South. On the other hand, the progressive-leftist regards the North Korean regime a partner to live together and unification with the North most valuable, transcending ideologies and systems. The progressive-leftist naturally regards "dependence" on the U.S. being against its national autonomy, and in the extreme, the U.S. an obstacle to its unification with the North.

This talk brings its focus on anti-Americanism derived from the progressive-leftist or unorthodox dissenting argument, and its influence on the ROK-U.S relations.

Hakjoon Kim is a visiting scholar at Center for East Asian Studies at Stanford and is the Chairman of Dong-a Il Bo, South Korean newspaper.  He was the President of Korea Political Science Association and Korean Federation of Teachers' Associations.  Kim was Scholar at the Alexander-von-Humboldt Foundation in Germany, and Guest Scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C.

Philippines Conference Room

Hakjoon Kim Visiting Scholar, CEAS Speaker
Seminars

Don Keyser

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

(650) 725-2703 (650) 723-6530
0
Pantech Fellow, 2008-09
Keyser,_Don.jpg

Donald W. Keyser retired from the U.S. Department of State in September 2004 after a 32-year career.  He had been a member of the Senior Foreign Service since 1990, and held Washington-based ambassadorial-level assignments 1998-2004.  Throughout his career he focused on U.S. policy toward East Asia, particularly China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Japan and the Korean Peninsula. Fluent in Chinese and professionally conversant in Japanese, Russian and French, he served three tours at the American Embassy in Beijing, two tours at the American Embassy in Tokyo, and almost a dozen years in relevant domestic assignments.  In the course of his career, Keyser logged extensive domestic and foreign experience in senior management operations, conflict resolution, intelligence operations and analysis, and law enforcement programs and operations.  A Russian language major in college and a Soviet/Russian area studies specialist through M.A. work, Keyser served 1998-99 as Special Negotiator and Ambassador for Regional Conflicts in the Former USSR.   He sought to develop policy initiatives and strategies to resolve three principal conflicts, leading the U.S. delegation in negotiations with four national leaders and three separatist leaders in the Caucasus region.

Keyser earned his B.A. degree, Summa Cum Laude, with a dual major in Political Science and Russian Area Studies, from the University of Maryland.  He pursued graduate studies at The George Washington University, Washington, D.C., from 1965-67 (Russian area and language focus) and 1970-72 (Chinese area and language focus).   He attended the National War College, Fort McNair, Washington (1988-89), earning a certificate equivalent to an M.S., Military Science; and the National Defense University Capstone Program (summer 1995) for flag-rank military officers and civilians.

Jong Seok Lee

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

(650) 723-6530
0
Visiting Scholar, 2008-09
Jong-Seok_Lee.JPG

Dr. Jong Seok Lee was the Minister of Unification, and the Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National Security Council in Korea. He is currently a Senior Fellow at Sejong Institute in Korea. He has published books on North Korea-China relations, contemporary North Korea, and Korea unification.

Our Daily Bread: Without public investment, the food crisis will only get worse

Paragraphs

During the eighteen months after January 2007, cereal prices doubled, setting off a world food crisis. In the United States, rising food prices have been a pocketbook annoyance. Most Americans can opt to buy lower-priced sources of calories and proteins and eat out less frequently. But for nearly half of the world’s population—the 2.5 billion people who live on less than $2 per day—rising costs mean fewer meals, smaller portions, stunted children, and higher infant mortality rates. The price explosion has produced, in short, a crisis of food security, defined by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) as the physical and economic access to the food necessary for a healthy and productive life. And it has meant a sharp setback to decades-long efforts to reduce poverty in poor countries.

The current situation is quite unlike the food crises of 1966 and 1973. It is not the result of a significant drop in food supply caused by bad weather, pests, or policy changes in the former Soviet Union. Rather, it is fundamentally a demand-driven story of “success.” Rising incomes, especially in China, India, Indonesia, and Brazil, have increased demand for diversified diets that include more meat and vegetable oils. Against this background of growing income and demand, increased global consumption of biofuels and the American and European quest for energy self-sufficiency have added further strains to the agricultural system. At the same time, neglected investments in productivity-improving agricultural technology—along with a weak U.S. dollar, excessive speculation, and misguided government policies in both developed and developing countries—have exacerbated the situation. Climate change also looms ominously over the entire global food system.

In short, an array of agricultural, economic, and political connections among commodities and across nations are now working together to the detriment of the world’s food-insecure people...

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Boston Review
Authors
Rosamond L. Naylor
External URL

Is Democracy Promotable?

-

James Traub is a contributing writer for The New York Times Magazine, where he has worked since 1998. From 1994 to 1997, he was a staff writer for The New Yorker. He has also written for The New York Review of Books, Foreign Affairs, The Atlantic Monthly, The New Republic and elsewhere. His articles have been widely reprinted and anthologized. He has written extensively about international affairs and especially the United Nations. In recent years, he has reported from Iran, Iraq, Sierra Leone, East Timor, Vietnam, India, Kosovo and Haiti. He has also written often about national politics and urban affairs, including education, immigration, race, poverty and crime.

Most recently, Traub authored the critically acclaimed book, The Best Intentions: Kofi Annan and the UN in the Era of American World Power. His previous books include, The Devil's Playground: A Century of Pleasure and Profit in Times Square, which was published in 2004, and City On A Hill, a book on open admissions at City College that was published in 1994 and won the Sidney Hillman Award for nonfiction. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Richard and Rhoda Goldman Conference Room

James Traub Writer Speaker New York Times Magazine
Seminars

From 11/9 to 9/11: How the Modern Interwar Years Shaped Our World

-

Derek Chollet is a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security in Washington, D.C., where he also teaches at Georgetown University’s Security Studies Program. He served in the State Department during the Clinton administration, as foreign policy adviser to former U.S. Senator John Edwards, and assisted former U.S. Secretaries of State James A. Baker III and Warren Christopher with their memoirs. He has written or coedited three books on American foreign policy, and his articles have appeared in the Washington Post, Financial Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Monthly, and numerous other publications.

James Goldgeier is a professor of political science and international affairs at The George Washington University and a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. He has authored or coauthored three books on foreign policy, and his articles have appeared in publications including Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, the National Interest, the Washington Post, Financial Times, and the Weekly Standard. He has held fellowships at Stanford University, the Brookings Institution, the Library of Congress, and the Woodrow Wilson Center and has served at the State Department and on the National Security Council staff.

Drs. Chollet and Goldgeier co-authored America Between the Wars: From 11/9 to 9/11, published in June 2008 by Public Affairs.

Reuben W. Hills Conference Room

James Goldgeier Professor of Political Science and International Affairs Speaker The George Washington University
Derek Chollet Senior Fellow at the Center for a new American Security Speaker Georgetown University
Seminars

Pavel Podvig: U.S.-Russian relations following Georgia conflict

Authors
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

If there's a consensus about the confrontation between Russia and Georgia, it's that the conflict has seriously strained the relationship between Moscow and its Western counterparts--namely, the United States and NATO. Now that the worst of the conflict seems over, it appears that the harshest measures suggested in the first days of the conflict, i.e., expelling Russia from the G-8, won't materialize. Despite all of the disagreements and mistrust, each party seems to understand that severing ties between Russia and the West isn't realistic.

The problem is that while G-8 membership is highly visible and symbolic, it isn't the most important element of the partnership between Russia and the West. This partnership is only as strong as the network of concrete agreements and bureaucratic arrangements that allow governments to work closely together, creating what someone aptly named "habits of cooperation." Today's sorry U.S.-Russian relationship is a direct result of Washington and Moscow neglecting in recent years the few existing cooperative arrangements between the countries.

We should try to remember that cooperation isn't a reward for good behavior. Rather, 'the habits of cooperation' are important building blocks of an equitable and trusting relationship that would make conflicts such as the one in Georgia impossible."
The danger is that in the emotional atmosphere of the aftermath of the Georgia conflict, the United States and Russia could damage the foundation of their relationship further, strengthening elements in both countries that are either indifferent or hostile to the idea of a partnership. Already, the early signs seem to indicate that we're moving in that direction.

Military cooperation between NATO and Russia may be the conflict's first political victim. For instance, Moscow has decided to halt joint military-to-military projects with NATO--a move that would cancel about 10 joint exercises scheduled for this year. And while both NATO and Moscow are leaving some room for normalization, the mood in the Kremlin seems to be that Russia has nothing to lose if it severs all ties with NATO.

The U.S.-Russian agreement on civilian nuclear cooperation is another likely casualty of the conflict. Although the agreement probably wouldn't have entered into force during the Bush administration--the administration got the timing wrong--now it's probable that Congress will pass a resolution explicitly rejecting it, making it difficult for the next administration to bring the agreement back--even if that administration decides that the agreement is an important means in which to cooperate and secure a powerful Russian ally, Rosatom, the Russian nuclear agency. I should note that Rosatom representatives are upset that the conflict in Georgia could potentially prevent the agreement from becoming a reality.

It's also unlikely that any of the proposals for transparency or cooperation regarding European missile defense will get a chance--especially given that the Georgia conflict quickly led to Washington and Warsaw finalizing a deal that would feature Poland hosting missile defense interceptors. Russian generals responded by threatening to add Poland to Moscow's nuclear target lists--a particularly ominous threat.

At this point, no one knows the full extent of the fallout from the Georgia conflict. Some pessimists have gone so far as to ask if Russia will pull out of the Cooperative Threat Reduction program and other efforts to reduce the danger of nuclear weapons or curtail access to the International Space Station. Personally, I don't envision this happening--precisely because these are established programs that have substantial internal support in Russia.

Of course, setbacks are inevitable--it's difficult to make a case for continuing a partnership in the midst of a crisis. But we should try to remember that cooperation isn't a reward for good behavior or a bargaining chip. Rather, "the habits of cooperation" are important building blocks of a stable, trusting, and equitable relationship that would make conflicts such as the one in Georgia impossible.

All News button
1

Freedom Fighters or Terrorists? Collaboration, Resistance, and Retribution as Illustrated by the Incidents at Oradour in France, Via Rasella in Rome, and Ujvidék/Novi Sad in Hungary/Yugoslavia

-

10:30 AM: Film screening - Hideg Napok [Cold Days]

12:00: Seminar

Synopsis

My purpose is to discuss three cases of violent resistance attacks followed by harsh reprisals in three different countries during World War II. Through their admittedly complicated stories, these bloody events should shed light on the legal, moral, and political dilemmas of military occupation, resistance, reprisal, and postwar retribution in Europe. I am referring here

  1. to maquis attacks on the German forces during the Normandy invasion and the massacres SS soldiers perpetrated in reprisal at Oradour-sur-Glane in central-western France;
  2. Communist partisan attack on German military policemen in Via Rasella in Rome, and the subsequent execution by the SS of 335 Italian hostages at the Ardeatine Cave; and
  3. Serbian Chetnik attacks, early in 1942 on the Hungarian military who, in alliance with Germany, had occupied and re-annexed a part of northern Yugoslavia.

I will discuss as well the retaliatory massacres that Hungarian soldiers and gendarmes committed in or near the city of Novi Sad.

The events at Oradour and at Via Rasella/Ardeatine Cave are impeccably described in their Wikipedia internet entries. Further readings are Sarah Farmer, “Postwar Justice in France: Bordeaux 1953,” in István Deák, Jan T. Gross, and Tony Judt, eds., The Politics of Retribution in Europe: World War II and Its Aftermath (Princeton U. Press, 2000, pp.194-211) and, by the same author, Martyred Village: Commemorating the 1944 Massacre at Oradour-sur-Glane (U. of California Press, 1999). On the events in Italy, see Alessandro Portelli, The Order Has Been Carried Out: History, Memory, and Meaning of a Nazi Massacre in Rome (Macmillan, 2003). Literature on the Ujvidék/Novi Sad events is extremely skimpy even in Serbian and Hungarian. However, just before the seminar meeting, I will be showing the 1966 Hungarian film, Hideg napok [Cold days], a semi-fictional documentary whose main characters are Hungarian officers awaiting their extradition to Yugoslavia for crimes they had committed during the war in the Novi Sad region.

Although this talk maintains an awareness of the issues surrounding the legality and morality of war, particularly in reference to these three events, its focus is primarily description of the incidents.

Prof. Deak aims to engage in the problems of legality and morality of war when answering questions. In the discussion session, Prof. Deak particularly explores the massacres in villages in northern Italy with much emphasis on how the memories of such events have played out since. Prof. Deak also explores how pro-Nazi eastern European countries dealt with the end of the war and the fall of the Nazi regime.

Download pdf
Download pdf

Encina Ground Floor Conference Room

Istvan Deak Seth Low Professor Emeritus Speaker Columbia University
Seminars

FSI International Conference

Since 2005, the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies has convened an annual international conference to address major challenges, risks, and opportunities for change in the international system.  The institute invites current and former policymakers, academic experts, diplomats, public intellectuals, and leaders to join with Stanford faculty, researchers, and students for an invigorating day of discussion and debate about global transformations and their implications for peace and security, sound governance, and human well-being.

Subscribe to Security