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. 

The Center on Ethics Arrow Lecture Series: Chasing the Flame: Sergio Vieira de Mello and the Fight to Save the World

-

Samantha Power is the Anna Lindh Professor of Practice of Global Leadership and Public Policy Practice at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government. A widely published columnist on foreign policy, her most recent book, A Problem from Hell: America and the Age of Genocide, won the 2003 Pulitzer Prize for General Nonfiction, the National Book Critics Circle Award for general nonfiction, and several other honors.

Among the topics she will discuss are the questions and issues left in the wake of the death of United Nations official Sergio Vieira de Mello, killed in a terrorist attack on UN Headquarters in Iraq in 2003. Chasing the Flame, her forthcoming book on his life, examines answers to the fascinating question of: Who possesses the moral authority, the political sense, and the military and economic heft to protect human life and bring peace to the unruly new world order?

This event is co-sponsored by the Barbara and Bowen McCoy Program in Ethics in Society, the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, and the Center for the Study of Poverty and Inequality.

Kresge Auditorium

Samantha Power Anna Lindh Professor of Practice of Global Leadership and Public Policy, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University Speaker
Lectures

FSI and Woods Institute announce William Wrigley Senior Fellowship

News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Honoring the legacy of their husband and father, William Wrigley, Julie Ann Wrigley '71 and Alison Wrigley Rusack '80, along with Alison's husband, Geoffrey Claflin Rusack, have joined together to endow a new senior fellowship that will span both the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and the Woods Institute for the Environment.

Julie Wrigley and the Rusacks were motivated to provide permanent funding for an interdisciplinary faculty member as part of Stanford's multidisciplinary, cross-school efforts to conduct cutting-edge research on global environmental policy under the international and environmental initiatives of the university's current campaign, The Stanford Challenge.

On Tuesday, January 15, a celebratory dinner was held at FSI to introduce the inaugural recipient of the fellowship, Rosamond L. Naylor, and the fellowship donors, Julie Ann Wrigley, Alison Wrigley Rusack, and Geoffrey Claflin Rusack. "This is an extraordinary occasion for Stanford," said FSI Director Coit D. Blacker. "A family who cares deeply about the conditions of our global environment has with their gift brought together the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and the Woods Institute for the Environment, providing permanent support for one of our most stellar, jointly appointed faculty members."

Rosamond (Roz) Naylor has served as the Julie Wrigley Senior Fellow at FSI and as a senior fellow at the Woods Institute. Currently, she is the director of the program on Food Security and the Environment; director of the Goldman Honors Program in Environmental Science, Technology, and Policy; and an associate professor of economics, by courtesy. She also teaches courses on the world food economy and sustainable agriculture for the Interdisciplinary Graduate Program in Environment and Resources. Her research focuses on the environmental and equity dimensions of intensive food production.

Walter P. Falcon, the Helen Farnsworth Professor of Agricultural Policy, Emeritus, and Buzz Thompson, the Perry L. McCarty Co-Director of the Woods Institute for the Environment, also spoke at the dinner, as did Julie Wrigley and Alison Wrigley Rusack.

In giving her personal thanks to the donors, Naylor said that she was "honored to be the first holder of this position, because it marks a new era at Stanford--one in which interdisciplinary research is valued and multi-institutional collaborations are encouraged... It is an unconventional position, donated by a family of highly innovative individuals."

William Wrigley, to whom this fellowship is a tribute, believed strongly in protecting the environment for future generations. Building on the vision of his father and grandfather, he worked tirelessly at guiding the Santa Catalina Island Conservancy in its mission of restoring, preserving, and sharing that unique and beautiful place. His leadership on Catalina, including the expansion of the Philip K. Wrigley Marine Science Institute, led him to broaden his conservation role through the establishment of the USC Wrigley Institute for Environmental Studies. He was also a board member of the Peregrine Fund. An unassuming man, William Wrigley didn't see his efforts as anything extraordinary. That he managed to create a lasting environmental legacy while running the multinational chewing gum manufacturer, the William Wrigley Jr. Co., told the world otherwise. The William Wrigley Senior Fellow will carry on in his honor--to William Wrigley, to his family, and to Stanford University.

All News button
1

Sanctioning Liberal Democracies

-

Much work has been done in recent political theory on the question of the appropriate scope of international involvement in the internal affairs of states. Two dominant debates come to mind in this respect: the ‘humanitarian intervention debate’, which explores the legitimacy of military intervention in cases such as massive violations of human rights, collapse of states and humanitarian disasters; and the ‘global justice debate’, which examines the appropriate scope of economic aid from rich to poor nations. In neither of these discussions has much attention been given to the particular question of the legitimacy and necessity of international military intervention, or supply of economic aid, to democracies, let alone liberal democracies.

Download pdf

Encina Ground Floor Conference Room

Avia Pasternak

Program on Global Justice
Encina Hall, Room E112
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305-6165

0
Postdoctoral Scholar in the Program on Global Justice and the Barbara and Bowen McCoy Progam in Ethics in Society
P1010002.JPG PhD

Avia's current post-doc position at Stanford is divided between the Program in Ethics in Society and the Program on Global Justice at the Freeman Spogli Institure for International Studies.

She wrote her thesis at Nuffield College, Oxford University. The title of the thesis is Civic Responsibility in the Face of Injustice. The thesis analyzes the ways in which democratic citizens, as individuals and as members of a collective, are responsible for the injustices perpetrated by their governments. A chapter of the thesis, 'Sanctioning Liberal Democracies", is forthcoming in Political Studies.

For the last two years she has been a tutorial fellow, at Christ Church College, teaching political theory to undergraduates. Before going to Oxford, she completed her B.A. and M.A. degrees at the Department of Political Science, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Her research interests concern the global responsibilities of liberal democracies; the notion of collective responsibility; the scope of democratic civic duties and the nature of democracy.

Avia Pasternak Postdoctoral Scholar in the Program on Global Justice and the Barbara and Bowen McCoy Progam in Ethics in Society Speaker Stanford University
Workshops
Linda Randall Meier Research Workshop on Global Justice

January 2008 Dispatch - South Korea's New President: An Opportunity for Closer Ties with the United States

News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs
We are pleased to bring you the first dispatch of the new year in our series of Shorenstein APARC Dispatches. This month's piece comes from David Straub, this year's Pantech Fellow. Straub served thirty years in the U.S. Department of State, specializing in Northeast Asian affairs, including as the Department's director of Korean and of Japanese affairs. Since leaving the State Department last year, he has taught U.S.-Korean relations at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and Seoul National University's Graduate School of International Studies. At Shorenstein APARC, he is writing a book on U.S.-South Korean relations.

In December 2007, for the first time ever, South Koreans, anxious about the economy, elected a businessman as their president. Pro-growth conservative Lee Myung-bak won a resounding victory, with 49 percent of the vote, over left-center candidate Chung Dong-young, who won only 26 percent. Lee's margin would have been even greater had it not been for the late entry into the race by another conservative, Lee Hoi-chang, who finished third with 15 percent.

Korean voters had become tired of ten years of rule by the left-center, and they saw incumbent President Roh Moo-hyun as confrontational and ineffective. By contrast, Lee, a former Hyundai Engineering and Construction CEO, has a reputation for being a pragmatic, can-do leader. As mayor of Seoul (2002-2006), he beautified the city and reformed its mass transit system.

Lee is scheduled to be inaugurated on February 25 for a single five-year term, but he faces two early challenges. First, just before the election, the left-center camp passed a bill establishing a special prosecutor to investigate allegations that Lee had been involved in business fraud and other corruption. The special prosecutor is supposed to announce his findings before the inauguration. A regular prosecutor earlier found the charges to be unfounded, and most observers think that the special prosecutor will not turn up significant new information.

Second, President-elect Lee must counter centrifugal forces in the conservative party ahead of parliamentary elections on April 5. Lee Hoi-chang's defection has already split the conservative camp, and now President-elect Lee and former conservative party leader Park Geun-hye (daughter of the late President Park Chung Hee) are feuding over how much say each should have in choosing candidates for the parliamentary election.

If President-elect Lee is cleared by the special prosecutor and if he successfully manages relations with Park, Lee's party will likely win a very large majority in the parliamentary election, offering him the opportunity to be a strong and effective executive.

As president, Lee will face two long-term challenges. First, as Lee has promised Korean voters, he must strengthen the economy. While the Korean economy has been growing at a rate of about 5 percent in recent years, the average Korean has felt hard-pressed by large increases in housing and education costs. Lee plans to focus on deregulation and attracting foreign investment. He has, however, already been forced to scale back his promise of 7 percent annual growth to 6 percent at least for his first year in office.

Second, although North Korea was not a major issue in the election campaign, due to the apparent progress in Six-Party talks to end North Korea's nuclear weapons program, many experts are skeptical that North Korea will fully abandon its nuclear ambitions. Lee supports engagement of North Korea and continued humanitarian aid, but he has said he will not provide major economic aid to North Korea until it ends its nuclear weapons program. This marks a significant departure from the policy of his predecessors Roh Moo-hyun and Kim Dae-jung. A renewal of tensions with North Korea could threaten South Korean economic growth and Lee's popularity.

Lee strongly supports South Korea's alliance with the United States. He may seek talks with the United States to adjust or delay implementation of agreements reached in recent years to reduce the United States' role in South Korea's defense. Lee also supports early ratification of the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement (FTA), the largest U.S. free trade agreement since NAFTA. (The U.S. Congress has not yet approved the U.S.-Korea FTA.)

Many experts believe that the near coincidence of Lee's election and the inauguration of a new U.S. administration in January 2009 offers a major opportunity to strengthen U.S.-South Korean relations. Shorenstein APARC and the New York-based Korea Society recently announced the formation of a study group of senior former U.S. officials and experts to issue a report and recommendations on how the next U.S. administration can work with President Lee. The study group will travel to Seoul in early February for meetings with President-elect Lee and his economic, foreign policy, and security advisors.

Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of the election of Lee was that Koreans did not think it remarkable. They simply took it for granted that the election would be free, fair, and peaceful. Yet it has only been twenty years since South Koreans literally forced a military-backed government to allow them to vote democratically for their chief executive. In those two decades, there have been five presidential elections, with Lee's victory making the second full-fledged transfer of power between political camps. Moreover, this election was conducted at very low cost, using public funds; companies were not "squeezed" for campaign contributions as in the past. South Korea has demonstrated itself to be, along with Australia and New Zealand, the most democratic country in East Asia and a model of political development for the entire international community.

All News button
1

Terror and Consent: The Wars for the 21st Century

-
Join Philip Bobbitt, one of the nation's leading constitutional theorists and the Thomas C. Macioce Professor of Law at Columbia University, as he discusses topics related to his forthcoming book, Terror and Consent: The Wars for the 21st Century.

Bobbitt will bring together historical, legal, and strategic analyses to understand the idea of a "war on terror." Does it make sense? What are its historical antecedents? How would such a war be "won"? What are the appropriate doctrines of constitutional and international law for democracies in such a struggle? At stake is whether we can maintain states of consent in the twenty-first century or whether the dominant constitutional order will be that of states of terror.

This event is co-sponsored by CISAC and the Stanford Constitutional Law Center.

Download pdf

Stanford Law School
Room 290

Philip Bobbitt Thomas C. Macioce Professor of Law Speaker Columbia University
Seminars

The Supply and Demand of Nuclear Terrorism

-
Paul Kapur (speaker) is a visiting professor at CISAC, on leave from the U.S. Naval War College, where he is an associate professor in the Department of Strategic Research. Before joining the War College in 2006, Kapur was visiting professor at CISAC and assistant professor of Government at Claremont McKenna College. He also served as a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Chicago, where he received his Ph.D. in political science. His research interests include the strategic effects of nuclear weapons proliferation, deterrence theory, and the international security environment in South Asia. Kapur is author of Dangerous Deterrent: Nuclear Weapons Proliferation and Conflict in South Asia (Stanford University Press, 2007). His work has also appeared in journals such as International Security, Security Studies, Asian Survey, and Asian Security.

Martha Crenshaw (discussant) is a senior fellow at CISAC and FSI and a professor of political science by courtesy. She was the Colin and Nancy Campbell Professor of Global Issues and Democratic Thought and professor of government at Wesleyan University in Middletown, Conn., from 1974 to 2007. Her current research focuses on innovation in terrorist campaigns, the distinction between "old" and "new" terrorism, how terrorism ends, and why the United States is the target of terrorism.  She serves on the Executive Board of Women in International Security and chairs the American Political Science Association (APSA) Task Force on Political Violence and Terrorism. She has served on the Council of the APSA and is a former President and Councilor of the International Society of Political Psychology (ISPP). In 2004 ISPP awarded her its Nevitt Sanford Award for Distinguished Scientific Contribution and in 2005 the Jeanne Knutson award for service to the society. She serves on the editorial boards of the journals International Security, Orbis, Political Psychology, Security Studies, and Terrorism and Political Violence. She coordinated the working group on political explanations of terrorism for the 2005 Club de Madrid International Summit on Democracy, Terrorism and Security. She is a lead investigator with the National Center for the Study of Terrorism and the Response to Terrorism (NC-START) at the University of Maryland, funded by the Department of Homeland Security. She was a Guggenheim Fellow in 2005-2006. She serves on the Committee on Law and Justice and the Committee on Determining Basic Research Needs to Interrupt the Improvised Explosive Device Delivery Chain of the National Research Council of the National Academies of Science. She was a senior fellow at the National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism in Oklahoma City for 2006-2007.

Reuben W. Hills Conference Room

Paul Kapur Speaker
Martha Crenshaw Speaker
Seminars
Strengthening Security and Stability in South Asia

Deference, Dissent, and Dispute Resolution: An Experimental Intervention Using Mass Media to Change Norms and Behavior in Rwanda

-
Elizabeth Levy Paluck (speaker) received her PhD in 2007 from Yale University in Social Psychology. Her research focuses on the political psychology of prejudice and conflict reduction, in particular the role of mass media, community dialogue, and education. She has conducted the bulk of her fieldwork using field experiments and qualitative methods in Central Africa and in the US. She is currently an Academy Scholar at Harvard's Weatherhead Center for International Affairs.

Desha Girod (discussant) is a doctoral candidate at Stanford, where she researches the effects of international organizations on local institution-building. She is devoting her fellowship at CDDRL to completing her dissertation, "Why being poor helps postwar development." For her dissertation, Desha carried out field work in Mozambique and Uganda. In addition, she is conducting a study on democracy promotion after regime change by investigating the impact of US intervention in Panama, where she also did field work. Another study investigates the effects of remittances on access to public goods in Mexico. Desha's advisors at Stanford include Jim Fearon, Steve Krasner, David Laitin, and Jeremy Weinstein.

Reuben W. Hills Conference Room

Elizabeth Levy Paluck Academy Scholar Speaker Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard University

Desha Girod

N/A

0
CDDRL Postdoctoral Fellow 2008-2009
desha_web.jpg
Desha Girod is a postdoctoral fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development and Rule of Law at Stanford University where she manages the program Evaluating International Influences on Democratic Development.  Her research focuses on the influence of external actors on political and economic development.  In 2009, she will join the faculty of the Department of Government at Georgetown University.
Desha Girod Speaker
Seminars
Subscribe to Security