In mid-September, honors students from the Interschool Honors Programs convened by FSI's Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law and the Center for International Security and Cooperation traveled to Washington, D.C., with their faculty advisors for senior-level meetings and policy briefings. They met with senior U.S. government officials from the White House, State Department, Homeland Security, and the intelligence community, with representatives of international organizations such as the World Bank, and NGOs, think tanks and other policy forums engaged in international affairs.

CDDRL Policy Briefings

Led by CDDRL Director and FSI Senior Fellow Larry Diamond, Deputy Director and FSI Senior Fellow Kathryn Stoner, and FSI's %people5%, CDDRL students engaged in policy discussions with the National Endowment for Democracy, USAID, the World Bank, the National Security Council, the Center for International Private Enterprise, the Inter-American Dialogue and the Millennium Challenge Corporation.  Sessions were held at the Open Society Institute founded by George Soros and the Community of Democracies.  Students met at the U.S. State Department with Policy Planning staff and the Under Secretary for Economic, Energy and Agricultural Affairs for frank discussions of U.S. policy priorities, the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review and the transformative effects that emerging economic powers, such as China, India and Brazil are exerting on trade, credit, investment, innovation and governance of major and political and economic institutions.

During these sessions, CDDRL students delved into efforts to advance and secure democracy, economic development, good governance, rule of law, corruption control, civil society, and a free media. In the current environment, marked by repression in many countries, multi-pronged efforts to help ensure that the pluralistic institutions of a vibrant civil society are allowed to prosper took on  particular importance.  Another key issue was the role of information technologies, in building and supporting democracy, by creating a robust network of activists and promoting collective action.

“It was eye-opening to see the diverse mechanisms through which one can effect positive social change. I learned that it is possible to successfully bridge the two worlds of policy and academe. The meetings made me think about the many different routes to a possible career in the dynamic world of Washington politics.”
 Kamil Dada ’11, CDDRL

"A key objective of the Washington trip is to expose these talented students to the challenges of policy formulation, implementation, and assessment, as they prepare to write their honors theses this academic year," said Kathryn Stoner-Weiss. For some students, it was a first exposure to the policy process in Washington. Others had interned in policy positions in the nation's capital and overseas, and used their opportunities in September to report back on findings of their previous work, renew contacts and glean new insight and information on evolving issues.

"The discussions we held with senior officials were full, frank, and often, off-the-record to give the students a firsthand opportunity to engage in candid exchange on major issues and to pose probing questions," said Larry Diamond, CDDRL Director. "The players, issues, and dilemmas that arise in the policy process are not always evident from the outside."

CISAC: Focus on Security Issues

The students in CISAC's Interschool Honors Program in International Security Studies-led in Washington by Martha Crenshaw, FSI Senior Fellow and professor (by courtesy) in the Political Science Department; Lynn Eden, Senior Research Scholar and CISAC Associate Director for Research; and teaching assistant Michael Sulmeyer, a CISAC pre-doctoral fellow and third-year Stanford law student-focused on major national and international security issues, including nuclear weapons policy like the new START Treaty to reduce nuclear arms and the Nuclear Posture Review, and counter-terrorism issues such as intelligence gathering and regional analysis. CISAC students first met with four veteran national security reporters at The New York Times, and later with members of the intelligence community, including the Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, Michael Leiter, and the Chairman of the National Intelligence Council, Christopher Kojm.

“This was my first visit to Washington, and I could not have asked for a more comprehensive or enjoyable introduction to the nation’s capital. The broad array of institutions and people we experienced was a salient reminder of just how diverse this country truly is.” Devin Banerjee ’11, CISAC

Students also met with Paul Stockton, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and Americas' Security Affairs. Prior to his government service, Stockton had been a scholar at CISAC and had taught CISAC honors students for three years. CISAC students met with Antony Blinken, who serves as National Security Adviser to Vice President Biden. The students also were exposed to research and publication think-tanks like the Brookings Institution, RAND Corporation, the Center for a New American Security and the New America Foundation. At the end of CISAC's first week in the capital, the students met a dozen Washington-based alumni of the program over dinner, where alumni provided valuable research resources and job advice to their younger counterparts.

"The Washington component of CISAC's honors program provides an invaluable opportunity for our students to learn how the policy-making process works, explore the complexities of international security, and test their preliminary ideas about the topic they have chosen for their honors thesis," said Martha Crenshaw. "In turn, the officials we meet invariably wish to spend longer with our students, some even rearranging their schedules (or trying!) to continue a fascinating and candid conversation."

Highlight: The National Security Council

A major highlight of this year's trip, for both the CISAC and the CDDRL students, was a policy discussion at the National Security Council with two leading Stanford political scientists and foreign policy experts serving in the Obama administration. Political Science Professor Michael A. McFaul, former director of CDDRL and deputy director of FSI, is now Senior Director for Russia on the National Security Council and the president's top advisor on Russia, and Assistant Professor Jeremy M. Weinstein, an affiliated CISAC and CDDRL faculty member, serves as Director for Democracy on the National Security Staff.  Students engaged in a lively discussion of U.S. foreign policy priorities, U.S.-Russian relations, democracy, human rights and economic development.

"Our honors students are fortunate to have the chance to engage in high-level policy discussions, especially with Stanford faculty members serving in Washington," said Coit D. Blacker, Director of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, who directs the CISAC honors program with Martha Crenshaw and who, under President Clinton, served as special assistant to the President and  Senior Director for Russian, Ukrainian, and Eurasian Affairs on the National Security Council. "Direct exposure to the policymaking process, with all its promise and pitfalls, will make them better scholars and future thought leaders."

"I was struck by the innovative ways in which certain agencies approach democracy promotion," said CDDRL honors student Ayeesha Lalji '11. "I think the struggle is often in packaging programs in the right way so that an impervious nation becomes more open to a vital component of social, political, or economic development."

"The discussions with prominent policy thinkers and current and former senior officials made a deep impression on our students," said Larry Diamond, CDDRL Director.  "These young people--who will go on themselves to be leaders in these fields-- got a vivid sense of how the policy process really works, and why service in government and public affairs is, despite the frequent frustrations, an exciting and noble mission."

"CISAC's ten days in Washington provide our students exceptional access to practitioners of various types and at all levels of the policy world, as well as inside knowledge of today's critical issues," said Martha Crenshaw. "The experience also establishes a solid foundation for a year-long intellectual experience in a weekly research seminar devoted to producing a thesis that makes an original contribution to the field of international security."

The ‘fair society' motto has been the centerpiece in the second half of the Lee Administration.

-Gi-Wook Shin, director of Shorenstein APARC and KSP

On August 8, 2010, South Korean President Lee Myung-bak put into place the largest cabinet reorganization since he took office, nominating 48 year-old Kim Tae-ho as prime minister. However, after only 21 days, failing to pass a confirmation hearing of Parliament, Kim Tae-ho took the initiative to declare his resignation while waiting for Parliament to take action following the vote on his prime minister nomination. South Korea's prime minister [post] is without any real power; however, with a high parliamentary status, it is also in reality an important auxiliary to the president. Now into the second half of Lee Myung-bak's term, confronted with the dilemma of needing to identify a prime minister for a fourth time, one cannot help but raise the question: what is going on with South Korean politics?

The ruling Grand National Party hoped to pariah Kim Tae-ho, who in the prime of life, would have been able to give Li Myung-bak's government an infusion of "reform," "communication," and a "fresh" approach, but the opposition party also questioned Kim Tae-ho's political qualifications. From August 24-25, when the Parliament confirmation hearings convened, the Democratic Party also threw in several heavy accusations-Kim Tae-hoe's receiving bribes and illegal loans to raise campaign funds, having a public bus for his personal use, ordering full-time civil servants to do housework, and his wife accepting bribes and improperly managed properties-and strongly opposed Kim Tae-ho as Prime Minister. Gi-Wook Shin, director of Stanford University's Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, says: "These allegations are not new. Though the prosecution has cleared Kim of bribery charges, I think the fact that he lied about his ties with Park Yeon-cha, a convicted businessman at the center of a high-profile bribery scandal, was the last straw. A photo also surfaced after the hearing showing Kim standing next to Park at a date several months earlier than Kim testified to having made his first acquaintance with Park." Park Yeon-cha is the former chairman of Taekwang Industrial. By the end of 2008's "Park Yeon-cha Gate" [scandal], numerous South Korean political figures were involved in the bribery scandal,  and former President Roh Moo-hyun also committed suicide.

"Kim Tae-ho's ambiguous statements have also left the ruling party and the public feeling disappointed. Kim Tae-ho was not widely known outside of his South Gyeongsang Province office. President Li Myung-bak praised him to South Korean society for being young, for having strength and charisma, and for being an honest, reliable politician. Now voters naturally are questioning his integrity and this has become a barrier for Lee Myung-bak's administration," says Dr. Insung Lee, director of Yonsei University's East Asia International Studies Institute.

Kim Tae-ho believes there are some accusations that are not very fair. Dr. Shin suggests: "What Kim meant by "unfair" was the fact that his confirmation hearing focused in large part on making personal attacks on Kim, and throwing harsh criticism of the ruling party, rather than serving its purpose to prove he was unqualified for the PM position." This no doubt exposed the intense power struggle between South Korea's political factions, and even differences within the Grand National Party.

"Lee Myung-bak should not introduce the subject of Kim Tae-ho when talking about matters of the next presidential election," says Dr. Lee. In 2004, Kim was elected governor of South Gyeongsang Province, becoming the youngest governor. During the time that he was the provincial governor, he actively promoted the "South Coast Sunbelt" development plan as a national project. Through word of mouth, he easily won the 2008 local government re-elections. According to the Constitution, Lee Myung-bak is unable to run for president again. Because of this, public opinion holds that he had the intention to train Kim Tae-hoe for the 2012 presidential candidacy. "The opposition party members at the hearing increasingly attacked Kim Tae-ho, in part to prevent this kind of arrangement from taking place," says Dr. Lee.

Dr. Chung-In Moon, professor of political science at Yonsei University pointed out: "People believe that Lee Myung-bak selected Kim Tai-ho to compete in the 2012 general election against in-party rival Park Geun-hye. Since this card is obsolete, Lee Myung-bak now cannot help but stand with Park Geun-hye. I cannot decide for certain how long this will last-the Lee camp will certainly find their own candidate." The internal struggle between the Grand National Party's inner factions was exposed in the battle of the recent Sejong City construction plan amendment. Park Geun-hye, the daughter of the leading "Second Faction's" former president Park Chung-hee, publicly sang a different tune towards Lee Myung-bak, displaying a hope to follow up with the plan to promote the construction of Sejong City. At the time of Parliament's vote, 50 of the ruling party's 168 members voted against the pro-Park opposition party. After former Prime Minister Chung Un-chan announced he would resign, Park Geun-hye raised the issue, holding Lee Myung-bak to be the primary lead of the Sejong City amendment and the one who should bear the responsibility.

On the day that Kim Tae-ho made his declaration to resign the prime minister nomination, those nominated to be the Minister of Culture, Sports, and Tourism and Minister of Education and Economics, also took the initiative to resign because of the suspicion of having accepted bribes. After several days, Foreign Minister Yu Myung-hwan was also forced to resign due to the incident of his daughter's receiving "special admission" to become a senior civil servant. President Lee Myung-bak expressed: "I accept their resignation. I believe this will lead to the starting point of a fair society." Dr. Gi-Wook Shin believes: "The 'fair society' motto has been the centerpiece in the second half of the Lee Administration. As President Lee said in his liberation day speech in August 2010, 'A fair society is where each individual has to take responsibility for the outcome of his or her undertakings . . . A fair society constitutes the ethical and practical infrastructure for the advancement of the Republic.' To this effect, Lee reportedly instructed his secretariat to toughen the screening of ethical backgrounds of candidates for top government posts. Putting emphasis on higher ethical and moral standards can be seen as a positive sign of Korea's democratic advancement. It is not the only measure, but it is also an important measure for the betterment of South Korean politics."    

Translation by Sarah Lin Bhatia

 

 

 

Nigeria’s national oil company NNPC is at the center of a profoundly dysfunctional oil sector in a country that some argue embodies the “resource curse.” In a new study, PESD Associate Director Mark C. Thurber and PESD affiliated researchers Ifeyinwa Emelife and Patrick Heller find that NNPC’s persistent underperformance stems from its role as the linchpin of a sophisticated and durable system of patronage.

Abstract

Nigeria depends heavily on oil and gas, with hydrocarbon activities providing around 65 percent of total government revenue and 95 percent of export revenues.  While Nigeria supplies some LNG to world markets and is starting to export a small amount of gas to Ghana via pipeline, the great majority of the country's hydrocarbon earnings come from oil.  In 2008, Nigeria was the 5^th largest oil exporter and 10^th largest holder of proved oil reserves in the world according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.  The country's national oil company NNPC (Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation) sits at the nexus between the many interests in Nigeria that seek a stake in the country's oil riches, the government, and the private companies that actually operate the vast majority of oil and gas projects.

Through its many divisions and subsidiaries, NNPC serves as an oil sector regulator, a buyer and seller of oil and petroleum products, a technical operator of hydrocarbon activities on a limited basis, and a service provider to the Nigerian oil sector.  With isolated exceptions, NNPC is not very effective at performing its various oil sector jobs.  It is neither a competent oil company nor an efficient regulator for the sector.   Managers of NNPC's constituent units, lacking the ability to reliably fund themselves, are robbed of business autonomy and the chance to develop capability.  There are few incentives for NNPC employees to be entrepreneurial for the company's benefit and many incentives for private action and corruption.  It is no accident that NNPC operations are disproportionately concentrated on oil marketing and downstream functions, which offer the best opportunities for private benefit.  The few parts of NNPC that actually add value, like engineering design subsidiary NETCO, tend to be removed from large financial flows and the patronage opportunities they bring. 

Although NNPC performs poorly as an instrument for maximizing long-term oil revenue for the state, it actually functions well as an instrument of patronage, which helps to explain its durability.  Each additional transaction generated by its profuse bureaucracy provides an opportunity for well-connected individuals to profit by being the gatekeepers whose approval must be secured, especially in contracting processes.  NNPC's role as distributor of licenses for export of crude oil and import of refined products also helps make it a locus for patronage activities.  Corruption, bureaucracy, and non-market pricing regimes for oil sales all reinforce each other in a dysfunctional equilibrium that has proved difficult to dislodge despite repeated efforts at oil sector reform.