Rule of Law

Room N346, Neukom Building
555 Nathan Abbott Way
Stanford, CA 94305

650.721.7681
0
Associate Professor of Law, Stanford Law School
diego-zambrano-3-1024x684_square.jpg

Diego A. Zambrano’s primary research and teaching interests lie in the areas of civil procedure, transnational litigation, and judicial federalism. His work explores the civil litigation landscape: the institutions, norms, and incentives that influence litigant and judicial behavior. Professor Zambrano also has an interest in comparative constitutional law and legal developments related to Venezuela. He currently leads an innovative Stanford Policy Lab tracking “Global Judicial Reforms” and has served as an advisor to pro-democracy political parties in Venezuela. In 2021, Professor Zambrano received the Barbara Allen Babcock Award for Excellence in Teaching.

Professor Zambrano’s scholarship has appeared or is forthcoming at the Columbia Law Review, University of Chicago Law Review, Michigan Law Review, Northwestern University Law Review, Stanford Law Review, and Virginia Law Review, among other journals, and has been honored by the American Association of Law Schools (AALS) and the National Civil Justice Institute. Professor Zambrano will be a co-author of the leading casebook Civil Procedure: A Modern Approach (8th ed. 2024) (with Marcus, Pfander, and Redish). In addition, Professor Zambrano serves as the current chair of the Federal Courts Section of the AALS. He also writes about legal issues for broader public audiences, with his contributions appearing in the Wall Street Journal, BBC News, and Lawfare.

After graduating with honors from Harvard Law School in 2013, Professor Zambrano spent three years as an associate at Cleary Gottlieb in New York, focusing on transnational litigation and arbitration. Before joining Stanford Law School in 2018, Professor Zambrano was a Bigelow Teaching Fellow at the University of Chicago Law School.

CDDRL Affiliated Faculty
Authors
Alice Wenner
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

The Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI) at Stanford University is pleased to announce that Stephen Kotkin has been appointed to the position of FSI Senior Fellow, effective September 1, 2022.

Kotkin is based at FSI’s Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (APARC), and is affiliated with FSI’s Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, as well. He holds a joint appointment with the Hoover Institution as the Kleinheinz Senior Fellow.

"Stephen is a remarkable academic and public intellectual whose work has transformed our understanding of Russian history and the historical processes that have shaped today’s global geopolitics,” said APARC Director Gi-Wook Shin. “We are proud to have him as our colleague at APARC and are excited to work together to expand the center’s scholarship on the role and impact of the Eurasian powers in the era of great-power competition."

Prior to joining FSI, Kotkin was the Birkelund Professor of History and International Affairs in what was formerly known as the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton University, where he taught for 33 years. He now holds that title as emeritus. In addition to founding and running Princeton’s Global History Initiative, Kotkin directed the Princeton Institute for International and Regional Studies and served as the founding co-director of the Program in History and the Practice of Diplomacy. He chaired the editorial board of Princeton University Press.

“Joining the ranks of the phenomenal scholars at FSI is a dream come true,” Kotkin stated.

Stephen is a remarkable academic and public intellectual whose work has transformed our understanding of Russian history and the historical processes that have shaped today’s global geopolitics.
Gi-Wook Shin
Director of Shorenstein APARC

Kotkin’s scholarly contributions span the fields of Russian-Soviet, Northeast Asian, and global history. His publications include Stalin: Waiting for Hitler, 1929-1941, and Stalin, Vol. I: Paradoxes of Power, 1878-1928, part of a three-volume history of Russian power in the world and of Stalin’s power in Russia.

"I am thrilled to welcome Stephen to FSI this fall,” said FSI Director Michael McFaul. “He is an excellent addition to the cutting-edge research and teaching team at APARC, and I look forward to seeing the important impact he makes in his new role."

Kotkin writes reviews and essays for The Times Literary Supplement, Foreign Affairs, and The Wall Street Journal, among other publications. He was the business book reviewer for the New York Times Sunday Business Section for a number of years. He earned a bachelor’s degree at the University of Rochester in 1981 and received a Ph.D. at UC Berkeley in 1988, and during that time took a graduate seminar at Stanford.

Read More

FSI Director Michael McFaul introduces President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at a live video address on May 27, 2022.
News

FSI Director Michael McFaul Honored by the Government of Ukraine with State Award

FSI Director Michael McFaul Honored by the Government of Ukraine with State Award
Jennifer Pan joins the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies as a Senior Fellow working with the Center on China's Economy and Institutions
News

Jennifer Pan to Become FSI’s Newest Senior Fellow

Pan’s research focuses on political and authoritarian politics, including how preferences and behaviors are shaped by political censorship, propaganda, and information manipulation.
Jennifer Pan to Become FSI’s Newest Senior Fellow
Peter Blair Henry
News

Peter Blair Henry Joins the Hoover Institution and Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies

A former senior fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, Henry is reprising his roles at FSI and the Hoover Institution to continue his groundbreaking research on economic reforms and the global economy.
Peter Blair Henry Joins the Hoover Institution and Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
All News button
1
Subtitle

Kotkin’s research interests include authoritarianism, geopolitics, global political economy, and modernism in the arts and politics.

Herbert Hoover Memorial Building 107
434 Galvez Mall
Stanford, CA 94305-6003

650.721.1780
0
Affiliated Scholar, Deliberative Democracy Lab
Kleinheinz Fellow, Hoover Institution
valentin_bolotnyy_-_valentin_bolotnyy.jpg

Valentin Bolotnyy is a Kleinheinz Fellow at the Hoover Institution and an Affiliated Scholar at CDDRL's Deliberative Democracy Lab. He designs and analyzes randomized experiments aimed at understanding how Americans communicate about politics and public policy, and what factors may lead to changes in public opinion on key issues. He also works on forming research partnerships with government agencies to improve public services and gain insight into social behavior. His recent studies have covered the America in One Room experiment, climate adaptation, the gender earnings gap, public infrastructure procurement, immigration policies, and graduate student mental health.

Bolotnyy’s work has received national attention in outlets such as The Wall Street Journal, The Boston Globe, The Atlantic, Vox, and American Theatre Magazine. He was awarded the Padma Desai Prize in Economics in 2019.

Bolotnyy received a PhD in Economics from Harvard University and a BA in Economics and International Relations, with honors and distinction, from Stanford University.

Authors
The Irrawaddy
News Type
Q&As
Date
Paragraphs

This interview with Scot Marciel was originally published by The Irrawaddy. Marciel, who served as U.S. ambassador to Myanmar from March 2016 through May 2020, is a visiting practitioner fellow on Southeast Asia at APARC. His forthcoming book, Imperfect Partners: The United States and Southeast Asia, which interprets the region and its relations with the United States historically and at present, will be published by APARC later this year.


Since it seized power in February 2021, Myanmar’s military regime has ignored international calls to end its use of violence, release political prisoners and negotiate with its opponents. Some Western nations have applied sanctions, while powerful neighbors India and China have largely sought to protect their own interests. Regional bloc ASEAN has been split, with some members seeking to engage the junta and others calling for contact with the shadow National Unity Government. The Irrawaddy spoke to Scot Marciel, former United States ambassador to Myanmar (2016-20) and currently a Visiting Scholar at Stanford University’s Walter Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, about the current state of regional and international efforts to tackle the Myanmar crisis.

The Irrawaddy: There have been many tragic stories in Myanmar since the coup. It is not enough to just pressure the regime to change its behavior or to make concessions. Can you talk about how the international community and regional groupings such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) should assist the Myanmar people?

Marciel: I would offer two thoughts. First, I don’t think you can expect ASEAN to solve this problem, certainly not by itself. The ASEAN Five-Point Consensus, while it’s done with very good intentions, not only are the points not being implemented, they are actually not appropriate for the situation in Myanmar in my view. So it is a mistake to dwell on the Five-Point Consensus. I don’t really blame ASEAN too much for that because the junta is refusing to be reasonable at all and make any kind of concessions. Second, as Malaysia’s foreign minister has suggested publicly, more engagement with the National Unity Government (NUG) and other figures opposed to the junta is really important. I am pleased to see that [US] Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman met with Zin Mar Aung [the NUG foreign minister, on Aug. 12] in Washington. I think there needs to be more engagement with the NUG and other actors, recognizing that trying to convince the generals to hold talks with those who oppose them is not really a very useful way of going about things.

The Irrawaddy: Do you think the NUG is the best option, aside from Ethnic Armed Organizations (EAOs) and other stakeholders, in terms of whom the US and ASEAN should be engaging with?

Marciel: I know some people have not been fully satisfied with the NUG. I understand that, but it’s certainly one important factor that has a lot more legitimacy than the junta for sure. I think it is useful to engage with the NUG, but also with actors who are seeking to return the country to a democratic and peaceful path.

The Irrawaddy: When we talk about ASEAN there are some criticisms because so far the Five-Point Consensus as you said is going nowhere, but people keep talking about it. We, ourselves, have become the hostages of the consensus. Beyond ASEAN, there has also been some criticism that the US and other Western countries are outsourcing the Myanmar crisis to ASEAN. We know that ASEAN is toothless and powerless, and so far has achieved little on Myanmar. Why has the West outsourced the problem to ASEAN?

Marciel: To be fair, at least for the United States, I don’t think the United States is necessarily expecting ASEAN by itself to solve the problem. The truth is I don’t know any outside player that can solve the problem. ASEAN can help. This goes back to, among other things, the Five-Point Consensus. It’s not just that the points aren’t being implemented, they really aren’t appropriate for the situation. A ceasefire… OK If the military stops all violence and allows peaceful protests, that would be useful. But does anyone really think that is going to happen? Second, dialogue, my sense is, again I can’t speak for the Myanmar people, but it seems people aren’t interested in negotiating and compromising with the military junta. They want them out of power. And I think the international community should be supporting those efforts, rather than proposing and calling for some kind of dialogue that is completely unrealistic, at least at this time.

Maximum pressure, both internally and externally, on Myanmar’s military, whether it’s by sanctions or other means, is the best chance of achieving progress, though it won’t be easy.
Amb. Scot Marciel

The Irrawaddy: In the past, the US has played a major role in promoting democracy, freedom and federal union in Myanmar. You know in 2008-09, we had Kurt Campbell, one of the key architects of the pivot to Asia and of course specific Myanmar policies of principled engagement, and the carrot-and-stick approach, where sanctions were imposed but also with the incentive that if reforms took place, the sanctions would be eased. There was very consistent and intense communication with the-then regime and the opposition in Myanmar. Do you think that, in coordination with ASEAN, the US can work on Myanmar issues with the same vigor and energy as it did in the late 2000s?

Marciel: It’s a good question. It’s very clear that the US and the Biden administration remain very supportive of efforts to help the country go back to democracy and peace and federal union. But my sense is that it’s hard to figure out what they can actually do to make that happen. There’s not a lot of easy choices, whether it’s the United States or ASEAN, because the generals do not seem interested in doing anything positive, they are just holding onto power. We’ve seen what they are willing to do to their own people for the sake of holding power. And it narrows the space for diplomacy, certainly. I would have a very hard time if I were still in the government saying we should engage with the junta and try to create incentives for them because I think there is no chance, absent them feeling much more pressure, that they are willing to seriously consider changing their approach.

The Irrawaddy: Do you think there should be more sanctions, more pressure, including maybe an arms embargo? What about ASEAN and other countries like China, Thailand, and India?

Marciel: There is no great option right now. I don’t believe there is, at this point at least, any opportunity for dialogue that will return the country to a democratic path or democratic federalism. I don’t think the military can restore stability and govern the country effectively. So the best possible scenario is for the military to face so much pressure, that they then begin to look for a way out. So yes, I think maximum pressure, both internally and externally, on the military whether it’s by sanctions or other means is the best chance of achieving progress, though it won’t be easy.

The Irrawaddy: We have a powerful neighbor, China, which shares a long border with Myanmar. We also have our neighbor Thailand, which is absorbing refugees, migrant workers, and asylum seekers. Because of the crisis, they are also sharing the burden. Obviously, China is always supportive of those in power, whether it is the regime or a democratic government. If China and Thailand don’t make any moves, don’t apply any external pressure, it is hard to see any policy of maximizing pressure on the regime working. Do you agree?

Marciel: I agree that there are limits in terms of external pressure. That’s why there is no easy answer. It seems that China is willing to support the junta even though nearly the entire population of Myanmar opposes that. I don’t think that is likely to change. On Thailand, I hope that the Thai authorities will see that the longer the military is in power, the more problems there are going to be across the border, including refugees and instability. And the Thais, I think, will have an interest in pressing in their own way, pressing the military to look for a way out, because otherwise this crisis is going to continue and Thailand’s going to suffer from some of these cross-border challenges, including very serious humanitarian issues.

The Irrawaddy: We have heard that the regime is not happy with the idea of—the wording is quite sensitive—a humanitarian corridor. But Thailand will have to play a key role if cross-border assistance and humanitarian assistance are to reach a large number of Myanmar people. What are your thoughts on that, as the US has made at least four high-ranking official visits to Thailand since the coup? Should the Biden administration engage and cooperate with the Thai government to provide assistance?

Marciel: There is a lot of discussion between the US and Thai officials on this. I don’t know the substance of those discussions. I am not sure what exactly has been said. But to me the United States and Thailand, even if we may have somewhat different views on the coup and the junta, we should try to find a way to work together at a minimum to address the serious humanitarian need right along the Thai border and just across the border. You know it is not easy for Thailand as a neighbor of Myanmar having to deal with the junta. But I think there are ways that this could be done carefully and I assume that these discussions are happening between the United States and Thailand. I hope that they lead to greater and more successful efforts to get humanitarian assistance to the border and across the border on behalf of Myanmar people.

The Irrawaddy: Not only Thailand but, since 1988, the US has also been one of the more generous countries in taking Myanmar refugees and asylum seekers from the Thailand-Myanmar border. This time, again, we see the educated people, the middle class, technicians, professionals, artists, media, and IT people leaving Myanmar. It is a brain drain for Myanmar, but a brain gain for the countries they go to. Do you agree that those people are hugely beneficial to those societies?

Marciel: Yes, I agree. I think, the US processing of…I hate to sound bureaucratic, but you know working to welcome refugees is not a fast process, because there are so many refugees around the world who are seeking asylum in the United States and other places. The US does, as you said, have a long record of accepting and welcoming refugees from Burma/Myanmar. I expect that will continue. I mean, it serves one aspect. A lot of people want to go back to the country and contribute, but right now the conditions aren’t right. For those who definitely want to leave, I think the United States will continue to welcome them. But there is a process because there are so many refugees around the world now.

The Irrawaddy: In Myanmar, as in any country, the people need a professional military, but not the one we have right now. That’s why people have taken up arms against it and the regime. You wrote an article about the Myanmar military last year. Can you talk about reform in the military and security sector?

Marciel: It is too bad that the situation has reached the point that people feel like they have no choice but to take up arms. I don’t judge them for that. It is unfortunate. But the military took away the peaceful option for people to protest or express their views against the junta. It is understandable why a number of people have taken up arms. I wrote the article because I was hearing from some people in the region and around the world saying well, the Myanmar military is an essential institution and one of the country’s few unifying institutions. I disagree. In theory, it should be a unifying institution, but it hasn’t been one. It’s been one that has been a source of so much division and so much conflict. I am sure that there are individuals in the military who would like to work in a professional military but, at least at the leadership level, the culture of brutality and impunity is so deeply ingrained that I don’t think you can reason with these generals. I think Myanmar does need a military, but a dramatically reformed military that will be answerable to the civilian government and that, over many years, will adopt a very different culture and will respect human rights instead of waging war on the people.

Phot of Scot Marciel

Scot Marciel

Visiting Practitioner Fellow on Southeast Asia, APARC
Full Biography

Read More

Portrait of Mary-Collier Wilks
Q&As

Postdoc Fellow Spotlight: Mary-Collier Wilks Explores Power Dynamics and Development Imaginaries in International Organizations

Ethnographer and APARC Postdoctoral Fellow Mary-Collier Wilks unveils how distinct development narratives shape the dynamics of aid chains and international organizations’ delivery of services in Southeast Asia.
Postdoc Fellow Spotlight: Mary-Collier Wilks Explores Power Dynamics and Development Imaginaries in International Organizations
Kate Imy
Q&As

How Feminist Military History Sheds Light on Colonial Rule and Warfare

In this interview, Lee Kong Chian NUS-Stanford Fellow on Southeast Asia Kate Imy discusses her research into identity in the twentieth-century British imperial world and her current book project on the colonial roots of winning "hearts and minds" in war, specifically focusing on Malaya and Singapore.
How Feminist Military History Sheds Light on Colonial Rule and Warfare
Yoon Suk-yeol speaks during a press conference
Commentary

In Troubled Waters: South Korea’s Democracy in Crisis

Just as the United States experienced a crisis of democracy under the Trump administration, South Korea underwent a democratic recession during President Moon Jae-in’s time in office. The consequences of this decline have been evident throughout the election and the subsequent presidential transition.
In Troubled Waters: South Korea’s Democracy in Crisis
All News button
1
Subtitle

The Irrawaddy spoke to Scot Marciel, former United States ambassador to Myanmar and currently a visiting scholar at APARC, about the current state of regional and international efforts to tackle the Myanmar crisis.

Authors
Nora Sulots
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Congratulations to Carson Smith, a graduate of CDDRL's 2018-19 Fisher Family Honors Program, on her selection as a 2022 Knight-Hennessy Scholar. Knight-Hennessy Scholars cultivates and supports a multidisciplinary and multicultural community of graduate students from across Stanford University, and delivers engaging experiences that prepare graduates to be visionary, courageous, and collaborative leaders who address complex challenges facing the world.

At CDDRL, Smith wrote her thesis on Conflict Resolution in Tribal Societies: The Community Impact of Non-Indians in Peacemaking Processes. When asked what initially attracted her to the Fisher Family Honors Program, she shared at the time: "I really enjoy the interdisciplinary approach of this program. For example, CDDRL gave me an opportunity to work with professors at the law school, who have the most expertise in my area of research. Additionally, because we all study separate subjects, I have learned about a wide range of methodologies and areas of research from my peers."

The Knight-Hennessy Scholars press release is available here, and the announcement from the Stanford Report is below.

All News button
1
Subtitle

Carson Smith (honors class of 2018-19) is among 70 scholars in the Knight-Hennessy Scholars' fifth cohort.

Paragraphs

Classical liberalism is in a state of crisis. Developed in the wake of Europe’s wars over religion and nationalism, liberalism is a system for governing diverse societies, which is grounded in fundamental principles of equality and the rule of law. It emphasizes the rights of individuals to pursue their own forms of happiness free from encroachment by government.

It's no secret that liberalism didn't always live up to its own ideals. In America, many people were denied equality before the law. Who counted as full human beings worthy of universal rights was contested for centuries, and only recently has this circle expanded to include women, racial and ethnic minorities, and others. Conservatives complain that liberalism empties the common life of meaning.

Image
Liberalism and Its Discontents
As the renowned political philosopher Francis Fukuyama shows in Liberalism and Its Discontents, the principles of liberalism have also, in recent decades, been pushed to new extremes by both the right and the left: neoliberals made a cult of economic freedom, and progressives focused on identity over human universality as central to their political vision. The result, Fukuyama argues, has been a fracturing of our civil society and an increasing peril to our democracy.

In this short, clear account of our current political discontents, Fukuyama offers an essential defense of a revitalized liberalism for the twenty-first century.
 

PRESS & REVIEWS
 

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Subtitle

A short book about the challenges to liberalism from the right and the left by the bestselling author of The Origins of Political Order.

Authors
Francis Fukuyama
Book Publisher
Farrar, Straus and Giroux
Authors
Melissa Morgan
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

A year ago, a crowd on the National Mall violently breached the halls of the U.S. Capitol with the intent of disrupting the formal ratification of the 2020 presidential election. Despite the chaos, Joe Biden was inaugurated as the president, the prosecution of individual perpetrators has begun, and the House of Representatives January 6 Commitee's investigation is ongoing. Yet there remains a sense that something fundamental to American democracy has changed. Where is America now, one year from the attack?

To mark the first anniversary of the January 6 Capitol riot, scholars from across the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies share their thoughts on what has happened in the year since, and what the ongoing effects of the violence signal about the future of democracy and the integrity of America’s image at home and abroad.


Intensifying Divisions

Larry Diamond, Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy

The January 6 insurrection was the gravest assault on American democracy since the Civil War, and it came much closer to disrupting the peaceful transfer of power (and possibly our democracy itself) than we realized at the time.

Rather than providing a sobering lesson of the dangers of political polarization, the insurrection seems only to have intensified our divisions, and the willingness to contemplate or condone the use of violence. According to a recent Washington Post survey, a third of Americans feel violence against the government could be justified in some circumstances —a sharp increase from 16 percent in 2010 and 23 percent in 2015.

Sadly, many politicians have not been the least bit chastened by the close brush with a constitutional catastrophe. The “Big Lie” that Biden did not legitimately win the 2020 election retains the support of most Republicans and a substantial proportion of independents. Around the country, Republican legislatures have been introducing, and in many states adopting, bills that would give Republican legislatures the ability to reverse or sabotage legitimate electoral outcomes, and other bills that make it more difficult for people (especially Democratic-leaning groups) to vote. All of this is doing deep damage to the global reputation and hence “soft power” of American democracy.

Although they are generally relieved that Trump is no longer president, our allies remain deeply worried about the stability and effectiveness of American democracy.

What gives me some hope is the expanding network of civil society organizations documenting the multiple threats to electoral integrity in the U.S. But we are going to need much more widespread and resourceful mobilization to counter the downward spiral of our democracy.

Professor Larry Diamond

Larry Diamond

Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy at FSI
Full Profile

Problems at Home, Issues Abroad

Francis Fukuyama, Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow

The Capitol uprising on January 6 marked a grave crisis in American institutions, when a sitting President refused to transfer power peacefully and sought to actively overturn an election.  The Republican Party, rather than repudiating the uprising and marginalizing its organizers, instead rallied in subsequent weeks to normalize the event.  These developments, while bad in themselves from the standpoint of US politics, also sent an unmistakable geopolitical signal that the Biden presidency would not represent an American return to “normal” internationalism.  The Administration would lead a deeply polarized country uncertain of its own global role.

This is the point at which geopolitics and domestic unrest come together. The single greatest weakness of the United States today does not lie in its economy or military power, but in the deep polarization that has affected American politics.  This is not just speculation, but something underlined by Kremlin-linked commentators, as Françoise Thom has detailed: in the words of one, "the decrepit empire of the Stars and Stripes, weakened by LGBT, BLM, etc." makes "it is clear that it will not survive a two-front war."  They see that a significant number of Republicans believe that the Democratic Party represents a bigger threat to the American way of life than does Russia.  A country that cannot rally around sensible public health measures during a pandemic will not rally around defense of freedom abroad.  This is the significance of January 6:  it has hardened partisan divisions rather than being the occasion for national soul-searching.

Read Francis Fukuyama's full commentary in American Purpose.

Francis Fukuyama

Francis Fukuyama

Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow at FSI
Full Profile

Democracy vs. Partisanship

Didi Kuo, Senior Research Scholar at CDDRL

It has been a year since rioters stormed the United States Capitol in an effort—an organized, violent effort—to declare Donald Trump the rightful winner of the 2020 presidential election. The riots signaled a dangerous turn in American politics, an attack on the basic, fundamental institutions of democracy. For democracy to work, all sides must agree on the rules of the game: the fairness of the balloting and counting process, the routine and peaceful transfer of power. We now see what happens when the institutions and procedures of elections are delegitimated.

Our political leaders can act now to restore confidence in elections. They can do so by protecting election administrators from threats of violence, by depoliticizing oversight of elections, and by passing democratic reforms. Although President Biden’s Freedom to Vote Act and John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act have been blocked by Republicans, narrower versions of these bills could create stricter federal election standards. And Americans can organize to protect democracy through civic groups that push for ballot access and election integrity, particularly at the state level. Politicians and activists alike must make clear that election administration is not a partisan issue. As the nation enters the third year of a global pandemic and an upcoming midterm election, our leaders must make strengthening democracy their utmost priority.

Watch Kuo's conversation with Hakeem Jefferson about the anniversary of the riots at the U.S. Capitol.

Didi Kuo

Didi Kuo

Senior Research Scholar at CDDRL
Full Profile

Epistemic Fractures and Exploitation

Herbert Lin, Senior Research Scholar at CISAC

The failure of the Jan. 6 insurrection provided an opportunity for the United States to collectively take a step back from the conspiracy theories and lies that pervaded American political discourse in the preceding couple of years. But alas, the nation failed to take advantage of that opportunity, with tens of millions of Americans maintaining their delusions as strongly as ever. Substantial numbers of Americans continue to believe that Donald Trump really won the 2020 election, and the number of QAnon adherents and believers was virtually unchanged.

Even more alarming has been the cynical exploitation of such trends by elected officials in their quest to gain or retain political power. Rather than standing up for the rule of law and defending the conclusions of an independent judiciary regarding various allegations of election fraud, they have pointed to such outcomes as yet more evidence of a system rigged against them. We now live in a environment in which no conceivable evidence can persuade true believers to change their minds, and the resulting epistemic fractures translate into a once-unified nation sharply divided against itself.  A worse national posture to meet the challenges of coming great-power competition could not be imagined.

Read more of Herbert Lin's analysis of contemporary security issues and power competition in his latest book, Cyber Threats and Nuclear Weapons (Stanford University Press, 2021).

Dr. Hebert Lin

Herbert Lin

Senior Research Scholar at CISAC
Full Profile

The Need to Protect and Invest In Elections

Matthew Masterson, Non-resident Fellow at the Stanford Internet Observatory

The insurrection on January 6th left a scar on American Democracy. For the first time in our history, America did not have a peaceful transition of power. The effects of that day continue to be felt every day in election offices across the United States. Election officials, the guardians of our Democracy, are targets of harassment and threats fueled by the ongoing lies regarding the integrity and accuracy of the election. Worse yet, there have been little no consequences for these threats against our democracy. While some who participated in January 6th are being investigated and prosecuted, those responsible for the threats against election officials have faced little to no accountability for their actions. Facing ongoing threats and little support from law enforcement election officials are leaving their jobs out of fear for their own safety and the safety of their families.

Healing the wound of January 6th won’t be easy; there must be accountability for the damage done to our democracy. American democracy is resilient and strong, but can not survive the unchecked attacks against it. Those who seek to profit from the lies about 2020 need to be held accountable for selling out democracy in pursuit of their own political and financial gain. They must be defeated at the ballot box or their businesses made to pay the price  by Americans unwilling to accept holding democracy for ransom. As we bring accountability, we need to invest in continuing to improve the security, accessibility and integrity of the process. We need to fund elections on an ongoing basis like the national security issue they are. The only response to this sustained attack on our democracy is a sustained investment in protecting it.  

Matt Masterson

Matthew Masterson

Non-resident Fellow at the Stanford Internet Observatory
Full Profile

Read More

storming of capital 2021
News

To Support Democracy Abroad, the U.S. Needs To Set Its Own House In Order, says FSI Director Michael McFaul

Former U.S. ambassador to Russia and Stanford political scientist Michael McFaul recommends that the incoming Biden administration “go big” in its efforts to reaffirm core democratic values – including passing comprehensive, structural reforms.
To Support Democracy Abroad, the U.S. Needs To Set Its Own House In Order, says FSI Director Michael McFaul
Cover of the EIP report "The Long Fuse: Misinformation and the 2020 Election"
News

Election Integrity Partnership Releases Final Report on Mis- and Disinformation in 2020 U.S. Election

Researchers from Stanford University, the University of Washington, Graphika and Atlantic Council’s DFRLab released their findings in ‘The Long Fuse: Misinformation and the 2020 Election.’
Election Integrity Partnership Releases Final Report on Mis- and Disinformation in 2020 U.S. Election
Capitol Building
News

Stanford Scholars React to Capitol Hill Takeover

FSI scholars reflect on the occupation of the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday and suggest what needs to happen next to preserve democracy.
Stanford Scholars React to Capitol Hill Takeover
All News button
1
Subtitle

On the first anniversary of the riot at the U.S. Capitol, scholars from across FSI reflect on the ongoing ramifications the violence is having on America's domestic politics and international influence.

-

About the Seminar: Mark Fathi Massoud will discuss his new book, Shari‘a, Inshallah: Finding God in Somali Legal Politics (Cambridge University Press 2021). Based on historical research, ethnographic fieldwork, and interviews in the Horn of Africa, Shari‘a, Inshallah documents nearly 150 years of historic attempts by the Somali people to use shari‘a to strengthen human rights and the rule of law — including attempts by contemporary women's rights activists to push for gender equality by invoking shari‘a. Massoud upends the conventional account of secular legal progress and demonstrates instead how faith in a higher power guides people toward the rule of law. In a space where secular human rights interventions have largely failed, Massoud shows how future progress in human rights and the rule of law is still possible under shari'a.

Register Now

About the Speaker: 

Image
Mark Massoud

Mark Fathi Massoud is a professor of politics at UC Santa Cruz, where he directs the Legal Studies Program. Massoud is also Visiting Professor of Law at the University of Oxford. He is a former CDDRL postdoctoral fellow (2008–09). Most recently, he received a Guggenheim Fellowship.

 

 

Online, via Zoom.

Mark Fathi Massoud Professor of Politics, UC Santa Cruz Visiting Professor of Law, University of Oxford
Seminars
Authors
Ari Chasnoff
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

The Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI) at Stanford University is pleased to announce that Larry Diamond has been named the Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) at FSI.

The new position was made possible by a generous gift from the Mosbacher family Nancy, '76, Bruce, '76, JD '79, Emily (Harvard ’16), and Jack, '12 – in recognition of Diamond’s distinguished contributions as a researcher, teacher and mentor.

“As a teacher, scholar, and person, Larry Diamond is an embodiment of Stanford’s highest ideals,” said Bruce Mosbacher. “Our family is honored beyond measure to support Professor Diamond’s vital work in the years to come, and we are gratified that Larry’s impact and legacy now have a permanent home at Stanford University."

Founded 19 years ago, CDDRL is an interdisciplinary center for research on development in all of its dimensions: political, economic, social, and legal, and the ways in which these different dimensions interact with one another. The center bridges the worlds of scholarship and practice to understand and foster the conditions for effective representative governance, promote balanced and sustainable economic growth, and establish the rule of law. Diamond is one of the center’s original founders, and was CDDRL’s director from 2008-2014.

Larry Diamond is truly an inspiration. I can think of no better way to celebrate this extraordinary person than with an extraordinary honor like the Mosbacher Senior Fellowship in Global Democracy.
Kathryn Stoner
Mosbacher Director of CDDRL and FSI Senior Fellow

“Larry Diamond has no equal in the field of democracy studies. He is a giant not only in scholarship regarding how democracies rise, function and sometimes fail, he has long applied his knowledge to improve the practice of democracy through his work with international organizations and here at Stanford.” said Kathryn Stoner, Mosbacher Director of CDDRL and FSI Senior Fellow. She added that “Larry Diamond is truly an inspiration. I can think of no better way to celebrate this extraordinary person than with an extraordinary honor like the Mosbacher Senior Fellowship in Global Democracy. I am so grateful to the Mosbacher family for all that they have done for CDDRL, and for this especially wonderful tribute to Larry’s life and work.”

Diamond has served on the Stanford faculty since 1985. He is a senior fellow at FSI and the Hoover Institution and holds courtesy appointments in the departments of political science and sociology. He has taught and mentored thousands of students, including those in the Fisher Family Honors Program at CDDRL, FSI’s Ford Dorsey Master’s in International Policy (MIP) program, and democracy activists from around the world through CDDRL’s Draper Hills Summer Fellows Program, among others at Stanford. Among his many accolades, Larry received the Richard W. Lyman Award in 2013 for his service and generosity to Stanford alumni, as well as the Dinkelspiel Award in 2007 for excellence in teaching and mentoring Stanford undergraduates.

Diamond has also been an institution-builder both inside and outside of Stanford, having made contributions not only to CDDRL and Stanford’s Haas Center for Public Service (where he served as co-director from 2010-2016) but also to the National Endowment for Democracy where he serves as senior consultant to the International Forum for Democratic Studies. He has worked to shape public policy in many ways, from working for the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq, to campaigning more recently on behalf of ranked-choice voting initiatives in a variety of American states and cities.

“What Larry presciently labeled a ‘democratic recession’ a decade ago has metastasized into a very dark period for global politics,” said Michael McFaul, the director of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies. “This newly endowed position will ensure FSI continues to be at the cutting edge of research, policy impact and education in the field of global democracy for many years to come.”

During his career of service to FSI and Stanford, Diamond has authored books like The Spirit of Democracy and Ill Winds, countless articles and edited books on democracy in various country and regional settings. He also served as a founding editor of The Journal of Democracy, which has become the most important academic source for writing on the subject.

“I am deeply honored by this generous gift from the Mosbacher family,” said Diamond. “Their extraordinary support will enable us to sustain and deepen our study of global democracy during an era when it faces its greatest challenge in decades. Working closely with brilliant Stanford colleagues, students and visitors is a great privilege, and I look forward to advancing the field well into the future.”

Learn More About Larry Diamond's Research

larry diamond

Larry Diamond

Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Full Profile

Read More

Climate change activists march down a street carrying banners and signs.
Q&As

Together For Our Planet: Americans are More Aligned on Taking Action on Climate Change than Expected

New data from the Center for Deliberative Democracy suggests that when given the opportunity to discuss climate change in a substantive way, the majority of Americans are open to taking proactive measures to address the global climate crisis.
Together For Our Planet: Americans are More Aligned on Taking Action on Climate Change than Expected
gettyimages 1217563637
News

What Protests For Racial Justice Tell Us About U.S. Democracy

American democracy is facing its most serious challenge in decades, says Larry Diamond on the World Class Podcast. But there are signs of hope.
What Protests For Racial Justice Tell Us About U.S. Democracy
Trump supporters at the Capitol Building
News

New Administration Inherits a Democracy in Crisis, Explains FSI Panel

Scholars say there is much work to be done to restore confidence in democracy in America and around the world.
New Administration Inherits a Democracy in Crisis, Explains FSI Panel
All News button
1
Subtitle

CDDRL’s Larry Diamond, a world-renowned expert on comparative democracy, is recognized for a career of impact on students, policymakers and democratic activists around the world.

-

The Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) will be accepting applications from eligible juniors on who are interested in writing their senior thesis on a subject touching upon democracy, economic development, and rule of law (DDRL) from any university department.  The application period opens on January 10, 2022 and runs through February 11, 2022.   For more information on the Fisher Family CDDRL Honors Program, please click here.

Join us online via Zoom on Friday, January 21st at 12:00pm (PST) to learn more! 

REGISTER NOW

CDDRL faculty and current honors students will be present to discuss the program and answer any questions.

 

Online via zoom. REGISTER HERE.

CDDRL
Encina Hall, C152
616 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

(650) 725-2705 (650) 724-2996
0
Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Professor, by courtesy, of Political Science
Stedman_Steve.jpg
PhD

Stephen Stedman is a Freeman Spogli senior fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law and FSI, an affiliated faculty member at CISAC, and professor of political science (by courtesy) at Stanford University. 

In 2011-12 Professor Stedman served as the Director for the Global Commission on Elections, Democracy, and Security, a body of eminent persons tasked with developing recommendations on promoting and protecting the integrity of elections and international electoral assistance. The Commission is a joint project of the Kofi Annan Foundation and International IDEA, an intergovernmental organization that works on international democracy and electoral assistance. In 2003-04 Professor Stedman was Research Director of the United Nations High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change and was a principal drafter of the Panel’s report, A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility. In 2005 he served as Assistant Secretary-General and Special Advisor to the Secretary- General of the United Nations, with responsibility for working with governments to adopt the Panel’s recommendations for strengthening collective security and for implementing changes within the United Nations Secretariat, including the creation of a Peacebuilding Support Office, a Counter Terrorism Task Force, and a Policy Committee to act as a cabinet to the Secretary-General.  His most recent book, with Bruce Jones and Carlos Pascual, is Power and Responsibility: Creating International Order in an Era of Transnational Threats (Washington DC: Brookings Institution, 2009).

Affiliated faculty at the Center for International Security and Cooperation

Encina Hall, C150
616 Jane Stanford Way
Stanford, CA 94305

0
Senior Research Scholar
didi_kuo_2021.jpg

Didi Kuo is the Associate Director for Research and Senior Research Scholar at the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law at Stanford University. She is a scholar of comparative politics, with a focus on democratization, corruption and clientelism, political parties and institutions, and political reform. Her recent work examines changes to party organization, and the impact these changes have on the ability of governments to address challenges posed by global capitalism. She is the author of Clientelism, Capitalism, and Democracy: the rise of programmatic politics in the United States and Britain (Cambridge University Press, 2018), which examines the role of business against clientelism and the development of modern political parties in the nineteenth-century. 

She has been at Stanford since 2013 as the manager of the Program on American Democracy in Comparative Perspective, which examines problems such as polarization, inequality, and responsiveness, and recommends possibilities for reform. She also teaches in the Fisher Family Honors Program at CDDRL. She is a non-resident fellow in political reform at New America, where she was a 2018 Eric and Wendy Schmidt Fellow. She received a PhD in political science from Harvard University, an MSc in Economic and Social History from Oxford University, where she studied as a Marshall Scholar, and a BA from Emory University.
 
Associate Director for Research
Subscribe to Rule of Law
Top