Stanford University

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

Visit by Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko

-

9/18/08: ** THIS EVENT HAS BEEN CANCELLED **


President Viktor Yushchenko has cancelled his trip to California and will no longer deliver a lecture in the Bechtel Conference Center on September 25, 2008. This event has been cancelled.


Thank you for your interest. We look forward to welcoming you to future programs.

Sincerely,

Center for Russian, East European and Eurasian Studies
Forum on Contemporary Europe
Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies

EVENT CANCELLED

Viktor Yushchenko President, Ukraine Speaker
Seminars

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

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

Creating a New Europe

-

Professor Hedlund explores a shift in focus in Europe away from the 'Brussels vs. Moscow' attitude by proposing strategic interaction in what he calls the 'corridor countries.' He discusses why there is a variety of outcomes in terms of economic success in these countries, in particular the strain of rapid deregulation in 1991 in the Soviet Union. Professor Hedlund also examines the challenges for these countries in Europe now.

Synopsis

In 'Creating a New Europe,' Professor Hedlund begins by discussing the choice the European Union had when they met in the Netherlands in 1991. He argues policymakers could have widened the concept of European integration through free trade and economic cooperation which would have led to unlimited expansion options towards the East. However, Prof. Hedlund argues they decided instead to deepen this notion of 'the United States of Europe' through a currency, flag, and constitution leading to an exclusionary approach. Now, in 2008, there is new opportunity with new members in the EU. Problems such as Russia's interaction with its neighbors which were formerly seen as external issues are now internal issues affecting Brussels. Rather than being 'grateful children' as Jacques Chirac infamously put it, these 'corridor states' are decentralising the game between Brussels and Moscow. Prof. Hedlund argues we must look for more substantial success in internal dynamics in these 'corridor states,' states which were formerly part of the U.S.S.R. and are now part of the EU or are hoping to be in the near future. To Prof. Hedlund, these states are in a good position to act as credible brokers for strategic interaction between the EU and Russia, as well as between each other, such as Lithuania's intervention during the Orange Revolution.

Prof. Hedlund explains how these ‘corridor countries’ were seen as homogenous in 1991 but now have a great diversity in economic outcomes. Much of this can be attributed to the over eager embracement of a market economy by Russia in 1991 and the hardship it caused. In addition, Prof. Hedlund identifies the corrupted markets which exploited the natural resources available following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Moreover, Prof. Hedlund cites that the ‘rent seeking’ attitude of the Russian government was not reciprocated in all former Soviet states. Some were arguably lured by the prospect of EU membership while others might have drawn in by the examples of the successful and democratic Western countries.

To Prof. Hedlund, the challenge now is to develop forward movement in the areas of the ‘corridor countries’ that have become stalled. In addition, some of the markets in those areas must be developed away from their, as he puts it, ‘3rd world’ manners of operating. Accountability is crucial to a functioning economy to Prof. Hedlund. Finally, these ‘corridor countries’ can help in democracy building.

In taking questions, Prof. Hedlund further reiterates his belief in the necessity of accountability. In addition, he touches on his sense that European education is waning, and that this is setting back innovation. Moreover, Prof. Hedlund addresses the merits of a variety of diplomatic approaches.

About the speaker

Stefan Hedlund is an Anna Lindh Research Fellow at the Stanford Forum on Contemporary Europe. He is professor of Soviet and East European Studies at Uppsala University, Sweden. Before 1991, his research was centered on the Soviet economic system. Since then, he has been focusing on Russia's adaptation to post-Soviet realities. This has included research on the multiple challenges of economic transition as well as the importance of Russia's historical legacy for the reforms. With a background in economics, he has a long-standing interest in problems related to the Soviet economic system, and the attempted transition that followed in the wake of the Soviet collapse. More recently, his research has revolved around neo-institutional theory, and problems of path dependence. Among sixteen authored and coauthored titles in English and Swedish, he is the author of Russian Path Dependence (2005), and the forthcoming co-edited volume Russia Since 1980: Wrestling with Westernization (Cambridge, 2009.) Professor Hedlund has received numerous awards including fellowships at the Davis Center for Russian Studies, Harvard University; the Slavic Research Center, Hokkaido University; and at the Kennan Institute, Washington DC.

Download pdf

Daniel and Nancy Okimoto Conference Room

Stefan Hedlund

Department of East European Studies
Uppsala University
Gamla Torget 3, III
Box 514, 751 20 UPPSALA
Sweden

0
Professor of East European Studies, Uppsala University
Visiting Scholar, Forum on Contemporary Europe (December 2008)
Hedlund_photo.JPG PhD

Stefan Hedlund is Professor of East European Studies at Uppsala University, Sweden. A long-standing specialist on Russia, and on the Former Soviet Union more broadly, his current research interest is aimed at economic theories of institutional change. He also has a devouring interest in Russian history, which he has sought to blend with more standard theories of economic change. He has been a frequent contributor to the media, and has published extensively on matters relating to Russian economic reform and to the attempted transition to democracy and market economy more generally. His scholarly publications include some 20 books and close to 200 journal and magazine articles. His most recent monographs are Russian Path Dependence (Routledge, 2005), and Russia since 1980: Wrestling with Westernization (Cambridge University Press, 2008), the latter co-authored with Steven Rosefielde.

 

Stefan Hedlund Professor of Soviet and East European Studies Speaker Uppsala University, Sweden
Seminars

Europe and the U.S. After the U.S. Presidential Election

-

The dawn of a new US administration could be seen as the beginning of a golden era in the transatlantic relations. But is a new president enough to overcome different interests and especially Europe's structural inability to speak with one voice?

Anton Pelinka is professor of Political Science and Nationalism Studies at Central European University Budapest. Previously, he served as Dean of the School of Political Science and Sociology (2004-2006), and as Chair Bernheim d' Etudes sur la Paix at Université Libre, Brussels (2002). Professor Pelinka was the Austrian Representative to the EU Commission on Racism and Xenophobia in 1994 and 1997. Professor Pelinka has taught Political Science at University of Salzburg, University of Essen, Pedagogical College of Berlin (West), and University of Innsbruck. He has been a visiting professor at Nehru University, University of New Orleans, and the University of Michigan, and a fellow at Harvard University and Collegium Budapest. Professor Pelinka served as the Austrian Chair at Stanford University in 1997.

Download pdf

Philippines Conference Room

Anton Pelinka Professor of Political Science and Nationalism Studies, Central European University Budapest Speaker
Seminars

Southeast Asian Studies at Stanford: A rising profile

News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Five visiting scholars with expertise on Southeast Asia will spend varying portions of the academic year 2008-09 in residence at Stanford. Shorenstein APARC and the Southeast Asia Forum will host four of them: three were selected under the Lee Kong Chian NUS-Stanford Initiative on Southeast Asia. and one is a recipient of a 2008-09 Shorenstein Postdoctoral Fellowship. A fifth scholar will be on campus as a National Fellow of the Hoover Institution.

The five are John Ciorciari, Joel S. Kahn, Mark Thompson, Angie Ngoc Tran, and Christian von Luebke.

John Ciorciari spent the 2007-08 academic year at Stanford as a Shorenstein Postdoctoral Fellow at Shorenstein APARC. He finished a book that examines how Southeast Asian states have "hedged" their relations with the United States and China.

Dr. Ciorciari will spend upcoming academic year at Stanford as a Hoover Institution National Fellow. In that capacity he plans to expand his research to include the international relations of India.

Joel S. Kahn is a professor of anthropology (emeritus) in the School of Social Sciences at La Trobe University in Victoria, Australia. He will be at Stanford for the first half of October 2008 as the 2008 Lee Kong Chian National University of Singapore-Stanford University Distinguished Lecturer.

While at Stanford Professor Kahn will give three public lectures. Their tentative titles are: "A Southeast Asian Modernity?"; "Empires, States, and Political Identities in (Pen)insular Southeast Asia"; and "Religion, Reform, Science, and Secularity." Details including dates, times, and venues will be posted as they become known.

Mark Thompson is a professor of political science at the Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg, Germany. He will be in residence at Stanford in Winter and Spring 2009 as the 2009 Lee Kong Chian National University of Singapore-Stanford University Distinguished Fellow.

While at Stanford, Prof. Thompson will pursue a book project on "Late Democratization in Pacific Asia." The book will question the claim that democratization in Pacific Asia (including Southeast Asia) has been driven by economic growth and offer an alternative perspective. He will present the results of his project in a public lecture in the spring of 2009. Date, time, venue, and other details will be posted when known.

Angie Ngoc Trần is a professor in the Division of Social and Behavioral Sciences and Global Studies at California State University, Monterey Bay (CSUMB). She will be in residence at Stanford for the second half of November 2008 as the 2008 Lee Kong Chian National University of Singapore-Stanford University Distinguished Fellow.

In a public lecture on November 17, 2008 (Mobilized Workers vs. Morphing Capital: Challenging Global Supply Chains in Vietnam), Professor Tran will present the results of her study of labor-capital relations in Vietnam and how the different national origins of investors and owners affect workers' conditions, consciousness, and activism. Details including time and venue will be posted as they become known.

Christian von Luebke was a research fellow in Tokyo at Waseda University's Institute for Global Political Economy in 2007-08 following receipt of his 2007 PhD in public policy and governance at the Australian National University. He will be at Stanford for the 2008-09 academic year as a Walter H. Shorenstein Postdoctoral Fellow.

During his residence Dr. von Luebke will pursue a research and writing project on "Good Governance in Transition: Explaining Local Policy Variations in Indonesia, China, and the Philippines." He will give a public lecture on the results of his project in winter or spring 2009. The date, time, venue, and other details will be posted when known.

All News button
1
Subscribe to Europe