The presentation summarizes preliminary findings of my research project on Allied policy towards resistance groups during World War II and its impact on post-war political and ideological divisions.

The research is linked with a multiplicity of historical problems: the western Allies’ balance of political and military considerations during World War II; the Anglo-American cooperation and competition in the field of intelligence; the use of special operations as an instrument of foreign policy, especially in regard to countries where the development of resistance movements had a strong impact on post-war settlement (e.g. Yugoslavia, Greece and Poland); the politics of communist movements between war and revolution in Central and Eastern Europe; the relationship between the Western Allies and the Soviet Union and the Allies’ perception of the latter.

The particular contribution of the project is to bring together aspects which are usually addressed separately: the different national scenarios, whose connections and mutual influence will be investigated; the two Western intelligence agencies, which have been researched mostly in separate ways by scholars of the corresponding nationalities; the Soviet and Western allies’ policies.

Tommaso Piffer is a Marie Curie Postdoctoral Fellow at the Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies at Harvard and at the University of Cambridge. Among his publications is a biography of Alfredo Pizzoni, the political chief of the Italian Resistance (Il Banchiere della Resistenza, 2005), an account of the relationship between the Allies and the Italian Resistance during World War II (Gli Alleati e la Resistenza Italiana, 2010) as well as several essays. He also edited a book in memory of Victor Zaslavsky on Totalitarian societies and democratic transition (Società totalitarie e transizione alla democrazia, 2011, with Vladislav Zubok) and the collection of essays on the political mass murder of Porzus (Porzus. Violenza e resistenza sul confine orientale, 2012). He is an affiliate at the Harvard Center for European Studies and a contributor to the cultural insert of the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera.

Open to Stanford affiliates

Sponsored by the Center for Russian, East European and Eurasian Studies and co-sponsored by The Europe Center

Workshop Goals

On the first day, develop a set of research interventions (surveys, experiments, archival searches, participant observations, etc.) that will gain some leverage in measuring differential policies in Europe and their impact on integration, however specified; or in examining the various immigrant populations to measure their differential success in integration, however specified. Each of the participants (either singly or in collaboration) will write up one or two research proposals that lay out the outcomes of interest and the strategy for explaining variation on those outcomes.  Discuss problems and opportunities for each of the submitted proposals and fulfill this first goal.

The second goal of the workshop, and the subject for the second day, to think through three related issues. The first is how to frame the set of proposals in a way that they all fit into a well-defined framework, as if each proposal were a piece of a coherent puzzle. The second is to think through funding sources for this set of interventions that would allow us to conduct the research we proposed and to continue collaborating across these projects. The third is to explore whether there are scholars whose work we know who should be invited to join our group and become part of the grant proposing team.

Wednesday, May 7, 2014 Agenda

I.  Citizenship (discussant Thad) – [9-11AM]

• Hainmueller/Hangartner – Return on getting citizenship; encouragement design in Switzerland
• Gest/Hainmueller/Hiscox – Encouragement design on citizenship in US (Chicago)
• Hainmueller/Laitin – Encouragement design on citizenship in France
• Alter/Margalit – Immigration and political participation, where immigrants get immediate rights to citizenship (Israel)
• Dancygier/Vernby – return on citizenship for labor market success (Sweden)

II. Local Context (Rafaela) [11:15-12:15]

• Adida/Hangartner – RDD on Sudanese refugees in various US cities; experiment with IRC on Iraqi/Chaldian integration in El Cajon

III. Contracts of Integration (Yotam) [1:30-3PM]

• Hainmueller/Hangartner – Integration Contracts and Naturalization
• Hainmueller/Laitin – Integration Contracts in France

IV. Discrimination (Jens) [3:30-5PM]

• Ortega/Polavieja – Immigrants and Job security in Spain and elsewhere in Europe
• Margalit – Overcoming employer abuse of immigrant workers
• Dancygier/Vernby – failure of immigrants to get nominated for political office

Thursday, May 8, 2014 Agenda

Discussion on what investments in collective goods might advance this research perspective productively. We might look at favorable granting institutions and how we might combine our memos into a macro proposal; or we might think about building a common research infrastructure (in the way J-PAL has done for experimental development studies). Working towards a jointly authored volume might be another way to aggregate our research projects. All of this discussion depends on the complementarities that emerge from our discussions on Wednesday. David will chair the Thursday discussion.

Mr. Chun Yungwoo, the national security adviser to the South Korean president from 2010 to 2013, will analyze Korea’s strategic situation in light of the current geopolitical dynamics and challenges to peace and security in Northeast Asia. He will assess the state of bilateral relations among key states in the region, including the risk of territorial disputes spiraling out of control due to domestic politics or miscalculation. As a former chief South Korean negotiator to the Six Party Talks on ending North Korea’s nuclear weapons program, Ambassador Chun will also present his ideas for making progress on North Korean denuclearization while discussing the existential crisis facing North Korea and the long-term future of the Korean Peninsula.

Chun Yungwoo is the chairman and founder of the Korean Peninsula Future Forum (KPFF). Previously, Ambassador Chun served as the National Security Advisor to President Lee Myung-Bak from 2010 to 2013. In his 33 years of service in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Chun served as Second Vice Foreign Minister (2009-2010), Special Representative for Korean Peninsula Peace and Security Affairs and Head of the ROK Delegation to the Six-Party Talks (2006-2008), and Deputy Foreign Minister for Policy Planning and International Organizations (2005-2006). He was also the Korean Ambassador to the United Kingdom (2008-2009), Ambassador and Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nations (2003-2005), and also held earlier diplomatic postings in France, Morocco, and Austria. Ambassador Chun received a BA from Pusan National University and Master of International Affairs from the School of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University.

Abstract: How do policymakers infer the long-term political intentions of their states' adversaries? A new approach to answering this question, the “selective attention thesis,” posits that individual perceptual biases and organizational interests and practices influence which types of indicators a state's political leaders and its intelligence community regard as credible signals of an adversary's intentions. Policymakers often base their interpretations on their own theories, expectations, and needs, sometimes ignoring costly signals and paying more attention to information that, though less costly, is more vivid (i.e., personalized and emotionally involving). In contrast, intelligence organizations typically prioritize the collection and analysis of data on the adversary's military inventory. Over time, these organizations develop substantial knowledge on these material indicators that they then use to make predictions about an adversary's intentions. An examination of three cases based on 30,000 archival documents and intelligence reports shows strong support for the selective attention thesis and mixed support for two other approaches in international relations theory aimed at understanding how observers are likely to infer adversaries' political intentions: the behavior thesis and the capabilities thesis. The three cases are assessments by President Jimmy Carter and officials in his administration of Soviet intentions during the collapse of détente; assessments by President Ronald Reagan and administration officials of Soviet intentions during the end of the Cold War; and British assessments of Nazi Germany before World War II.

About the Speaker: Professor Keren Yarhi-Milo is an Assistant Professor of Politics and International Affairs at Princeton University’s Politics Department and the Woodrow Wilson School for Public and International Affairs. Her research and teaching focus on international relations and foreign policy, with a particular specialization in international security, including foreign policy decision-making, interstate communication and crisis bargaining, intelligence, and US foreign policy in the Middle East.

Professor Yarhi-Milo’s forthcoming book (Princeton University Press) titled, “Knowing The Adversary: Leaders, Intelligence Organizations, and Assessments of Intentions in International Relations,” explores how and why civilian leaders and intelligence organizations select and interpret an adversary’s signals of intentions differently.