Stable and Stagnant Relations
Two years ago today, American troops and their coalition partners invaded Iraq. Saddam Hussein, President Bush argued, was on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons to augment his arsenal of chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction. Before the menace grew any stronger, Saddam had to be toppled.
Carol Atkinson (speaker) retired as a lieutenant colonel from the U.S. Air Force in 2005. While in the military she served in a wide variety of management and operational positions in the fields of intelligence, targeting, and combat assessment. During the Cold War she flew on the Strategic Air Command's nuclear airborne command post as a target analyst. During Operation Desert Storm (1991) she worked on the intelligence staff in Riyadh, and, subsequently, on the contingency planning staff in Dhahran/Khobar, Saudi Arabia. While in the military, she taught at the Air Force Academy and the Air Force's Command and Staff College.
Atkinson holds a PhD in international relations from Duke University, an MA in geography from Indiana University, and a BS from the United States Air Force Academy (5th class with women). She is currently a post-doctoral research fellow at the Center for International Studies at the University of Southern California. Atkinson's primary research focuses on U.S. military-to-military contacts as channels of international norm diffusion. She is also working on a project examining the influence of educational exchange programs on democratization and a project on the social construction of the biological warfare threat in the United States.
Jessica Weeks (respondent) is a doctoral candidate in the Stanford Department of Political Science. Her research interests include foreign policy decision-making in non-democratic regimes, the settlement of military crises, and the effects of foreign military interventions on target states. She will be a pre-doctoral fellow at CISAC during 2007-2008. Jessica received her BA in political science from The Ohio State University, and an MA in international history and politics from the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva, Switzerland.
Reuben W. Hills Conference Room
Charles Perrow (speaker) is an emeritus professor of sociology at Yale University and a visiting scholar at CISAC. An organizational theorist, his latest research is presented in The Next Catastrophe: Reducing Our Vulnerabilities to Natural, Industrial, and Terrorist Disasters (Princeton, spring 2007). Among his award-winning research is Organizing America: Wealth, Power, and the Origins of American Capitalism (Princeton, 2002), winner of the Max Weber award for best book on organizations from the American Sociological Association in 2003. His recent articles include "Organizational or Executive Failures?" and "Inside the Nuclear Plant's Executive Office," both published in Contemporary Sociology. Perrow currently serves on a National Academy of Science panel on the possibilities of certifying software. He received his BA, MA, and PhD from the University of California, Berkeley, all in sociology.
Peter G. Neumann (respondent) has been in SRI's Computer Science Lab since September 1971. He is concerned with computer systems and networks, trustworthiness/dependability, high assurance, security, reliability, survivability, safety, and many risks-related issues such as voting-system integrity, crypto policy, social implications, and human needs including privacy. He moderates the Association for Computing Machinery's Risks Forum, edits Communications of the ACM's monthly Inside Risks column, chairs the ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy, and chairs the National Committee for Voting Integrity. He is a Fellow of the ACM, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and is also an SRI Fellow. He received the National Computer System Security Award in 2002 and the ACM SIGSAC (Special Interest Group on Security, Audit, and Control) Outstanding Contributions Award in 2005. He is a member of the U.S. Government Accountability Office Executive Council on Information Management and Technology, and the California Office of Privacy Protection advisory council. He has doctorates from Harvard and Darmstadt.
Reuben W. Hills Conference Room
David Holloway is the Raymond A. Spruance Professor of International History, a professor of political science, and an FSI senior fellow. He was co-director of CISAC from 1991 to 1997, and director of FSI from 1998 to 2003. His research focuses on the international history of nuclear weapons, on science and technology in the Soviet Union, and on the relationship between international history and international relations theory. His book Stalin and the Bomb: The Soviet Union and Atomic Energy, 1939-1956 (Yale University Press, 1994) was chosen by the New York Times Book Review as one of the 11 best books of 1994, and it won the Vucinich and Shulman prizes of the American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies. Holloway also wrote The Soviet Union and the Arms Race (1983) and co-authored The Reagan Strategic Defense Initiative: Technical, Political and Arms Control Assessment (1984). He has contributed to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Foreign Affairs, and other scholarly journals.
Since joining the Stanford faculty in 1986 -- first as a professor of political science and later (in 1996) as a professor of history as well -- Holloway has served as chair and co-chair of the International Relations Program (1989-1991), and as associate dean in the School of Humanities and Sciences (1997-1998). Before coming to Stanford, he taught at the University of Lancaster (1967-1970) and the University of Edinburgh (1970-1986). Born in Dublin, Ireland, he received his undergraduate degree in modern languages and literature, and his PhD in social and political sciences, both from Cambridge University.
Reuben W. Hills Conference Room
CISAC
Stanford University
Encina Hall, E214
Stanford, CA 94305-6165
David Holloway is the Raymond A. Spruance Professor of International History, a professor of political science, and an FSI senior fellow. He was co-director of CISAC from 1991 to 1997, and director of FSI from 1998 to 2003. His research focuses on the international history of nuclear weapons, on science and technology in the Soviet Union, and on the relationship between international history and international relations theory. His book Stalin and the Bomb: The Soviet Union and Atomic Energy, 1939-1956 (Yale University Press, 1994) was chosen by the New York Times Book Review as one of the 11 best books of 1994, and it won the Vucinich and Shulman prizes of the American Association for the Advancement of Slavic Studies. It has been translated into seven languages, most recently into Chinese. The Chinese translation is due to be published later in 2018. Holloway also wrote The Soviet Union and the Arms Race (1983) and co-authored The Reagan Strategic Defense Initiative: Technical, Political and Arms Control Assessment (1984). He has contributed to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Foreign Affairs, and other scholarly journals.
Since joining the Stanford faculty in 1986 -- first as a professor of political science and later (in 1996) as a professor of history as well -- Holloway has served as chair and co-chair of the International Relations Program (1989-1991), and as associate dean in the School of Humanities and Sciences (1997-1998). Before coming to Stanford, he taught at the University of Lancaster (1967-1970) and the University of Edinburgh (1970-1986). Born in Dublin, Ireland, he received his undergraduate degree in modern languages and literature, and his PhD in social and political sciences, both from Cambridge University.
The Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies has been selected to join the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy at Rice University, Stanford Law School, the University of Virginia School of Law, and William & Mary School of Law, as partnering institutions in the Miller Center of Public Affairs' newly constituted National War Powers Commission, it was announced on February 28, 2007, by Gerald L. Baliles, director of the University of Virginia's Miller Center and former governor of Virginia. The commission will be co-chaired by former Secretary of State James A. Baker, III and former Secretary of State Warren Christopher, a graduate of Stanford Law School and former President of the Stanford University Board of Trustees. The commission has ten distinguished public members: former U.S. Senator from Washington Slade Gorton, former Representative from Indiana and Iraq Study Group Co-Chair Lee H. Hamilton, former U.S. Trade Representative Carla A. Hills, former Secretary of the Army John O. Marsh, Jr., former U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese, III, former Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Abner J. Mikva, former Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Atlantic Fleet J. Paul Reason, former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft, the Dean of Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs Anne-Marie Slaughter, and Brookings Institution President and former Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbot.
Co-directed by John C. Jeffries, Jr., dean of the University of Virginia School of Law, and W. Taylor Reveley, III, dean of William & Mary School of Law, the commission will seek a practical and constitutional consensus on how the three branches of government - the President, Congress, and the Courts - are to exercise their respective prerogatives to shape American war and peace. As the conveners note in their initial brief, "For over two centuries war powers issues have bedeviled a host of Presidents, Congresses, and at times the Courts." Competing claims to war powers have remained more unsettled than almost any other issue of American constitutional law. The country lacks a consensus about how the President and the Congress are to make decisions about war and peace, and whether and to what extent the Courts should resolve disputes or adjudge the uses of war powers by the President and Congress. Consequently, they note, "Presidents, members of Congress, Courts, scholars and pundits continue to debate which branch should set policy concerning (1) the initiation of conflict, (2) how conflict is to be conducted once begun, and (3) when and how conflict is to be terminated."
As the conveners state, "we badly need a consensus on how the President and Congress are to share their overlapping powers to shape American war and peace, about who should decide what, and when each must participate meaningfully in shaping national policy." In addition, the practical and constitutional consensus the commission seeks to reach, "should comport with not only the text of the Constitution and the intent of its Framers, but also the experiences of our history." Members of the War Powers Commission were selected on the basis of their diverse and impressive experiences, and bipartisan backgrounds, in the hope that they can recommend "a process, formula or result that could be embraced by future administrations or Congresses." The commission intends to release a report reflecting its views, and emphasizes that the recommendations it expects to issue will be entirely prospective in nature and not intended to apply to the current administration or the present Congress.
For those seeking a new national consensus, the National War Powers Commission has been born at a propitious time. "During this time of war, as the nature of war changes, and as Congress and the President demonstrate a capacity for both contention and agreement," the conveners state, "the Commission will be well-poised to contribute to a resolution that has eluded the country for well over two hundred years. America's policymakers need it, America's voters deserve it, and now make be an auspicious time to seek it."
For more information, please visit the Miller Center's website, www.millercenter.org, or contact Lisa Todorovich, Assistant Director of Communications at the Miller Center, 434-924-4096, or by e-mail, ltodorovich@virginia.edu.
The success of the 6-party negotiations has changed the dynamic of the situation in the Korean peninsula. How do we assess the status of the talks? What are the prospects for U.S.-DPRK relations? And what is the trend in inter-Korean relations?
The ROK-US alliance is undergoing rapid change, symbolized by the decision to change the combined command structure in 2012 and the redeployment of U.S. troops. Both countries are heading toward important president elections and coping with strategic challenges in the world. How should we think about the role of the alliance as we look toward the future?
What are the long-term trends in Northeast Asia? How will the rise of China as an economic power and the economic recovery of Japan impact the region? What is the role of Korea in the strategic architecture of Northeast Asia? How does the region fit into U.S. strategic priorities?
In this second forum, current developments in North Korea, the future of the alliance, and strategic vision for Northeast Asia will be discussed.
Bechtel Conference Center