All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Subtitle

There is a widespread perception that China’s digital censorship distances its people from the global internet, and the Chinese Communist Party, through state-controlled media, is the main gatekeeper of information about foreign affairs. Our analysis of narratives about the Russo-Ukrainian War circulating on the Chinese social media platform Weibo challenges this view. Comparing narratives on Weibo with 8.26 million unique news articles from 2,500 of some of the most trafficked websites in China, Russia, Ukraine, and the United States (totaling 10,000 sites), we find that Russian news websites published more articles matching narratives found on Weibo than news websites from China, Ukraine, or the United States. Similarly, a plurality of Weibo narratives were most associated with narratives found on Russian news websites while less than ten percent were most associated with narratives from Chinese news sites. Narratives later appearing on Weibo were more likely to first appear on Russian rather than Chinese, Ukrainian, or US news websites, and Russian websites were highly influential for narratives appearing on Weibo. Altogether, these results show that Chinese state media was not the main gatekeeper of information about Russia’s invasion of Ukraine for Weibo users.

Journal Publisher
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Authors
Hans W.A. Hanley
Yingdan Lu
Jennifer Pan
Jennifer Pan
Authors
Khushmita Dhabhai
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

At a CDDRL weekly seminar, American University Political Scientist Keith Darden examined how the Russian-Ukrainian war is reshaping European institutions. The talk was part of the REDS seminar series, organized in partnership with The Europe Center and the Hoover Institution. While some expected that heightened military threats would drive greater European Union (EU) unity and integration, Darden argued that the war is instead reinforcing national institutions and re-nationalizing Europe.

First, the war has shifted power dynamics within the EU, strengthening newer member states, particularly those from post-enlargement waves in Eastern Europe. Unlike older Western European members, these states do not share the post-WWII commitment to anti-nationalism that has underpinned European integration. Countries such as Poland and Hungary have adopted nationalist policies that challenge the EU’s foundational ideals, treating European regulations as discretionary rather than binding. This shift has weakened the EU’s ability to act as a unified political entity.

Second, while the war has spurred European military rearmament, this has occurred along national rather than EU-wide lines. Defense spending has surged across the continent, yet procurement remains fragmented, with countries prioritizing domestic industries and bilateral agreements over collective EU initiatives. Military aid to Ukraine, rather than being coordinated by European institutions, has largely been managed through U.S.-led bilateral mechanisms. This reflects the EU’s limited role in security policy. Historically, existential threats have led to fiscal centralization—the concentration of taxation and spending powers at a higher level of government to fund collective defense. However, the EU is restricted by its treaties from directly allocating budgeted funds for military expenditures, limiting its ability to centralize security coordination or build stronger institutional frameworks in response to the war.

Third, the war has heightened national identity politics across Europe, further undermining European integration. Instead of fostering a shared European identity, the conflict has reinforced national distinctions. In Ukraine, the war has fueled policies emphasizing language, media control, and historical narratives rooted in nationalism. Within the EU, it has led to unilateral trade restrictions, violations of Schengen rules, and disputes over migration policies. These trends have strengthened sovereignty-based decision-making at the national level rather than pushing Europe toward deeper federalism.

Darden situated these findings within broader theories of state-building. Drawing from bellicist theories, he explained that war has historically driven state-building by centralizing fiscal capacity and consolidating power. However, unlike past cases where war led to greater political integration, the EU remains structurally constrained by its reliance on voluntary market-based cooperation rather than centralized security imperatives. Kelemen and McNamara (2022) argue that the EU’s fragmented institutional development results from the absence of war-induced fiscal consolidation. Even with the return of war to Europe, integration has not accelerated; instead, security responses have remained decentralized, with national governments taking the lead.

Darden concluded that the war is reinforcing the dominance of the nation-state rather than strengthening the EU as a collective entity. Despite increased military spending, European defense remains disjointed, and the war’s institutional impact is shaped by national identities, security alternatives, and EU governance constraints. Far from unifying Europe, the war may ultimately weaken the post-WWII European project.

Read More

Alice Siu presented her research during a CDDRL seminar on January 30, 2025.
News

Can Deliberation Revitalize Democracy?

Alice Siu, Associate Director of CDDRL’s Deliberative Democracy Lab, demonstrates the wide-ranging effects of deliberation on democracy.
Can Deliberation Revitalize Democracy?
Ali Çarkoğlu
News

Polarization, Cleavages, and Democratic Backsliding: Electoral Dynamics in Turkey (1990-2023)

Using data from the World Values Survey and Turkish Election Studies, CDDRL Visiting Scholar Ali Çarkoğlu explores the rise of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the enduring influence of cultural divides on Turkey’s political landscape.
Polarization, Cleavages, and Democratic Backsliding: Electoral Dynamics in Turkey (1990-2023)
Yoshiko Herrera presented her research in a REDS Seminar co-hosted by CDDRL and TEC on January 16, 2025.
News

Identities and War: Lessons from Russia’s War on Ukraine

Political Science scholar Yoshiko Herrera examines how identity shapes the causes, conduct, and consequences of war, especially in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Identities and War: Lessons from Russia’s War on Ukraine
All News button
1
Subtitle

American University Political Scientist Keith Darden examines how the Russian-Ukrainian war is reshaping European institutions.

Date Label
Authors
Sophia Browder
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Michael McFaul ’86 M.A. ’86, director of the Freeman Spogli Institute (FSI) and former U.S. ambassador to Russia, and investigative journalist Roman Anin, a former John. S. Knight Fellow, called for continued U.S. support in countering Russia’s invasion of Ukraine under the new President Donald Trump administration, and for the critical importance of journalists in uncovering truth under autocracies at a Tuesday panel.

McFaul and Anin, a founder of news platform iStories and a former journalist for independent Russian newspaper Novaya Gazeta, explored the relationship between Trump and Vladimir Putin in a conversation moderated by Dawn Garcia, director of the John S. Knight (JSK) Fellowships. JSK, which aims to “empower diverse journalism leaders as change agents,” sponsored the event at FSI.

“Trump and Putin share a lot of psychological traits. They are both narcissistic, they need admiration and both share the trait of Machiavellianism,” Anin said. He commented on the apathy of both presidents who, in his view, disregard the suffering of others to achieve power.

Putin sees himself not as a president, but rather as a father of the nation.
Roman Anin
iStories Co-founder

Anin stressed the importance of understanding Putin’s nationalist, Orthodox ideology that positions Russia in opposition to Western values. He said that Putin’s worldview is deeply rooted in his KGB background and a desire to regain Russia’s perceived lost influence after the Cold War. McFaul said that this ideology was “one of the things we in the United States least understand about Putin.” In his experience, it went unrecognized in the White House that Putin could be transactional, a thug and an ideologue at the same time.

Anin believes Ukraine is not a top priority for Trump, a shift which could lead to hasty decisions that are detrimental to Ukrainian interests in an effort to quickly end the Ukraine War.

McFaul noted, however, that this would not be effective in ending the invasion, and any deal excluding Zelensky was a non-starter. “Ukrainians won’t accept a deal agreed by Trump and Putin in Helsinki,” he said.

The speakers further explored the challenges facing journalists in Russia, particularly in an era of misinformation and social media dominance. Anin expressed concern about the devaluation of factual reporting and increased cognitive overload for civilians, and McFaul emphasized the importance of distinguishing between commentary and reporting.

The discussion highlighted the crucial role of independent Russian journalists operating in exile, such as Anin’s team at Important Stories (iStories), who analyze images of dead soldiers to build algorithms tracking Russian casualties. Journalists continue to investigate and expose corruption and human rights abuses, often at serious personal cost.

This pursuit of truth is critical in light of heavy propaganda in Russia. Anin described youth indoctrination for over a decade in Russia as an example of the ideological homogeneity in the country.

“They dress kindergarteners in military uniforms, teach weapon use and glorify killing Ukrainians,” Anin said. Putin has managed to “raise a generation of young Russians who support him and are ready to fight,” he said.

It’s not inevitable that Putinism in its current form will still exist in twenty years. In fact, I actually think it’s improbable.
Michael McFaul
FSI Director

Asked about Putin’s potential successor, Anin named Putin’s ex-bodyguard, Alexei Dyumin. “He truly believes in Putin’s ideology, and he’s devoted to him like a dog,” Anin said. He added that Putin “sees himself not as a president, but rather as a father of the nation.”

McFaul had a hopeful outlook: “I know from Russian and Soviet history that it’s not inevitable that Putinism in its current form will still exist in twenty years. In fact, I actually think it’s improbable. There are still courageous Russians that believe in an alternative Russia, and we should do what we can to support that.”

Diya Bhattacharjee ’28, who attended the panel, said she “really enjoyed listening to two experts on Russian affairs answer difficult questions about the future of Russia and U.S.- Russian relations and share their interesting experiences living in the country.”

Another attendee, Bay Area-based reporter Valerie Demicheva, said she thought that JSK did a service to the journalistic community by hosting “a raw and poignant conversation with the experts who truly understand geopolitics and the state of democracy.”


 

This story originally appeared in The Stanford Daily.

Read More

Vladimir Kara-Murza onstage with Michael McFaul at Stanford University.
News

Gone Today, Here Tomorrow: Vladimir Kara-Murza on the Fight for Democracy in Russia

During the 2024 Wesson Lecture, former political prisoner and democracy activist Vladimir Kara-Murza called for transparency and accountability from within Russia and more support from the international community to establish and grow Russian democracy.
Gone Today, Here Tomorrow: Vladimir Kara-Murza on the Fight for Democracy in Russia
Protests demonstrate against Vladimir Putin outside a Russian-owned international investment bank in Budapest, Hungary.
Q&As

Pushing Back on Putin: The Fight for Democracy Within Russia

Lyubov Sobol, an activist and current visiting scholar at CDDRL, explains the roots of Russia's pro-democracy movement and the importance of its success to Russia, Ukraine, and the future stability of the global democratic community.
Pushing Back on Putin: The Fight for Democracy Within Russia
Ambassador Audra Plepytė of Lithuania in conversation with Michael McFaul, director of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford University.
News

Lithuanian Ambassador Audra Plepytė Urges Resistance to Russia

At a public event hosted by the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, Audra Plepytė, the Lithuanian ambassador to the U.S., called for continued support for Ukraine, and awarded Michael McFaul the Cross of Knight of Order for Merits to Lithuania under a decree of the Lithuanian president.
Lithuanian Ambassador Audra Plepytė Urges Resistance to Russia
All News button
1
Subtitle

At an event hosted by the John S. Knight Journalism Fellowships at Stanford, Michael McFaul and journalist Roman Anin discussed U.S.-Russia relations under Putin and Trump and the role of journalism in combatting anti-democratic ideology.

Date Label
-
Aerial Drone Flyby Shot in Kyiv - Biggest National flag of Ukraine. Aerial view. Spivoche Pole, Kiev Aerial shot of the Motherland Monument and the Biggest National Flag of Ukraine in Kyiv, Ukraine, photographed prior to February 24, 2022. Oleksandr Tkachenko, Getty Images

February 24 marks the third anniversary of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Though Ukraine has won many battles, the war for Ukraine’s right to exist as an independent, democratic nation rages on at a very steep human cost.

To commemorate this important day for Ukraine and the world, the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law is honored to host a panel of high-profile Ukrainian leaders currently based in Kyiv for a discussion of the impact of the war on daily life, the global democratic order, and Ukraine's future.

The panel will be introduced by Kathryn Stoner, the Mosbacher Director of the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, and moderated by Michael McFaul, Director of FSI, the Ken Olivier and Angela Nomellini Professor of International Studies in the Department of Political Science, and a former U.S. ambassador to Russia.

Lunch will be available for in-person attendees. For those unable to join us in person, a livestream of the panel will be available via Zoom.

Meet the Panelists

Oleksiy Honcharuk

Oleksiy Honcharuk

Former Prime Minister of Ukraine
Learn More

Oleksiy Honcharuk served as the 17th prime minister of Ukraine from 2019-2020, during which time he introduced important policy initiatives in Ukraine including the institution of business privatization processes, efforts to combat black markets, and the launch of the Anti-Raider Office to respond to cases of illegal property seizures. Prior to serving as prime minister, Honcharuk was deputy head of the Presidential Office of Ukraine and was a member of the National Reforms Council under the president of Ukraine. In 2021, he was the Bernard and Susan Liautaud Visiting Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI).

Serhiy Leshchenko

Serhiy Leshchenko

Advisor to President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's Chief of Staff
Learn More


Serhiy Leshchenko is formerly a journalist with Ukrainska Pravda and member of Ukrainian Parliament (2014-2019). He first rose to political prominence during Ukraine’s 2014 Maidan Revolution, and has continued to serve in government and civil society since. He is an advisor to President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s chief-of-staff, working and living in the governmental bunkers during the start of Russia's invasion and siege on Kyiv in 2022. He is an alumnus of the 2013 cohort of the Draper Hills Summer Fellows program (now the Fisher Family Summer Fellows Program) at FSI’s Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law at Stanford University.

oleksandra hs

Oleksandra Matviichuk

Founder of the Center for Civil Liberties
Learn More


Oleksandra Matviichuk is a human rights advocate and founder of the Center for Civil Liberties, which was recognized as a co-recipient of the 2022 Nobel Peace Prize. The mission of the Center for Civil Liberties is to protect human rights and establish democracy in Ukraine and the OSCE region. The organization develops legislative proposals, exercises public oversight over law enforcement agencies and judiciary, conducts educational activities for young people, and implements international solidarity programs. Matviichuk was a visiting scholar from 2017-2018 with the Ukrainian Emerging Leaders Program at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law.

sasha

Oleksandra Ustinova

Member of the Verkhovna Rada, Ukraine's Parliament
Learn More


Oleksandra Ustinova is a member of the Verkhovna Rada, Ukraine's parliament. Since the beginning of Russia's invasion in 2022, she has met repeatedly with lawmakers in the United States to advocate on behalf of Ukraine, including an address before the U.S. House of Representatives on February 28, 2022. Prior to her government service, Ustinova was the head of communications and anti-corruption in healthcare projects at the Anti-Corruption Action Center (ANTAC), one of the leading organizations on anti-corruption reform in Ukraine. She was a visiting scholar with the Ukrainian Emerging Leaders Program at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law from 2018-2019.

Kathryn Stoner
Kathryn Stoner
Michael A. McFaul
Michael McFaul

In-person: Bechtel Conference Center (Encina Hall, First floor, 616 Jane Stanford Way, Stanford)

Virtual: Zoom

Members of the media interested in attending this event should contact fsi-communications@stanford.edu.

Oleksiy Honcharuk Former Prime Minister of Ukraine
Serhiy Leshchenko Advisor to Ukrainian President Vlodomyr Zelenskyy's chief of staff
Oleksandra Matviichuk Founder of the Center for Civil Liberties, 2022 Nobel Peace Prize recipient
Oleksandra Ustinova Member of Verkhovna Rada
Panel Discussions
Date Label
Authors
Soraya Johnson
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

In a recent REDS Seminar, co-sponsored by CDDRL and The Europe Center, University of Wisconsin-Madison Professor of Political Science Yoshiko Herrera examined the role of identity in shaping the causes, conduct, and impact of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Based on the groups they align themselves with, Herrera explained, individuals hold collective memories and similar interpretations of a shared past. These memories and interpretations are often central to our understanding of wars. In the Russian context, the narrative of humiliation by the West in the 1990s and the urge to show strength against NATO expansion fueled Russia’s violent drive to assert its national identity.

During conflict, identity is central to an individual’s assessment of who is an ally or enemy. According to the social identity theory, humans cooperate more within their ingroups than outgroups, or those they perceive as different. Importantly, it can be difficult to determine which identity markers prevail the most. Although identity is often viewed through the limited lens of ethnicity, factors like nationality, religion, or gender can anchor group cohesion. In Ukraine, for example, a concept of national identity has unified people across other markers, such as ethnicity. The fundamental denial of Ukraine’s national identity has been central to Putin’s devastating invasion of the country.

Group alignment, moreover, continues to affect political attitudes throughout a war, affecting, for instance, how invested the masses are in victory. The perception of a conflict as an assault on identity tends to deepen the public’s personal investment in that conflict, as evidenced by Ukraine’s high military mobilization since the onset of the war.

Identity is not only a driver of conflict; it also is a dependent variable, or a domain that is shaped by the experience of war. In Ukraine, a cohesive national identity has strengthened in reaction to Russia’s devastating aggression. Language, a crucial dimension of identity, demonstrates this pattern; as of 2023, 82% of Ukrainians identify Ukrainian as their “native tongue,” compared to only 57% in 2012. There has been a rapid evolution in how Ukrainians view themselves, extending beyond what even the most ardent nationalists could have hoped for a decade ago.

It is not just policy considerations and pragmatism that propel the decisions of political leaders; abstract and ever-evolving concepts of identity are motivating forces behind conflicts. Herrera’s research recognizes identity as a key factor influencing war, with the power to uniquely mobilize the masses. In the face of conflict, identities can change and strengthen; Russia’s construed narratives of national identity fuel its war conduct, while in Ukraine, there has been a corresponding maturing of a unified national identity. The role of identity in all aspects of conflict must not be underplayed, as it is manipulated by and motivates political leaders, especially in times of war.

Read More

Alberto Díaz-Cayeros presents his research in a CDDRL seminar.
News

Colonialism, Epidemics, and Resilience: Rethinking Demographic Collapse in Tepetlaoztoc

FSI Senior Fellow Alberto Díaz-Cayeros explores how demographic collapse, epidemic disease, and colonial rent extraction were interconnected in Tepetlaoztoc, a city-state in the Acolhua Kingdom of the Aztec Empire.
Colonialism, Epidemics, and Resilience: Rethinking Demographic Collapse in Tepetlaoztoc
Alex Mierke-Zatwarnicki
News

Understanding Identity Politics: Strategies for Party Formation and Growth

CDDRL Postdoctoral Fellow Alex Mierke-Zatwarnicki explores how identity politics — strategies of political mobilization based on group identity — shape the development of new political parties, particularly those trying to establish themselves in a competitive environment.
Understanding Identity Politics: Strategies for Party Formation and Growth
Bryn Rosenfeld
News

The Transformative Power of Anger Under Authoritarian Repression

Cornell Assistant Professor of Political Science Bryn Rosenfeld’s work explains why ordinary citizens — those without activist ties — sometimes take extraordinary risks to stand up to authoritarian regimes.
The Transformative Power of Anger Under Authoritarian Repression
All News button
1
Subtitle

Political Science scholar Yoshiko Herrera examines how identity shapes the causes, conduct, and consequences of war, especially in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Date Label
Authors
Melissa Morgan
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

A warming planet. Backsliding in democracy at home and abroad. Competition with China. And active war in Europe. Broadening conflicts in the Middle East.

The world today is facing no shortage of overlapping, multilateral challenges. At a recent panel titled, “Global Threats Today: What's At Stake and What We Can Do About It,” scholars from the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI) had an opportunity to delve deeper into what the data says about how these global threats are evolving, and how we should be thinking about how to address them.

The discussion, which was held as part of Stanford University's 2024 Reunion and Homecoming weekend, was moderated by Michael McFaul, director of the Freeman Spogli Institute, and featured Marshall Burke, Didi Kuo, Amichai Magen, Oriana Skylar Mastro, and Steven Pifer.

In the highlights below, each scholar shares what they wish people understood better about climate change, the war in Ukraine and Russia's aggression, China's strategy for building power, the health of American democracy, and how the fighting between Israel and Hamas fits into the geopolitical struggle between democracies and autocracies.

Their full conversation can be heard on the World Class podcast, and the panel can be watched in its entirety on YouTube.
 

Follow the link for a full transcript of "Global Threats Today: The 2024 Edition."


Illiberal Actors Are on the Move  |  Amichai Magen


Around the world, we are seeing a new axis of influence coalescing. Some have called it the "axis of misery" or the "axis of resistance." It is composed of Russia and Iran and North Korea, with a lot of Chinese involvement as well. It is transforming our international system in unbelievable ways. It is united by the desire to dismantle the liberal international order, and we're starting to see the nature and the interconnectivity of this new axis of chaos much more clearly. 

You see North Korean soldiers fighting for Putin in Ukraine. You see Putin helping the Houthis attack international Western shipping in Yemen. We see North Korean tunnel technology turn up in Lebanon with Hezbollah and then with Hamas in Gaza. The interconnectivity is something that we really need to know much more about.

Historically, emperors, kings, dukes, used to spend 50% of their resources on preparing for war or waging war. But in the post-Second World War era, we built a critical norm that we've called the liberal international order. And the miracle of the liberal international order is that we've managed to take global averages of defense spending from about 50% to a global average of about 7%. And the resulting surplus wealth has allowed us to invest in education, health, and scientific discovery.

What is at stake now is the possibility of a return of a norm where states are destroyed and disappear. And we have currently three states in the international system, at the very least — Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan — that are at risk of annihilation. To that end, we must articulate a positive strategic vision for the Middle East that will strive towards a two state solution, that would give the Palestinian people the dignity and the freedom that they deserve alongside a safe and secure Israel, and that will leverage the new spirit of cooperation that exists in the Middle East.

If we allow the norm of the non-disappearance of state to erode and collapse, we will go back to the law of the jungle, where we will have to spend so much more money on the wrong things. That is what is at stake in Ukraine, in the Middle East, and with Taiwan.
 

Amichai Magen

Amichai Magen

Visiting Fellow in Israel Studies at the Freeman Spogli Institute
Full Profile


Challenges to Democracy Come From Within |  Didi Kuo


Many people think that the threat to democracy comes from outside our borders, particularly from countries like Russia and China that are asserting themselves in new and aggressive ways.

But the real threat to democracies that we're seeing across the globe is coming from within. Leaders come to power through democratic means, but then they begin to erode power from within. They attack the electoral system and the process of democratic elections, and they take power from other branches of government and aggregate it to themselves within the office of the executive. 

The good news is there are examples of countries like France, Brazil, and Poland where illiberal leaders have been stopped by pro-democracy coalitions of people who came together. These coalitions don't necessarily agree with each other politically, but they've come together and adapted in order to foreclose on these anti-democratic forces. 

That flexibility and adaptability is the reason democracies succeed. We see this over and over again in the the United States. When our institutions have become out of date, we've changed them. We extended suffrage, first to Black Americans who were formerly enslaved, then to women, then to Native Americans. We eliminating poll taxes and rethought what it means to have a multiracial democracy. We have a long track record of making changes.

Today in 2024, some of our democratic institutions are antiquated and don't reflect our contemporary values. This is a moment where we should lean into that flexible strength of democracy and think about institutional reforms that will both strengthen our system against illiberal creep and help us better achieve the ideals that we aspiring to as a people.
 

Didi Kuo

Didi Kuo

Center Fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law
Full Profile


Ukraine Is Not Fated to Lose |  Steven Pifer


There's a narrative that's taking place that Russia is winning the war, Ukraine is losing, and it's only a matter of time. And it is true that Russia has captured a bit more territory than they occupied at the start of the year. But they've only achieved that at enormous cost.

As of September, the Pentagon says Russia had lost 600,000 dead and wounded soldiers. To put that in context, in February of 2022 when this major invasion began, the total Russian military — not just the army, but the total Russian military — was 1.1 million people. And the British Ministry of Defense earlier this week assessed that Russia now is losing 1,200 soldiers killed or severely wounded per day. You have to ask how long that's sustainable.

When I talk to Ukrainians, they still regard this war as existential. They're very determined to win, and we need to do a better job of supporting that. A stable and secure Europe is vital to America's national security interests, and you're not going to have a stable and secure Europe unless there's a stable and secure Ukraine. So we need to both provide them the weapons they need and relieve some of the restrictions we currently have and allow the Ukrainians to use those weapons to strike military targets in Russia.

Because we have to ask ourselves: what does an emboldened Vladimir Putin do if he wins in Ukraine? I don't think his ambitions end with Ukraine, perhaps not even with the post-Soviet space. There's going to be a much darker Russian threat hovering over Europe if Putin wins. So let's not count the Ukrainians out.
 

Man smiling

Steven Pifer

Affiliate at the Center for International Security and Cooperation and The Europe Center
Full Profile


China Isn't Going Away Anytime Soon  |  Oriana Skylar Mastro


There is a lot of discussion right now about the fact that the economy in China is slowing down and its demography is undergoing significant changes. What I'm here to tell you is that the challenge of China is not over, and is not going to be over any time soon. China has built power in a different way than the United States, and we have to reassess how we understand that power if we want to effectively deter, blunt, and block them from acting out in ways that threaten our partners and allies.

Since the 1990s, China has developed a significant amount of political, economic, and military power. They've gone from having an economy smaller than France’s  to the second largest in the world. They've gone from not being involved in international institutions to a great degree, not even having diplomatic relations with major countries like South Korea, to now having stronger and greater diplomatic networks, especially in Asia, than the United States.

What we really need to understand is that the U.S.-China competition is not about the United States or about China; it's about the rest of the world, and how the rest of the world sees us and how China interacts with us. The balance of power is shifting, and we have to be a lot smarter and a lot faster if we want to make sure it shifts in favor of our interests.

The United States hasn't had a comprehensive strategy towards the developing world in a long time. And we are running out of time to get that balance right in Asia. We don't have the right stuff. We don't have it in the right numbers, and it's not in the right place. Some of this is about deterring war over Taiwan, but it's also about generally maintaining peace and stability in Asia.
 

Oriana Skylar Mastro

Oriana Skylar Mastro

FSI Center Fellow at the Asia-Pacific Research Center and the Center for International Security and Cooperation
Full Profile


We're Doing Better (But Not Enough) on Climate Change |  Marshall Burke


Many people don't recognize how much progress we're actually making on climate issues. Emissions have fallen by 20% since 2005. We're actually speeding up the amount of substantial progress being made in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and dealing with the core climate change problem, which is the human emission of greenhouse gasses.

In the United States, the Inflation Reduction Act and the subsequent implementation of various rules the Biden administration has championed has given a huge boost in transitioning our economy to greener energy technologies, transportation technologies, and other kinds of infrastructure. We're moving a lot of cash to get that done, and the president is trying to get as much of it out the door as he can before his term ends.

Globally, the progress has been less rapid. Emissions are roughly flat. But overall, we're still making progress. I co-teach an undergraduate class on climate change, and we've had to update our slides on how much warming we're expecting over the next century. We thought it was going to be four degrees Celsius. Now we think it's going to be something between two and three degrees Celsius.

But the flip side of that is that we're still going to get warming of two to three degrees Celsius. We're already experiencing warming of about a degree Celsius, which is about two degrees Fahrenheit, and it's projected that we're going to get another three to five degrees Fahrenheit by the end of the century. That is a lot of warming, and we are not prepared to deal with it. We need to do much more on mitigation and much more on adaptation if we're going to meet the realities of living in a changing climate.

So we've had progress on the one hand, but there's still a lot of work left to do in the coming decades.
 

Marshall Burke

Marshall Burke

Deputy Director of the Center on Food Security and the Environment
Full Profile


Get additional analysis from scholars at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies by following us on X, Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, YouTube, and by subscribing to our newsletters and updates.

Read More

group of people standing on steps of Encina Hall at the 2024 Trans-Pacific Sustainability Dialogue
News

Driving Climate-Resilient Infrastructure and Inclusive Industrialization: Highlights from the Third Annual Trans-Pacific Sustainability Dialogue

Held at Stanford and hosted by the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, the third annual Dialogue convened global leaders, academics, industry experts, and emerging experts to share best practices for advancing Sustainable Development Goal 9 in support of economic growth and human well-being.
Driving Climate-Resilient Infrastructure and Inclusive Industrialization: Highlights from the Third Annual Trans-Pacific Sustainability Dialogue
People report high levels of dissatisfaction with democracy in countries where corruption is endemic.
News

How Corruption at the Top Erodes Support for Democracy

News of high-level dishonesty and graft can reduce people’s trust in government — and their fellow citizens.
How Corruption at the Top Erodes Support for Democracy
Lisa Einstein
News

Lisa Einstein to Lead Artificial Intelligence Efforts at Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency

Einstein, an alumna of the Ford Dorsey Master's in International Policy, was Stanford’s first dual master’s degree recipient in computer science (artificial intelligence concentration) and international policy (cyber policy and security specialization).
Lisa Einstein to Lead Artificial Intelligence Efforts at Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency
All News button
1
Subtitle

At a panel during Stanford's 2024 Reunion weekend, scholars from the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies shared what their research says about climate change, global democracy, Russia and Ukraine, China, and the Middle East.

Date Label
Paragraphs

Russia’s war in Ukraine has been roundly condemned in the West. NATO members have continued to supply Ukraine with weaponry while the EU, US and their allies have ensured that the Russian economy remains under the most extensive and intensive set of sanctions in history. Yet many leaders of countries in the global south have been far more hesitant to condemn Russian actions. Some have merely abstained in United Nations resolutions criticizing Russia, while others have remained neutral. This paper will endeavor to explain why the global south has such a different perspective from the global north on Russia’s war in Ukraine. I argue that this is a result of America’s withdrawal from the global south over the last two decades and Russia’s reemergence in many parts of the Middle East, Sub Saharan Africa, Latin America and Asia.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Journal Articles
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Slavic Review
Authors
Kathryn Stoner
Number
Issue 1
Authors
News Type
Commentary
Date
All News button
1
Subtitle

Does Attorney-Client Privilege Put Some People Above the Law? Lecturer Erik Jensen and Stanford Law and Policy Lab students Sarah Manny and Kyrylo Korol expose how attorney-client privilege can undermine the rule of law.

Date Label
Authors
Stanford Engineering Staff
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Political scientist Kathryn Stoner is the Director of the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) at Stanford and an authority on Russian/Ukrainian politics.

She says views on the current war depend on which side someone is on: Many Russians and their leader Vladimir Putin say Ukrainians are Russians and have been since the 10th century. Ukrainians strongly disagree, likening the two nations to the U.S. and Great Britain. How the present conflict is resolved has important implications for other former Soviet states and the future of the European Union, as Stoner tells host Russ Altman on this episode of Stanford Engineering’s The Future of Everything podcast.

Full transcript available from Stanford Engineering.

All News button
1
Subtitle

How the present conflict plays out has important implications for other former Soviet states and for the future of the E.U., says political scientist Kathryn Stoner.

Date Label
Authors
Michael Breger
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

The Indo-Pacific, the world’s fastest-growing region in the global economy, faces complex geopolitical and geo-economic risks. Amid Russia’s unrelenting war in Ukraine and its strengthening ties with a bellicose North Korea, China continues to exert its power through economic coercion and diplomatic pressures. Meanwhile, Asia's established and aspiring democracies must rise to the challenge of preventing further democratic decline and revitalizing their institutions. These trends dominated the agenda at the recent Nikkei Forum, The Liberal International Order in the Indo-Pacific.

Cohosted by Shorenstein APARC, the Keio Center for Strategy at the Keio University Global Research Institute, and Nikkei Inc., the forum was held on June 24, 2024, at Keio University and featured Freeman Spogli Institute (FSI) and Keio experts. Its first session, moderated by Akio Fujii, executive chair of the editorial board at Nikkei Inc., included panelists Oriana Skylar Mastro, FSI center fellow at APARC, and Michael McFaul, the director of FSI. They examined the geopolitical effects of the war in Ukraine, deterrence and provocation in Taiwan, and their implications for security in the Indo-Pacific. The second session, moderated by Nikkei commentator Hiroyuki Akita, included Gi-Wook Shin, the director of APARC and director of the Korea Program, and Kiyoteru Tsutsui, the deputy director of APARC and director of the Japan Program. Panelists considered the connectivity of European and Indo-Pacific security, the rise of authoritarianism and global populism, international partnerships, and various ongoing efforts to protect the liberal international order in the Indo-Pacific. The session recordings in English and Japanese are available on the Nikkei Global Events YouTube channel. 

Conflict, Deterrence, and Provocation

Opening the first session, McFaul underscored the broader geopolitical implications of the invasion of Ukraine. Emphasizing the significance of Russian President Vladimir Putin's recent visit to North Korea, he highlighted the intertwined nature of European and Asian security. McFaul argued against the notion that global security should solely focus on China, stressing that Putin's actions demonstrate a critical link between European security concerns and global stability.

McFaul offered a mixed assessment of the war in Ukraine. He praised the international community's response in providing military support and economic aid to Ukraine, stating, “I have been mostly impressed with how the liberal free world, including Japan, came together to provide weapons first and foremost, to provide economic assistance secondarily, and to put in place sanctions [agsint Russia].” Yet he also criticized delays in Western responses, attributing them partly to internal political dynamics, including actions taken during the Trump administration.

What I see, tragically, is the breakdown of the liberal International order.
Michael McFaul
Director of FSI

McFaul expressed concern that Russian defensive positions now hinder prospects for a breakthrough on the Ukrainian side, with future developments tied to the outcome of the next U.S. presidential election. He underscored the importance of democratic nations organizing against autocratic regimes, framing the conflict in Ukraine as a critical battleground for liberal democratic values amidst global power struggles. McFaul described that “what I see, tragically, is the breakdown of the liberal International order. We're going back to an earlier period where there was not one order, but two, and maybe many orders, and one of those divisions is between autocrats and democrats.”

Center Fellow Oriana Skylar Mastro addressed the moderator's query about Ukraine’s implications for East Asia by delving into the complexities of deterrence and provocation in relations with China. She highlighted three main concerns: the blurred distinction between actions that deter China versus those that provoke it, the conflicting priorities of reassuring allies versus deterring adversaries post-Ukraine, and the delicate balance between showcasing military capabilities and demonstrating resolve. Mastro argued that while military build-up might deter China, political gestures, such as enhancing Taiwan's international stature, could provoke tensions.

She emphasized the challenges in aligning U.S. and Japanese strategies, especially regarding Taiwan, where differing interpretations of deterrence and provocation persist. “Attempts to signal resolve can be much more provocative than attempts to demonstrate capabilities [...] It seems that the United States and Japan at least have to be on the same page about what is reassuring versus what deters China, what deters China versus what provokes China, and what is more important, capabilities or resolve,” she explained

Mastro stressed the importance of nuanced policy decisions considering how actions perceived as deterrence in one context might provoke, in another, thus impacting regional stability. “I prefer for the United States to speak softly and carry a big stick, meaning we have a lot of capability but we should stop talking about it so much,” she said. She underscored the U.S. and Japan must coordinate closely on strategic messaging to ensure a cohesive approach to managing China's responses and maintaining regional security.

FSI and APARC scholars meet with Yoshimasa Hayashi FSI and APARC scholars meet with Yoshimasa Hayashi.

During their visit to Tokyo, the Stanford delegation met with Japanese government officials, including Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi.

Michael McFaul gave an interview to the Japan Broadcasting Corporation's (NHK) prime-time news show News 7, which you can view here >

Manifold Pressures on Liberal Democracy

During the second panel, Gi-Wook Shin discussed the contemporary challenges facing liberal democracy, citing instances of foreign influence from authoritarian states like Russia and China. He began with a personal anecdote from Mongolia, where a friend running for parliament reported intimidation by authorities allegedly supported by Russia. Shin drew parallels to previous instances of interference, such as Russia's involvement in the 2016 U.S. election and China's actions in Taiwan and Korea.

In contrast to the American and British leadership against fascism and communism in the 1930s and 1940s, Shin described the current crisis in global leadership to safeguard liberal values. He questioned whether any country could now step up to combat rising authoritarianism, citing Modi’s India and alliances forming between leaders like Putin, Kim Jong-Un, and Xi Jinping. “I don't think I can say with confidence that the U.S. can defend liberal democracy, I don't see any leader in Europe either, and I don't see anyone in Asia,” he lamented.

He called for strategies to restore and strengthen global leadership in promoting and defending liberal democracy against mounting authoritarian challenges from China, Russia, and others.

Japanese democracy is functioning quite well. Apart from that, Japanese Society is peaceful, safe, and stable. Although the economic growth rate is low, people's discontent is not gushing out
Kiyoteru Tsutsui
Deputy Director of APARC

In his remarks, Kiyoteru Tsutsui addressed these global challenges to democracy and emphasized Japan's role in safeguarding it. Tsutsui noted Japan's relatively stable democratic environment compared to nations experiencing greater political divisions. Despite recent economic fluctuations in the country,, “Japanese democracy is functioning quite well,” he argued. “Apart from that, Japanese society is peaceful, safe, and stable. Although the economic growth rate is low, people's discontent is not gushing out and they can live quite a good life.”

Tsutsui emphasized Japan's economic and diplomatic contributions to promoting democracy, citing its trusted role in assisting Asian countries through the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JAICA). He suggested Japan could assert its influence not only through traditional democracy promotion but also by establishing standards in areas like infrastructure and public health. “If we look at the global rankings, Japan has quite a big influence.” He underscored the importance of Japan's discreet but impactful diplomacy in upholding democratic values globally, including its involvement in initiatives like the Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy, The Quad, and CPTPP. Through practical actions and international cooperation, he said, Japan  demonstrates its commitment to democratic values and counters global trends of democratic decline. Throughout the forum, the panelists agreed that the Indo-Pacific remains at the center of the global struggle between democracy and autocracy. They emphasized the need for collaborative action to bolster democratic institutions worldwide and urged nations to unite quickly to prevent further escalation of tensions in the region and beyond.

Nikkei newspaper report on the Nikkei Forum – July 3, 2024
Download pdf

Read More

Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida arrives to address a joint meeting of Congress in the House of Representatives at the U.S. Capitol on April 11, 2024 in Washington, DC.
Commentary

Kishida May Pay a Price, but Has Handled LDP Scandal Shrewdly

Moves by Japanese prime minister could have lasting impact on country's politics.
Kishida May Pay a Price, but Has Handled LDP Scandal Shrewdly
All News button
1
Subtitle

At the Nikkei Forum, Freeman Spogli Institute scholars Oriana Skylar Mastro, Michael McFaul, Gi-Wook Shin, and Kiyoteru Tsutsui considered the impacts of the war in Ukraine, strategies of deterrence in Taiwan, and the growing tension between liberal democracy and authoritarian populism.

Date Label
Subscribe to Ukraine