International Relations

FSI researchers strive to understand how countries relate to one another, and what policies are needed to achieve global stability and prosperity. International relations experts focus on the challenging U.S.-Russian relationship, the alliance between the U.S. and Japan and the limitations of America’s counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan.

Foreign aid is also examined by scholars trying to understand whether money earmarked for health improvements reaches those who need it most. And FSI’s Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center has published on the need for strong South Korean leadership in dealing with its northern neighbor.

FSI researchers also look at the citizens who drive international relations, studying the effects of migration and how borders shape people’s lives. Meanwhile FSI students are very much involved in this area, working with the United Nations in Ethiopia to rethink refugee communities.

Trade is also a key component of international relations, with FSI approaching the topic from a slew of angles and states. The economy of trade is rife for study, with an APARC event on the implications of more open trade policies in Japan, and FSI researchers making sense of who would benefit from a free trade zone between the European Union and the United States.

-
The Western, or liberal, international order which emerged after World War II reflects the culmination of a centuries-long process of European, and later American, economic and political development.  But how can we understand global trade and economic ties before the "Rise of the West" -- and what does the decline of the Western international order mean for global economic relations?  A decline in the economic and political hegemony of Western powers has provided an opening for the revival of trade ties between China and the Middle East, the world's economic hegemons before Europe's rise.  The creation of a new economic zone which touches half of the world's population speaks to the growing relevance of "South-South" economic ties.
 
Lisa Blaydes is Associate Professor of Political Science at Stanford University and Director of the Abbasi Program in Islamic Studies. She is the author of Elections and Distributive Politics in Mubarak’s Egypt (Cambridge University Press, 2011) andState of Repression: Iraq under Saddam Hussein (Princeton University Press, 2018).  Her articles have appeared in theAmerican Political Science Review, Governance, International Studies Quarterly, International Organization, Journal of Theoretical Politics, Middle East Journal, Studies in Comparative International Development and World Politics. During the 2008-9 and 2009-2010 academic years, Professor Blaydes was an Academy Scholar at the Harvard Academy for International and Area Studies. During the 2015-16 academic year, she was a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences. She holds degrees in Political Science (PhD) from the University of California, Los Angeles and International Relations (BA, MA) from Johns Hopkins University. 
 
To register, please visit: https://yoopay.cn/event/26611553
 

Stanford Center at Peking University
The Lee Jung Sen Building
Langrun Yuan
Peking University
No.5 Yiheyuan Road
Haidian District
Beijing, P.R.China 100871

Lisa Blaydes Associate Professor, Department of Political Science Stanford University
Authors
Gi-Wook Shin
Joyce Lee
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

 

The following article first appeared on The Diplomat.

With the historic U.S.-North Korea summit on the immediate horizon, we must recognize that denuclearization will not and cannot be permanent or irreversible as long as there is a desire to reverse it. U.S. President Donald Trump may strike a “grand deal” with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un to denuclearize North Korea, but Kim can — and most likely will — reverse course at his convenience to construct new nuclear weapons. By focusing solely on denuclearization, we risk losing sight of the bigger, more important picture — that is, transforming North Korea into a normal state that no longer sees the need to pursue nuclearization for deterrence, survival, or any other reason.

Much of debate has centered on why Kim suddenly emerged from long-held silence to take the world’s center stage through a series of summits. Was he pressured by toughened sanctions, as Trump credits himself for? Or was it an expression of Kim’s confidence as a leader of a now de facto nuclear power, with more leverage for negotiation? Or has he simply been trying to buy time to avoid war — to get through the unpredictable and ruthless Trump’s tenure as U.S. president? Yet, what really matters now is not so much the question of why Kim came to the table, but rather how we can make the latest détente sustainable without repeating the failures of the past. Will it be different this time?

With the Trump-Kim summit now back on the track after a 24-hour drama of cancellation then resumption, each side seems to have softened its stance by lowering the bar. Next week in Singapore, both leaders will be sorely tempted by clear political and economic interests to paint the meeting as a success. Real challenges, however, will arise as the logistical details of North Korea’s denuclearization are discussed following the summit. The Trump team is unlikely to abandon its goal of the CVID (complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization) of North Korea, while Kim and his men will stand firmly against this all-out approach so as not to follow the footsteps of Libya, Iraq, or Ukraine. North Korea has reportedly demanded a CVIG (complete, verifiable, and irreversible guarantee) of the security of the current regime, but there is a great danger that these deals, if made, will be nothing more than another sheet of paper full of empty words. The deep mistrust between the two countries cannot be overcome overnight, especially considering that both leaders have pretty bad track records of reneging on previous commitments. Neither CVID nor CVIG has much chance of being realized in the current context, from either a technical or a practical perspective.

With all this skepticism, why should we still bother playing this game with North Korea again? It is because we see a window of opportunity to guide North Korea into the international community through processes of diplomatic communication, exchange, and engagement. North Korea’s summit diplomacy has revealed its desire to appear a normal state. Kim vigorously showcased four summit meetings  — twice each with China’s Xi Jinping and South Korea’s Moon Jae-in — and numerous high-level meetings, within two months, all within the parameters of conventional “state-to-state” relationships, departing from past practices. Standing side-by-side with the South Korean president to read out a joint declaration, immediately releasing news of Kim’s summit meetings through its media, presenting Kim’s wife, Ri Sol-ju, as the state’s first lady — all of this would have been unthinkable in his father or grandfather’s generation.

North Korea’s latest efforts at international recognition as a normal state may be insincere and ill-intentioned, but even so, we should continue to allow North Korea and Kim to experience firsthand what it feels like and means to be treated as a normal state and a normal leader according to the ordinary conventions of international diplomacy. Although the goal seems so far away and unreachable, we should strive to normalize North Korea in all respects — its economy, its domestic and international politics, its integration into international institutions, and its adherence to international laws, norms, rights, duties, orders, etc.

CVID can still serve as a short- to mid-term goal, but not as a definitive solution to the long-standing North Korean threat. Whatever is decided at the upcoming summit, a more comprehensive roadmap should be set for enacting desirable transformations in security and economic relations with North Korea, putting the country on a path to become a stable and normal state increasingly integrated into the international community, where it would feel secure without a need for nuclear armament. As Trump says, he is starting a “process” of dealing with North Korea; the upcoming summit should be the beginning of an opportunity to advance this goal. After all, a normal North Korea can achieve CVID, but CVID cannot achieve a normal state.

Gi-Wook Shin is director of the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at Stanford University, and Joyce Lee is a research professional in the Korea Program at the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at Stanford University.

 

Hero Image
Building in Pyongyang
All News button
1

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

(650) 736-1436
0
joanne_camantigue_2024.jpg

Joanne Camantigue is the Finance and Research Manager at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law. Joanne first started her career at Stanford in Global Studies as Finance Associate in 2012 and became the Program Administrator for the Center for Russian East European and Eurasian Studies. She holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Hotel and Restaurant Management from the University of Santo Tomas, Manila, Philippines. She has lived in the Bay Area for many years and loves the diversity in this community. She enjoys learning about different cultures, and ethnic cuisine, one plate at a time.

Finance Manager, CDDRL
Date Label
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

The Korea Program invites junior faculty, post-doctoral fellows, and graduate students to apply for travel awards to attend an upcoming two-day conference organized by the Korea Program at Stanford' Asia-Pacific Research Center. The workshop titled "Future Visions: Challanges and Possibilities of Korean Studies in North America" will be held on November 1st and 2nd, 2018 at Stanford University.

The awards will cover accepted applicants' lodging, domestic airfares, and/or ground transportation. To apply for the travel awards, please submit your CV and 2-page statement as a single file by July 15 here.

About the conference:

“Future Visions: Challenges and Possibilities of Korean Studies in North America,” is designed to bring together leading scholars in the fields of language education, literature, history, social sciences, and library studies. Each panel will consist of three-four scholars who will be tasked with presenting a report on the state of the field. The purpose of the panels is to generate discussion around some of the following questions: 

  • What are the research trends in each field?
  • What kinds of directions can we expect in the near future?
  • What are some of the disciplinary or other challenges in each field?
  • How does each field interact with related fields?
  • What are some of the limitations and possibilities around graduate student training?
  • How can faculty with graduate students cultivate supportive and critical scholarly communities?
  • ​How are junior faculty encouraged, and what institutional structures may offer better support?

Accepted applicants are expected to actively participate in discussion sessions and to engage in networking with other scholars during the 2-day conference.

Please direct questions on the conference to hjahn@stanford.edu.

Hero Image
encina columns
All News button
1
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

During the 2017–18 academic year, SPICE’s Jonas Edman worked with six community college instructors from Las Positas College and Foothill College on their plans for integrating global issues into their classrooms. These six instructors were among ten Education Partnership for Internationalizing Curriculum (EPIC) Fellows to work collaboratively with colleagues at Stanford on projects aimed at internationalizing course curricula and producing innovative curricular materials for use in community college classrooms.

On May 19, 2018, an EPIC Symposium, “Integrating Global Issues into Community College Curricula,” was held at Stanford University that featured presentations by the EPIC Fellows as well as presentations from Stanford faculty. Community college faculty and administrators from across California gathered at Stanford University to discuss ways to prepare students for a world that is increasingly interconnected.

The six EPIC Fellows, with whom Edman worked, and their presentation topics are:

  • Brian Evans, Foothill College: The Latin American Lost Decade
  • Ann Hight, Las Positas College: Using Global Lifestyles as a Platform to Teach Gene Expression and Longevity
  • Natasha Mancuso, Foothill College: Using Online Games to Teach Business and Marketing from a Global Perspective
  • Kali Rippel, Las Positas College: Internationalizing the Research Project Using Wikipedia
  • Colin Schatz, Las Positas College: Globalized and Inclusive: Redesigning a Community College Honors Program
  • Antonella Vitale, Las Positas College: Global Voices in American History

Since 2010, Stanford Global Studies (SGS) has partnered with community colleges through innovative projects such as the Stanford Human Rights Education Initiative (SHREI) and EPIC to bring together faculty and administrators committed to developing global and international studies. Fellows join a growing network of EPIC alumni from across the state who are developing innovative programs to internationalize curricula. SPICE as well as Stanford’s Lacuna Stories have been working with SGS National Resource Centers—Center for East Asian Studies, Center for Latin American Studies, Center for Russian, East European and Eurasian Studies—on these efforts.

 

Hero Image
2017–18 EPIC Fellows Colin Schatz, Antonella Vitale, and Kali Rippel (Las Positas College) with SPICE Director Gary Mukai
2017–18 EPIC Fellows Colin Schatz, Antonella Vitale, and Kali Rippel (Las Positas College) with SPICE Director Gary Mukai
All News button
1
Authors
Amy Zegart
News Type
Q&As
Date
Paragraphs

In a world complicated by terrorism, cyber threats and political instability, the private sector has to prepare for the unexpected. Amy Zegart, CISAC co-director, the Hoover Institution’s Davies Family Senior Fellow, and co-author (along with Condoleezza Rice) of Political Risk: How Businesses And Organizations Can Anticipate Global Insecurity, explains lessons learned in keeping cargo planes moving, hotel guests protected – and possibly coffee customers better served.  

Hero Image
Radio mic
All News button
1
Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Immediate denuclearization of North Korea is dangerous to both North Korean and American interests, say Stanford scholars in a new research report. Instead, they advocate for phased denuclearization to take place over 10 years or more, allowing the United States to reduce the greatest risks first and address the manageable risks over time.

Immediate denuclearization of North Korea is unrealistic, said Stanford scholars in an in-depth report released by the Stanford Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC).
 
Instead, denuclearization should be phased over a 10-year period to allow the United States to reduce and manage risks, said Siegfried Hecker, who authored the study with his research assistant Elliot Serbin and Robert Carlin, a visiting scholar at CISAC.
 
In the report, the scholars laid out a “roadmap” for denuclearization, recommending what they call a “halt, roll back and eliminate” approach. Their advice – which includes informative color charts and detailed, qualitative analysis – emerged from a longer-term project about the nuclear history of North Korea between 1992 and 2017.
 
According to the research, the most important steps toward denuclearization include halting nuclear tests, stopping intermediate or long-range missile tests, stopping the production of plutonium and highly enriched uranium, and banning all export of nuclear weapons, materials or technologies to North Korea.
 
“The roadmap lays out a reasonable timeline for denuclearization, but politics may delay final denuclearization as much as 15 years,” said Hecker, who worked at the Los Alamos National Laboratory for almost two decades, where he served as its directors for 11 of those years. He joined CISAC as a senior fellow in 2005.
 
Building trust and interdependence
In the short term, North Korea and the United States should take steps to build trust and interdependence, which the researchers believe are pivotal for a viable long-term solution like complete demilitarization of North Korea’s nuclear program. North Korea, they argue, will likely want to retain some parts of its nuclear program as a hedge should any potential agreement fall apart. This is a manageable risk, they said.
 
The scholars also encourage Pyongyang to front-load its concrete plan towards  permanent nuclear dismantlement to make a phased approach more appealing to the US administration. This would include actions like halting nuclear and missile tests for intercontinental ballistic missiles.
 
According to Hecker, North Korea’s recent demolition of its nuclear test site is a significant step in that direction.
 
“The so-called ‘Libya model’ – complete and immediate denuclearization – is not a viable solution,” Hecker said. “Our approach leaves each party with a manageable level of risk. Even though it takes longer, it is safer for the world.”
 
Hecker also encouraged the US to recognize North Korea’s desire for civilian programs, including energy production, the use of radioactive substances in medical research, diagnosis and treatment, and a peaceful space program. These types of civilian programs can also foster opportunities for a collaborative relationship between the United States and North Korea. Further, increased cooperation –including with South Korea – can help make efforts for verification and monitoring with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) more reliable. The verification process that will confirm to what extent North Korea dismantles and destroys its military nuclear program is a big issue for negotiations, the scholars said.
 
Recent reconciliation
Critically, the researchers note that recent détente between North Korea and South Korea provides a window of opportunity to accomplish denuclearization – and that the US should take advantage of that window smartly. They  said they hope that the risk-management approach outlined in the report can maximize chances for a successful agreement.
 
“In the past, the US has missed opportunities to manage incremental risk,” Hecker said. “Now is the time to pay attention to that history and be prepared to implement a risk-management approach to denuclearization.”
Hero Image
Siegfried Hecker meets with members of North Korea’s nuclear scientific community during a visit to Yongbyon.
Siegfried Hecker meets with members of North Korea’s nuclear scientific community during a visit to Yongbyon.
Courtesy Siegfried Hecker
All News button
1
Paragraphs

From New York Times bestselling author and former U.S. secretary of state Condoleezza Rice and Stanford University professor Amy B. Zegart comes an examination of the rapidly evolving state of political risk, and how to navigate it.
The world is changing fast. Political risk-the probability that a political action could significantly impact a company's business-is affecting more businesses in more ways than ever before. A generation ago, political risk mostly involved a handful of industries dealing with governments in a few frontier markets. Today, political risk stems from a widening array of actors, including Twitter users, local officials, activists, terrorists, hackers, and more. The very institutions and laws that were supposed to reduce business uncertainty and risk are often having the opposite effect. In today's globalized world, there are no "safe" bets.


POLITICAL RISK investigates and analyzes this evolving landscape, what businesses can do to navigate it, and what all of us can learn about how to better understand and grapple with these rapidly changing global political dynamics. Drawing on lessons from the successes and failures of companies across multiple industries as well as examples from aircraft carrier operations, NASA missions, and other unusual places, POLITICAL RISK offers a first-of-its-kind framework that can be deployed in any organization, from startups to Fortune 500 companies.

Organizations that take a serious, systematic approach to political risk management are likely to be surprised less often and recover better. Companies that don't get these basics right are more likely to get blindsided.
All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Authors
Amy Zegart
Subscribe to International Relations