Governance

FSI's research on the origins, character and consequences of government institutions spans continents and academic disciplines. The institute’s senior fellows and their colleagues across Stanford examine the principles of public administration and implementation. Their work focuses on how maternal health care is delivered in rural China, how public action can create wealth and eliminate poverty, and why U.S. immigration reform keeps stalling. 

FSI’s work includes comparative studies of how institutions help resolve policy and societal issues. Scholars aim to clearly define and make sense of the rule of law, examining how it is invoked and applied around the world. 

FSI researchers also investigate government services – trying to understand and measure how they work, whom they serve and how good they are. They assess energy services aimed at helping the poorest people around the world and explore public opinion on torture policies. The Children in Crisis project addresses how child health interventions interact with political reform. Specific research on governance, organizations and security capitalizes on FSI's longstanding interests and looks at how governance and organizational issues affect a nation’s ability to address security and international cooperation.

News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

The recent developments in North Korea's summit diplomacy and the feasibility of CVID (complete, verifiable and irreversible dismantlement) of the nuclear program have received unprecedented responses, both optimistic and pessimistic, from the international community.

Please stay tuned to this page for APARC researchers' commentary and analysis on the CVID of the North Korean nuclear program through articles published in various news media.

Latest Commentaries:

How to Keep the Ball Rolling on North Korean Negotiations (East Asia Forum, May 2, 2019)

Why Walking Away from Kim's Deal May Have Been the Right Move (Axios, February 28, 2019)

Success of Second Trump-Kim Summit Will Lie in the Details (Axios, February 26, 2019)

The Second Trump-Kim Summit Must Settle the Big Questions (The National Interest, February 19, 2019)

Normalising, Not Denuclearising, North Korea (East Asia Forum, October 3, 2018)

Moon-Kim Summit in Pyongyang Was Promising, But No Game Changer (Axios.com, September 19, 2018)

Towards Normality: What's Next with North Korea? (East Asia Forum Quarterly, September 2018)

 

The Singapore Summit Empowers South Korean Chaebols (The New Republic, June 26, 2018)

Korean Elections Give Moon Momentum, But Could Shift U.S. Alliance (Axios, June 14, 2018)

Despite Lack of Plan, North Korea Denuclearization Could Still Happen (Axios, June 12, 2018)

Ambassador Kathleen Stephens shares reactions following the Trump-Kim summit, including her thoughts on President Trump's pledge to cancel military exercises on the Korean Peninsula (KQED's Forum, 06/12/18)

With North Korea, Let's Not Forget the Big Picture (The Diplomat, June 8, 2018)

"[T]he mere prospect of the June summit has already enhanced Kim's status on the international stage," observes APARC Director Gi-Wook Shin, Trump needs leadership and allies to salvage the North Korea summit (Axios, May 25, 2018)

Stanford Scholars Discuss Diplomacy’s Future after U.S.-North Korea Summit Is Canceled (May 24, 2018)

Dan Sneider understands Japanese skepticism of North Korea's conversion to disarmament in Japan, China and South Korea Get Together (The Economist, May 10, 2018)

Future of U.S. troops in South Korea uncertian (Los Angeles Times, May 4, 2018)

Related articles:

A new start or a rerun on the Korean Peninsula? (East Asia Forum, May 6, 2018)

Stanford Panel Discusses North-South Summit and What Happens Next (APARC News, April 28, 2018)

North Korea Summit Diplomacy (The Diplomat, March 30, 2018)

Moon's Bet on the Olympics: What Comes Next? (East Asia Forum, February 18, 2018)

 

Hero Image
panmunjom april 27 2018
Panmunjom Declaration on April 27, 2018 | Cheong Wa Dae
All News button
1
-

An Evening with ECE TEMELKURAN

Turkish writer and author of The Time of Mute Swans and Turkey: The Insane and the Melancholy



Monday, May 14, 7:00 – 8:30 p.m.

Stanford Humanities Center, Levinthal Hall

 

Co-Sponsors: Abbasi Program in Islamic Studies; CDDRL Program on Turkey; Department of Comparative Literature;

Division for Literatures, Cultures, and Languages; Stanford Humanities Center


 

 

Stanford Humanities Center, Levinthal Hall

 

Ece Temelkuran Turkish writer and author
-

RSVP required: Click here to register.

This is a book talk with Carter Eckert, the author of Park Chung Hee and Modern Korea: The Roots of Militarism, 1866-1945

Discussants:
Barak Kushner: Reader in Japanese History, University of Cambridge
Yumi Moon, Associate Professor of History, Stanford University

About the book:
For South Koreans, the twenty years from the early 1960s to late 1970s were the best and worst of times—a period of unprecedented economic growth and of political oppression that deepened as prosperity spread. In this masterly account, Carter J. Eckert finds the roots of South Korea’s dramatic socioeconomic transformation in the country’s long history of militarization—a history personified in South Korea’s paramount leader, Park Chung Hee.

For more information about this event, please visit CEAS event website.

This event is sponsored by the Center for East Asian Studies, APARC Korea Program, Department of History, Stanford Humanities Center, and the FSI Japan Fund.

Carter Eckert <i> Professor of Korean History, Harvard University</i>
Seminars
-

Public procurement accounts for a substantial portion of the taxpayers' money: approximately 12% of GDP and 29% of government expenditure in OECD countries. Governments are expected to carry it out efficiently and with high standards of conduct to ensure sustainable growth. In this talk, Lee will explain the unique auction system in South Korea's public procurement market, and discuss how government purchases can lead firms and the economy to grow. Firms that obtain short term public procurement contracts experience increased growth and activity, above the effects of the activity associated with the public contract, and this is observed especially among small, young and financially-constrained firms. Lee will also draw policy implications from those findings.

Image
lee
Munseob Lee is an assistant professor of economics at the UC San Diego School of Global Policy and Strategy. He is also a core faculty member at the UC San Diego Transnational Korean Studies. His research focuses on macroeconomics, firm dynamics, and Korea. Prior to joining UC San Diego, Professor Lee was a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, a research intern at the International Monetary Fund, and a sergeant in the Republic of Korea Army.

Munseob Lee <i>Assistant Professor of economics, UCSD School of Global Policy and Strategy</i>
Seminars
-

The Republic of China on Taiwan spent nearly four decades as a single-party state under dictatorial rule (1949-1987) before transitioning to liberal democracy. This talk is based on an ethnographic study of street-level police practices during the first rotation in executive power following the democratic transition (i.e. the first term of the Chen Shui-bian administration, 2000-2004). Summarizing the argument of a forthcoming book, Dr. Jeffrey T. Martin focuses on an apparent paradox, in which the strength of Taiwan's democracy is correlated to the weakness of its police powers. Martin explains this paradox through a theory of "jurisdictional pluralism" which, in Taiwan, is  organized by a cultural distinction between sentiment, reason, and law as distinct foundations for political authority. An overt police interest in sentiment (qing) was institutionalized during the martial law era, when police served as an instrument for the cultivation of properly nationalistic political sentiments. Martin's fieldwork demonstrates how the politics of sentiment which took shape under autocratic rule continued to operate in everyday policing in the early phase of the democratic transformation, even as a more democratic mode of public reason and the ultimate power of legal right were becoming more significant.


Image
jmart
Jeffrey T. Martin is an assistant professor in the Departments of Anthropology and East Asian Languages and Cultures at the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign. He specializes in the anthropological study of modern policing, and has conducted research in China, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and the USA. His research interests focus on historical continuity and change in police culture, especially as this culture reflects specific changes in the legal, bureaucratic, or technical dimensions of police operations. Prior to joining the University of Illinois, Dr. Martin taught in the Sociology Department at the University of Hong Kong, and in the Graduate Institute of Taiwan Studies at Chang Jung Christian University.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jeffrey T. Martin <i>Assistant Professor, Anthropology and East Asian Languages and Cultures, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign</i>
Seminars
-

Interested in pursuing a Master’s degree in International Policy? Come check out our newly redesigned Ford Dorsey Master’s in International Policy (MIP) at FSI!

 

MIP is a two-year Master of Arts program that emphasizes the application of advanced analytical and quantitative methods to decision-making in international affairs. It is also offered as a coterminal degree here at Stanford. If you are interested in hearing more, please join us for our upcoming MIP Coterm Info Session:

 

What: MIP Coterm Info Session

Date: May 22, 2018

Time: 12:30 -1:15pm

Location: International Policy Studies Kitchen, Ground Floor, Encina Hall Central (616 Serra St.)

 

Please see more details about the program, as well as application information, on our website: http://ips.stanford.edu/.

 

International Policy Studies Kitchen, Ground Floor, Encina Hall Central (616 Serra St.)

News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Even as Indian officials watch the rise of China and recent changes to its foreign policy with apprehension, they prefer to avoid having to choose sides between the United States and China.

That sentiment marked the keynote address by veteran journalist Siddharth Varadarajan, winner of the 2017 Shorenstein Journalism Award. Speaking on April 16 at the Award’s sixteenth anniversary panel discussion titled “India, the United States, and China: The New Triangle in Asia,” Varadarajan described a triangle where all three parties were in flux.

The award recognizes Varadarajan’s exemplary record of excellence in reporting on India’s domestic and foreign affairs in both traditional and new media. As founding editor of The Wire, Varadarajan combines innovative digital strategies with quality reporting that advances positive social, economic, and political change.

“Today we can see, across Asia as well as the United States, that journalism has been somewhat reinvigorated by… the growth of authoritarianism,” said Daniel Sneider, Shorenstein APARC visiting scholar, who chaired the noon panel. “I think we feel even more vindicated in hosting this award…and giving some attention to people who are making this kind of contribution.”

Thomas Fingar, a China specialist and a Shorenstein APARC fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute, and Nayan Chandra, the founder, former editor-in-chief, and current consulting editor of YaleGlobal Online magazine, joined Varadarajan on the panel.

The panelists addressed a host of questions related to Indian foreign policy under the geopolitical construct of a rising China and a retreating United States. Although the China-India-U.S. triangle has existed for some time, Varadarajan argued that present conditions make it an important topic for renewed discussion.

Pointing to recent internal changes by president Xi Jinping, India’s departure from the so-called Nehruvian consensus, as well as the unpredictability of U.S. foreign and trade polices under the Trump presidency, Varadarajan depicted a triangle comprised of shifting segment lengths and angles. He reviewed the India-U.S. and the India-China relationships and their evolution over the last decade-and-a-half; outlined significant changes in China’s foreign and economic policies over the last eight years; and elucidated the U.S.-India response to these changes.

Since 1998 and India’s declaration of its status as a nuclear power, U.S.-India relations have seen a succession of rises and falls under each presidency, with the present administration being no exception. “When the rest of the world was ambiguous, ambivalent, a bit worried about what the United States might do under Trump,” Varadarajan said, “Prime Minister Modi was one of the few world leaders to actually seek a doubling down of the relationship." Over the same period, India-China relations tended to follow a similar pattern of peaks and troughs, albeit in a reversed pattern. “If you look broadly at the India-China relationship,” Varadarajan summated, “it’s a textbook case of how improvements in economic relations and improvements in trade do not necessarily lead to improvements in political relations."

Image
2017 Shorenstein Journalism Award Panel

Varadarajan closed his remarks by arguing against the existing viewpoint of the triangle as a zero-sum game. “You cannot, on the one hand, talk of the need for a free and open Indo-Pacific region and, on the other hand, create forums or architecture that in some ways are designed to keep the Chinese out… India's interests lie perhaps in an architecture that is genuinely inclusive.”

The Shorenstein Journalism Award, which carries a cash prize of $10,000, recognizes accomplished journalists committed to critical reporting on and exploring the complexities of Asia through their writing. It alternates between honoring recipients from the West, who mainly address American audiences, and recipients from Asia, who pave the way for freedom of the press in their countries. Established in 2002, the award honors the legacy of Mr. Walter H. Shorenstein. A visionary businessman, philanthropist, and champion of Asian-American relations, Shorenstein was dedicated to promoting excellence in journalism and deeper understanding of Asia.

Varadarajan called the award a “boost to those of us in India who are fighting the good fight of keeping independent journalism alive-and kicking under difficult circumstances.”

Watch Varadarajan’s keynote speech:

Hero Image
2017 Shorentein Journalism Award Panel
Siddharth Varadarajan, the 2017 Shorenstein Journalism Award winner, speaks to an audience of Stanford faculty, students and community members, part of the award's 16th anniversary, April 16, 2018. | Rod Searcey
All News button
1
Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

As a senior policy advisor on the Middle East at the Pentagon and the White House, Colin Kahl has witnessed struggles in the region first-hand. From working to shape the U.S.-led campaign against the Islamic State and the long-term partnership with Iraq to limiting Iran’s nuclear activities to helping craft the U.S. response to the Arab Spring, Kahl knows better than most how important it is to understand this rapidly changing region.

Now that he has joined the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI) as its inaugural Steven C. Házy Senior Fellow, Kahl wants to improve understanding of how developments in the Middle East impact people in the region and security around the globe.

The launch of FSI’s Middle East Initiative provides a first step toward this objective. As the initiative’s first director, Kahl plans to create “connective tissue” for efforts already underway across Stanford.

“There are a number of disparate efforts around campus working on Middle East issues,” said Kahl. “There is a lot of terrific research and engagement going on. My hope is that the Middle East Initiative will serve as a focal point to expose the Stanford community to ongoing work and foster new conversations that are not happening now.”

Many of the Middle East activities already occurring on campus happen at FSI, making it a natural home for the initiative.

“Our scholars are already studying the dynamics of authoritarian regimes in the Middle East, prospects for reform and democracy in the Arab world, ways to counter terrorist activities and promoting economic development,” said FSI Director Michael McFaul. “Stanford students want to dive more deeply into the region’s political, social, economic and technological development. We want to give them that opportunity.”

In the 2018-2019 academic year, FSI’s Ford Dorsey Master's in International Policy plans to begin filling this need by adding a three-course sequence on the Middle East.

Kahl also plans to bring more Middle East scholars from outside Stanford to share their ideas and research.

“I look forward to helping Stanford students and scholars connect and collaborate in ways that enrich our understanding of this vital region,” said Kahl. “Stanford has much to contribute to some of the most pressing policy challenges we face.”

Hero Image
gettyimages 163230973
Gary John Norman/Getty Images
All News button
1
Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Answers to why the US-Russia relationship seems to be at a dangerous low these days can be found in a new book by Stanford scholar Michael McFaul.

McFaul’s new book, From Cold War to Hot Peace: An American Ambassador in Putin’s Russia, illuminates this geopolitical impasse as he reflects on his career as the Obama administration’s ambassador to Russia and his service on the National Security Council.

“From my days as a high school debater in Bozeman, Montana, in 1979 to my years as ambassador to Russia ending in 2014, I had argued that closer relations with Moscow served American national interests,” wrote McFaul, director of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.

As a student at Stanford, McFaul, AB/AM ’86, took Russian language classes and traveled to what Ronald Reagan dubbed “the evil empire” in the summer of 1983 to attend a summer language program at Leningrad State University.

“When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, I again packed my bags and moved to Russia to help support market and democratic reforms there, believing that those changes would help bring our two countries closer together,” wrote McFaul, a political scientist.

In 2009, he went to work for President Obama at the National Security Council, and in 2012 he became the US ambassador to Russia, where he noted that he felt “animated by the belief that a more cooperative relationship served American national interests.”

McFaul was positive about a healthier US-Russia relationship as he began his duties in Moscow. In fact, he helped craft the US policy known as “reset,” which advocated a new and unprecedented collaboration between the longtime adversaries.

But that did not last for very long, said McFaul.

‘Reset’ and Confrontation

When McFaul began his ambassadorship, the Russian government took measures to discredit and undermine him. The tactics included dispatching protesters to his place of residence; slandering him on state media; and closely surveilling McFaul, his staff, and even family.

A particularly tense time for McFaul was during the Arab Spring in 2011, which saw the fall of several Middle Eastern autocrats and the Obama administration’s embrace of a seemingly democratic swell throughout the region. Russia’s then-Prime Minister Vladimir Putin found the US support for democracy in the Arab world— especially McFaul’s enthusiasm— as a threat to his own political system in Russia, according to McFaul. Putin possessed an entirely different view of “regime change” and US efforts to foster democracy.

In 2012, McFaul was appointed the US ambassador to Russia. He looked forward to the new challenge—but it was troubled from the beginning. The Russian government, led by President Putin after a power shift, was deeply influenced by foreign minister Sergey Lavrov, McFaul said. They were both very suspicious of the US, and McFaul believed they saw him as the enemy due to his support of democracy and human rights.

“I left Washington as Mr. Reset. I landed in Moscow as Mr. Revolutionary,” he wrote.

Elections and Controversy

In December 2011 Putin’s party, United Russia, performed poorly in the parliamentary elections. Barely staying in power, it won only 49.3 percent of the vote— a significant drop from the 64.3 percent it had garnered four years earlier. Given its prior popularity, failing to win a majority of the popular vote represented a major setback for the ruling party. Serious allegations of election fraud on behalf of Putin’s party in 2011 soon dominated Russian media.

Russians, many of them young and connected by social media, took to the streets to protest the election. McFaul said that Putin’s first reaction to the demonstrators was anger and a sense of betrayal. “In his mind, he had made these young professionals rich, and now they had turned against him,” wrote McFaul.

Putin’s second reaction was fear. “He and his team were surprised by the size of the protests. Never before had so many Russians demonstrated against his rule. The message from the streets quickly turned radical, starting with outrage against falsification, but morphing into demands for the end of Putin’s regime,” wrote McFaul.

Putin, bedeviled by continuing demonstrations, seemed to believe the US was orchestrating the protests.

As a result, in 2014 McFaul announced he was stepping down and returning to the United States following the Winter Olympics in Sochi.

Russia-US relations today

In his book, McFaul paints a sobering picture of the US-Russia relationship.

“To win reelection in 2012 and marginalize his domestic opponents, Putin needed the United States as an enemy again. He rejected deeper cooperation with us,” wrote McFaul. “As a result, our administration pivoted to a more confrontational policy after President Putin had rebuffed our attempts to engage with him.”

The United States, for its part, slowed down discussions about missile defense, enacted the Magnitsky Act to punish Russian officials responsible for the wrongful death of Russian lawyer Sergey Magnitsky, canceled the Moscow summit in 2013 and continued to criticize Putin’s autocratic tendencies, among other measures.

With the issue of Russian meddling in the 2016 US election dominating news narratives in America and continued aggression by Russia, which was recently blamed for the nerve agent attack of a Russian spy in London, prospects for a healthy US-Russia relationship seems bleak, said McFaul.

Despite his journey through dark times in Russia, McFaul still remains optimistic about the “long game” of US-Russia relations.

“I am still convinced that Russia will one day consolidate democracy and that the United States and Russia will be allies. I just do not know when that ‘one day’ will come,” he wrote.

Hero Image
mcfaul obama
Courtesy of the White House
All News button
1
Subscribe to Governance