About the speaker

Steven A. Cook is the Douglas Dillon fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. He is an expert on Arab and Turkish politics as well as U.S.-Middle East policy. Dr. Cook is the author of Ruling But Not Governing: The Military and Political Development in Egypt, Algeria, and Turkey (Johns Hopkins University Press, May 2007).

Prior to joining the Council, Dr. Cook was a research fellow at the Brookings Institution (2001-2002) and a Soref research fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (1995-96) He has published widely in a variety of foreign policy journals, opinion magazines, and newspapers including Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, Wall Street Journal, Journal of Democracy, Weekly Standard, New Republic Online, New York Times, Washington Post, Financial Times, and the International Herald Tribune. Dr. Cook is also a frequent commentator on radio and television.

Dr. Cook holds a BA in international studies from Vassar College, an MA in international relations from the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, and both an MA and PhD in political science from the University of Pennsylvania. He speaks Arabic and Turkish and reads French.

About the moderator

Scott Sagan is a professor of political science and co-director of Stanford's Center for International Security and Cooperation. Before joining the Stanford faculty, Sagan was a lecturer in the Department of Government at Harvard University and served as a special assistant to the director of the Organization of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the Pentagon. He has also served as a consultant to the office of the Secretary of Defense and at the Sandia National Laboratory and the Los Alamos National Laboratory.

Sagan is the author of Moving Targets: Nuclear Strategy and National Security (Princeton University Press, 1989), The Limits of Safety: Organizations, Accidents, and Nuclear Weapons (Princeton University Press, 1993), and with co-author Kenneth N. Waltz, The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate Renewed (W.W. Norton, 2002). He is the co-editor of Peter R. Lavoy, Scott D. Sagan, and James L. Wirtz, Planning the Unthinkable (Cornell University Press, 2000). Sagan was the recipient of Stanford University's 1996 Hoagland Prize for Undergraduate Teaching and the 1998 Dean's Award for Distinguished Teaching. As part of CISAC's mission of training the next generation of security specialists he and Stephen Stedman founded Stanford's Interschool Honors Program in International Security Studies in 2000.

About Ruling But Not Governing: The Military and Political Development in Egypt, Algeria, and Turkey:

Ruling But Not Governing highlights the critical role that the military plays in the stability of the Egyptian, Algerian, and, until recently, Turkish political systems. This in-depth study demonstrates that while the soldiers and materiel of Middle Eastern militaries form the obvious outer perimeter of regime protection, it is actually the less apparent, multilayered institutional legacies of military domination that play the decisive role in regime maintenance. Steven A. Cook uncovers the complex and nuanced character of the military's interest in maintaining a facade of democracy. He explores how an authoritarian elite hijack seemingly democratic practices such as elections, multiparty politics, and a relatively freer press as part of a strategy to ensure the durability of authoritarian systems. Using Turkey's recent reforms as a point of departure, the study also explores ways external political actors can improve the likelihood of political change in Egypt and Algeria. Ruling But Not Governing provides valuable insight into the political dynamics that perpetuate authoritarian regimes and offers novel ways to promote democratic change.

Sponsored by FSI and the Council on Foreign Relations. 

Mr. Biberaj and Mr. Kesic both examine the issue of Kosovan independence from different persepectives. Mr. Biberaj explains why he believes that supervised independence is the only way forward. Mr. Kesic, on the other hand, expresses concern at how this decision is being made.

Synopsis

Mr. Biberaj argues that if Kosovo is not to remain part of Serbia, then it has only two options. The first is a continuation of the status quo, which Mr. Biberaj feels is untenable. The second is supervised independence. Mr. Biberaj believes that this is a defining moment for the Balkans, and the region needs to move on from this issue. He argues that danger of renewed violence is exaggerated primarily because there is now a different situation and NATO peacekeeping forces are on the ground. Although a transition will not be easy, Mr. Biberaj feels that it will be manageable due to the widespread support this move has from the US and many European states. In addition, Mr. Biberaj argues that Russia and Serbia are powerless to do anything about the move.

What is crucial, however, is that Kosovo must rapidly look to the challenges ahead. Its government, which will be a coalition, must reach out to the Serb community, create a secure environment, and battle corruption and economic difficulties. Although Mr. Biberaj argues military confrontation must not be ruled out, to him, the general situation is relatively stable. Addressing religion, Mr. Biberaj explains that Serbian Islamists are self-assured and moderate and do not pose a serious threat in Serbia and Kosovo. Most importantly, Mr. Biberaj stresses that this is perhaps the last opportunity to peacefully solve this Albanian-Serb conflict without partitioning Serbia. He explains that the Serbs will eventually learn to live with Kosovo’s independence but also emphasizes the US must stay until “business is finished.”

Citing the withdrawal of troops in particular, Mr. Kesic argues, on the other hand , that Kosovo is an example of failed US diplomacy. It was taken for granted that Russia and Serbia would reluctantly accept the US and European states’ approach to the Kosovan problem, and the issue was dealt with too much as a vacuum, not taking into account neighboring players. Moreover, Mr. Kesic feels that the whole process has left Serbia no reason to trust the US and the European states involved. NATO has not fulfilled its promise of protecting minorities, the US is still not satisfied with Serbia even after it has gotten rid of Milosevic, and Kosovo is being treated as an exception to the territorial integrity principle employed for dividing up former Yugoslavia. Mr. Kesic argues that if the decision of Kosovan independence is made through continuing this same diplomatic process then instability will follow. Furthermore, supervised independence with protection by NATO is a selective interpretation of a UN resolution. Mr. Kesic believes such interpretations create chaos, make bypassing diplomacy the norm, and undermine UN peacekeeping efforts. In addition, what is the point of establishing democracy in Serbia if the international community treats it in the same humiliating way as it did Serbia’s previous regime? To Mr. Kesic, we must also continue to take seriously issues that could lead to war, such as tensions between Albanians and Serbs in Kosovo itself. Finally, Mr. Kesic concludes by arguing that the EU’s common foreign policy is really what is being “put on the line.”

ABOUT THE SPEAKERS

Elez Biberaj is a 27-year veteran of the Voice of America. As division director, he brings to bear considerable radio and television broadcasting experience and Eurasian market knowledge in planning, directing, and developing VOA's multimedia programming in Russian, Ukrainian, Albanian, Bosnian, Croatian, Greek, Macedonian, and Serbian. Dr. Biberaj joined VOA's Albanian Service as an international radio broadcaster in 1980. From 1982 to 1986, he worked in the Press Division of the former U.S. Information Agency as a senior writer/editor, specializing in Soviet and East European Affairs. Dr. Biberaj returned to VOA as Albanian Service Chief in 1986, and, for the next 18 years helped transform the service into one of VOA's most successful broadcasting units. For over a decade, he served in dual capacity as chief of the Albanian Service and director of European Division writers and researchers. In the latter capacity, he directed the work of division writers and researchers, developed broad strategies for providing program material and research, and assigned coverage of events and topics of importance to Eastern Europe, and edited program material for use by division services.

Dr. Biberaj was named the Eurasia Division's managing editor in 2004, became acting director the following year, and was appointed division director in December 2006. In his Eurasia Division managerial positions, Dr. Biberaj helped develop new programming strategies that enabled language services to take advantage of new technologies, improve existing programming formats, and better meet audience demands in a highly competitive media environment. His expertise and knowledge of Eurasian affairs and of U.S. foreign policy objectives have been recognized inside and outside of VOA. On many occasions, he has been invited by the State Department, the National Security Council, and other U.S. government agencies, academia, and non-governmental organizations to participate in policy planning exercises, conferences, and panel discussions. He has also appeared on television outlets such as CNN, ABC, Fox, NBC, and CBC to comment on Balkan affairs.

Dr. Biberaj has written widely on the horrors of communist rule in Albania, the long struggle of Albanians in former Yugoslavia for human and national rights, and the daunting challenges that Albania has faced in its transition from communism to democracy. Elez Biberaj has a Ph.D. in political science from Columbia University. He has authored three books on Albanian affairs and contributed chapters to several others. He has also published articles in Encyclopedia Britannica, Conflict Studies, Problems of Communism, Survey, The World Today, East European Quarterly, The Wall Street Journal/Europe, etc.

Obrad Kesic is a Senior Partner with TSM Global Consultants, LLC. Mr. Kesic is also currently working with the Balkan countries on behalf of the Congressional National Prayer Breakfast. Over the last decade, Mr. Kesic has been working with the governments and with nongovernmental organizations in South Eastern Europe. Mr. Kesic also serves as a consultant on Balkan affairs for various US and international organizations and agencies. Mr. Kesic has provided analysis and briefings for US government agencies and officials, including The Department of State, The Department of Defense and the United States Information Agency. Mr. Kesic also provides frequent commentary and analysis for the US and international media, including for National Public Radio, CNN International, BBC, Voice of America, USA Today, and Monitor Radio. Mr. Kesic has authored dozens of articles and essays on Balkan affairs and on US policy toward the Balkan states. He is a frequent speaker to community, professional and scholarly groups. Mr. Kesic is a member of the Board of Directors of the Institute on Religion and Public Policy. He is also a member of the Board of Directors of the private company, SuperDrive, Inc.

Anders Åslund is specializing on postcommunist economic transformation, especially the Russian and Ukrainian economies. In January 2006, he joined the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington, DC, as a senior fellow. From 1994 till 2005, he worked at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, as a senior associate and Director of the Russian and Eurasian Program. He also teaches at Georgetown University. Dr. Åslund has served as a senior economic advisor to the governments of Russia, Ukraine, and Kyrgyzstan. He has been a Professor at the Stockholm School of Economics and a Swedish diplomat, serving in Kuwait, Geneva and Moscow. He earned his doctorate from Oxford University.

Dr. Åslund is the author of eight books, including How Capitalism Was Built: The Transformation of the Central and Eastern Europe, Russia, and Central Asia (Cambridge University Press, 2007), Russia’s Capitalist Revolution (Peterson Institute, 2007), Building Capitalism (Cambridge University Press, 2002), How Russia Became a Market Economy (Brookings, 1995), Gorbachev's Struggle for Economic Reform (Cornell University Press, 1989), and Private Enterprise in Eastern Europe: The Non-Agricultural Private Sector in Poland and the GDR, 1945-83 (Macmillan, 1985). He has also edited twelve books, most recently, Europe After Enlargement, and he has published widely, including in Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, National Interest, New York Times, Washington Post, Financial Times, and Wall Street Journal.

The President of the Basque Autonomous Community will discuss his "Road Map to bring an end to the Basque Conflict," including his offer of a political agreement already made to Madrid, based on a rejection of violence and an embrace of democratic principles and a Basque society plebiscite.

Synopsis

In a visit marked by controversy and protesting, President Ibarretxe clearly delivers his view on how the Basque country can establish sustainable human development. President Ibarretxe quickly stresses, however, that two challenges stand in the way of this goal. The first is securing peace from the violence of ETA, and the second is attaining political normalization through agreement with Spain. Citing dialogue as key, he explains that this conflict, lasting since the 19th century, must be resolved through political and democratic means based on the principle of self-determination. President Ibarretxe sets out the history of the Basque people, possibly the oldest in Europe, while revealing its openness to universal art and culture, as well as the Basque region’s top level social welfare. The Basque country, which has been ranked third in the UN’s Human Development Index, places emphasis on identity and innovation in striving forward. President Ibarretxe explains that 30 years after the 1979 Basque statute of autonomy, a clear majority demand a new framework for relations with Spain.

Therefore, President Ibarretxe reveals the “roadmap” he has formulated for the Basque country to achieve political normalization, as he puts it. His approach begins with four preliminary considerations. The first consideration is that the problems of the violence of ETA should not be confused with the political conflict between the Basque government and Spain. Secondly, President Ibarretxe argues that a key prerequisite to any solution is that the violence of ETA ceases immediately regardless of the state of the political conflict. Thirdly, stressing the importance of a necessary maxim to be used as a point of reference in the struggle for justice, President Ibarretxe emphasizes the defense of human rights without exception as fundamental to success. The fourth consideration that President Ibarretxe puts forward is that the right to self-determination is central to adopting a solution.

However, President Ibarretxe’s “roadmap” also offers concrete action through five specific steps. The five-step process begins with an offer of a political agreement based on ethics and democracy to Spain, something which President Ibarretxe has already extended to the Spanish government. Subsequently, President Ibarretxe offers a plenary session of the Basque parliament to either ratify any agreement reached with the Spanish government and call for a popular vote for Basque society to ratify the agreement as well or call for a popular vote to break a deadlock in the negotiation process. After the popular vote, President Ibarretxe reveals further negotiations will follow to end the violence of ETA and establish a new framework for Basque political parties to work under. Finally, President Ibarretxe offers a referendum in 2010 for the Basque people to vote on the result of this process. In concluding his talk, President Ibarretxe calls for any steps forward to be centered around “dialogue, democratic respect, and the liberty to decide.”

President Ibarretxe kindly takes the time to answer numerous questions on a variety of challenging issues. This question-and-answer session, where the questions are asked in English and President Ibarretxe replies in Spanish, is included in the recording. Unfortunately however, the translation of President Ibarretxe's responses cannot really be heard.

China's Harmonious Society colloquium series is co-sponsored by the Stanford China Program and the Center for East Asian Studies

Since 2006, the official doctrine of China's Communist Party calls for the creation of a "harmonious society" (HeXieSheHui). This policy, identified with the Hu Jintao leadership, acknowledges the new problems that have emerged as China continues its amazing economic growth. The economy is booming but so are tensions from rising inequality, environmental damage, health problems, diverse ethnicities, and attempts to break the "iron rice bowl." In this series of colloquia, leading authorities will discuss the causes of these tensions, their seriousness, and China's ability to solve these challenges.

A key issue in political economy concerns the accountability that governance structures impose on public officials and how elections and representative democracy influences the allocation of public resources. In this talk, Rozelle discusses a unique survey data set from 2450 randomly selected villages. The data describe China's recent progress in village governance reforms and its relationship to the provision of public goods in rural China between 1998 and 2004.

Rozelle and his colleagues examined two sets of questions using an empirical framework based on a theoretical model in which local governments must decide to allocate fiscal resources between public goods investments and other expenditures. They discovered--both in descriptive and econometric analyses--that when the village leader is elected, the provision of public goods rises (compared to the case when the leader is appointed by upper level officials). Thus, one may conclude that democratization--at least at the village level in rural China--appears to increase the quantity of public goods investment. Further, they find that when village leaders who had been elected are able to implement more public projects during their terms of office, they, as the incumbent, are more likely to be reelected.

Professor Brown's fields of interest include the history of political theory, nineteenth and twentieth century Continental theory, critical theory, and cultural theory (including feminist theory, critical race theory, and postcolonial theory). She is best known for intertwining the insights of Marx, Nietzsche, Weber, Freud, Frankfurt School theorists, Foucault, and contemporary Continental philosophers to critically interrogate formations of power, political identity, citizenship, and political subjectivity in contemporary liberal democracies. Brown's current work focuses on the relationship of political sovereignty to global capital and other transnational forces, including those associated with religion, law, culture and moral discourse.

Professor Brown received her Ph.D in Political Philosophy from Princeton University in 1983. Prior to coming to Berkeley in 1999, she taught at the University of California, Santa Cruz and at Williams College. Brown's books include Manhood and Politics: A Feminist Reading in Political Theory (Rowman and Littlefield, 1988), States of Injury: Power and Freedom in Late Modernity (Princeton, 1995), Politics Out of History (Princeton, 2001), Left Legalism/Left Critique, co-edited with Janet Halley (Duke, 2002), Edgework: Critical Essays in Knowledge and Politics (Princeton, 2005), and Regulating Aversion: Tolerance in the Age of Identity and Empire (Princeton, 2006). She has lectured widely in Europe and North America, has held a number of distinguished visiting lectureships, and has recently been a Senior Fellow of the American Council of Learned Societies, a Member of the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, and a UC Berkeley Humanities Fellow.