About the event: Criminal violence claims more lives globally than interstate and civil wars combined, yet it remains concentrated in certain regions while others escape this scourge. This project explains both why criminal violence is high in some places and not others, and why it becomes particularly intractable in democracies. While authoritarian regimes can avoid criminal violence through brutal repression or state-criminal collusion, democracies often become trapped in cycles where policy shocks – from housing demolitions to kingpin arrests to immigration enforcement – disrupt power balances between criminal groups and spark turf violence that mobilizes voters to demand “iron-fist” security policies and parties to compete on militarized security platforms. These policies tend to further shock the criminal distribution of power, locking countries in escalating cycles of criminal violence. Drawing on fine-grained data, ethnographic research, cross-national analysis, and case studies across Chicago, Mexico, El Salvador, and Colombia, the project examines how democratic responses often perpetuate these vicious cycles, and offers evidence-based policy alternatives for breaking them.

About the speaker: Sarah Z. Daly is Associate Professor of Political Science at Columbia University. She is the author of Organized Violence After Civil War (Cambridge University Press, 2016) and Violent Victors: Why Bloodstained Parties Win Postwar Elections (Princeton University Press, 2022), winner of the 2024 Gregory Luebbert Prize from the American Political Science Association. Her research spans war and peace, democracy, organized crime, and Latin America, and has appeared in International Security, World Politics, and British Journal of Political Science, among other outlets. Daly holds a BA from Stanford, MS from LSE, and PhD from MIT.

 All CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

No filming or recording without express permission from speaker.

About the event: This article examines how the Soviet Union transformed Sillamäe, Estonia and its oil shale deposits from a source of national independence into a cornerstone of the Soviet nuclear weapons program. Facing critical uranium shortages and logistical challenges in Central Asian mines, Soviet authorities seized upon Estonia’s oil-shale deposits, which contained extractable uranium essential for the construction of a nuclear bomb. Within weeks after recapturing the territory in 1944, Moscow established military exclusion zones, forcibly resettled the local Estonian population, and transferred jurisdiction over Sillamäe directly to the Main Directorate of the Atomic Energy Industry, bypassing Estonian SSR authority entirely. By August 1946, Sillamäe had become a closed city under Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD) control, erased from maps and accessible only with special passes. The MVD deployed forced labor to construct uranium processing facilities while simultaneously recruiting informants to monitor all residents. Through infrastructure development, population control, and an expansive security apparatus, Moscow bound Estonian territory materially and demographically to Soviet imperial power, demonstrating how nuclear colonialism operated through the deliberate engineering of both built environment and communities.

About the speaker: Dr. Alexandra Sukalo is an Assistant Professor of National Security Affairs and Director of the Intelligence Studies Project at the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin. A historian of Russia and Eastern Europe, her research focuses on Russian and Soviet intelligence services and the Soviet military-industrial complex. She is completing a manuscript on the Soviet Union’s domestic intelligence services under Stalin. Previously, she was an Assistant Professor at the Naval Postgraduate School and worked as a Eurasian analyst for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency and Central Intelligence Agency. She holds a PhD from Stanford University.
 

 All CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

No filming or recording without express permission from speaker.

About the event: Polarization is a defining feature of politics in the United States and many other democracies. Yet although there is much research focusing on the effects of polarization on domestic politics, little is known about how polarization influences international cooperation and conflict. Democracies are thought to have advantages over nondemocratic nations in international relations, including the ability to keep foreign policy stable across time, credibly signal information to adversaries, and maintain commitments to allies. Does domestic polarization affect these “democratic advantages”? This book argues that polarization reshapes the nature of constraints on democratic leaders, which in turn erodes the advantages democracies have in foreign affairs.

Drawing on a range of evidence, including cross-national analyses, observational and experimental public opinion research, descriptive data on the behavior of politicians, and interviews with policymakers, Myrick develops metrics that explain the effect of extreme polarization on international politics and traces the pathways by which polarization undermines each of the democratic advantages. Turning to the case of contemporary US foreign policy, Myrick shows that as its political leaders become less responsive to the public and less accountable to political opposition, the United States loses both reliability as an ally and credibility as an adversary. Myrick’s account links the effects of polarization on democratic governance to theories of international relations, integrating work across the fields of international relations, comparative politics, and American politics to explore how patterns of domestic polarization shape the international system.

About the speaker: Rachel Myrick is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Duke University. She studies the domestic politics of international security, with an emphasis on how polarization affects contemporary US foreign policy. Her first book, Polarization and International Politics: How Extreme Partisanship Threatens Global Stability, was published in 2025 by Princeton University Press in their Studies in International History & Politics. Her academic work is published in journals like International Organization, International Studies Quarterly, Journal of Conflict Resolution, and Journal of Politics, among others. Dr. Myrick completed her PhD in 2021 at the Department of Political Science at Stanford University.

 All CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

No filming or recording without express permission from speaker.

About the event: The Middle East experiences plenty of religiously-motivated violence, but this violence is initiated by non-state actors, such as terror groups, secessionist movements, and national liberation movements. States have bigger fish to fry. They may intervene in ongoing conflicts between religiously-motivated organizations or employ these organizations as proxies. But whether they initiate or join wars, they do not do so for religious reasons. Hassner seeks to explain this pattern by contrasting state interests with non-state interests. He does so by investigating major Middle East wars in contrast to civil wars and insurgencies. Hassner also seeks to show that the security policy of religiously-motivated non-state actors undergoes a process of moderation when they assume the responsibilities of statehood. Their religious identities do not disappear, but their religious ambitions weaken, are supplemented by nationalist and secular ideological concerns, and their wars take on new motivations and goals. The “taming” of religion by states does not end wars but it changes their fundamental character.

About the speaker: Ron Hassner teaches international conflict and religion. His research explores the role of ideas, practices and symbols in international security with particular attention to the relationship between religion and violence. His published work focuses on territorial disputes, religion in the military, conflicts over holy places, the pervasive role of religion on the modern battlefield, and military intelligence. He is the editor of the Cornell University Press book series "Religion and Conflict" and the editor-in-chief of the journal Security Studies.

 All CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

No filming or recording without express permission from speaker.

About the event: How would the leader of a nuclear-armed state respond if they believed themselves to be the target of a decapitation strike? This project examines how fears of leadership targeting shape policy choices between pre-delegation and the automation of launch authority. Zhang argues that choices over command-and-control design are driven by three forces: a tradeoff between revenge and deterrence, domestic politics, and national risk cultures. These factors jointly determine whether a state gravitates toward pre-delegation or automation. Empirically, he analyzes the Soviet Perimeter system, known in the West as the “Dead Hand,” developed between 1974 and 1985 when Soviet leaders feared that the United States was acquiring the capability and the doctrine to eliminate them in a decapitation strike. Zhang then compares this to U.S. efforts to cope with similar fears of decapitation, such as the Emergency Rocket Communications System (ERCS), an American analogue to Perimeter, and the emphasis on Continuity of Government (COG) procedures. These case studies shed light on how states respond to the threat of nuclear decapitation, when they choose pre-delegation or automation as solutions, and how those choices shape the stability or volatility of nuclear deterrence. More broadly, the project contributes to research on the determinants of nuclear command-and-control design, its implications for strategic stability, and the broader debate over automation versus human-in-the-loop design.

About the speaker: X Zhang is a Stanton Nuclear Security Fellow at Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation. Zhang received a PhD in political science from the University of Wisconsin–Madison, and their research examines the political psychology of international security, with a focus on interstate conflict, public opinion, and the domestic foundations of foreign policy. Zhang is also a Hans J. Morgenthau Fellow at the O’Brien Notre Dame International Security Center.

 All CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

No filming or recording without express permission from speaker.

The Liautaud Fellowship, made possible by the generosity of the Liautaud family, brings former heads of state, senior policymakers, and other eminent experts to Stanford, with the goal of promoting meaningful dialogue on the challenges world leaders face in crafting policy solutions to pressing global problems.

About the event: Lithuania is a country with a millennia-long history and a very strongly developed sense of independence and statehood. Ever since Lithuania declared its independence in 1990, a country of just 2.8 million has stood in support of freedom fighters everywhere. When Russia started the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, Lithuania became a model of support, sending equipment, taking in thousands of refugees, and standing with Ukraine on the diplomatic front. It is no secret that if Putin were to shift his march of aggression westward, the Baltic states, and among them Lithuania, could become a potential target. For realists in this world, it is a natural flow of history: the strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they must. But it is clear that Lithuania is not preparing for demise; it shows that a small country can wield power that is not calculated in numbers of people, square kilometres of territory, or military divisions. In this lecture, Gabrielius Landsbergis will explore what gives a small country its power.

About the speaker: Gabrielius Landsbergis, formerly the minister of foreign affairs of the Republic of Lithuania, is the Bernard and Susan Liautaud Visiting Fellow at FSI, effective September 15, 2025.

As a Liautaud Fellow, Landsbergis will be deeply enmeshed in the daily intellectual life of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, (FSI), with simultaneous affiliations with The Europe Center (TEC), and the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL).

Prior to his appointment at Stanford, Landsbergis served as the minister of foreign affairs of the Republic of Lithuania. Previously, he was the chairman of the Homeland Union Party while concurrently a member of the Lithuanian Parliament. Before assuming these roles, Landsbergis was also a member of the European Parliament and began his career as a diplomat for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Lithuania.

Landsbergis’ tenure serving as Minister of Foreign Affairs was defined by a value-based approach to foreign policy. During his time in office, he cemented deepening transatlantic relations, sustained support for Ukraine, and the elevation of global partnerships as strategic pillars of Lithuania’s foreign policy.

 All CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

No filming or recording without express permission from speaker.

About the event: America’s Founding Fathers feared that a standing army would be a permanent political danger, yet the US military has in the 250 years since become a bulwark of democracy. Kori Schake explains why in this compelling history of civil-military relations from independence to the challenges of the present.

The book begins with General George Washington’s vital foundational example of subordination to elected leaders during the Revolutionary War. Schake recounts numerous instances in the following century when charismatic military leaders tried to challenge political leaders and explains the emergence of restrictions on uses of the military for domestic law enforcement. She explores the crucial struggle between President Andrew Johnson and Congress after Abraham Lincoln’s assassination, when Ulysses Grant had to choose whether to obey the commander in chief or the law—and chose to obey the law. And she shows how the professionalization of the military in the 20th century inculcated norms of civilian control.

The US military is historically anomalous for maintaining its strength and popularity while never becoming a threat to democracy. Schake concludes by asking if its admirable record can be sustained when the public is pulling the military into the political divisions of our time.

About the speaker: Kori Schake leads the foreign and defense policy team at the American Enterprise Institute. She is the author of Safe Passage: the Transition from British to American Hegemony, and a contributing writer at The Atlantic, War on the Rocks, and Bloomberg.

 All CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

No filming or recording without express permission from speaker.

About the event: The Women, Peace and Security sector advocates for the inclusion of designated gender experts in peace processes to improve outcomes for women. However, empirical support for their effectiveness remains inconclusive. This talk questions whether gender experts are influential or ineffective advocates for women. While their explicit commitment to gendered issues may benefit women, the overt femininity of the role may disadvantage their capacity in overtly masculine security spaces. Leveraging an original dataset capturing the role of 2299 delegates across 116 comprehensive peace agreements finalized between 1990 and 2021, we find that gender experts increase the likelihood that agreements contain provisions for women. However, interviews and archival analysis suggest that the systemic structure of peace negotiations constrains gender experts’ overall influence. Consequently, we explain how gender experts are simultaneously powerful and powerless. Findings capture gender experts’ limitations, caution against policy that makes gender experts solely responsible for gendered considerations in peace processes, and contribute to understanding gendered power dynamics in negotiations more broadly.

About the speaker: Elizabeth is a CISAC Postdoctoral Fellow and previously held fellowships at Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center, Harvard Law School’s Program on Negotiation, the US Institute of Peace, Northwestern University’s Buffett Institute for Global Affairs, and Canada’s Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. Her research focuses on Women, Peace and Security, and explores power dynamics in peace negotiations. Her work has been published in the American Political Science Review. Elizabeth holds a Ph.D. from Northwestern University and she previously worked as a Gender Specialist with the UN in Kosovo and as a Gender Consultant for USAID in Ghana.

 All CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

No filming or recording without express permission from speaker.

About the event: The Baltic states keep surprising researchers — and that is why they are worth studying. They survived the Global Financial Crisis without devaluing their currencies and recovered quickly, even though many economists expected them to fail. Estonia did better than its neighbors during that crisis, and this could not be explained by economic factors alone — political trust turned out to matter. Now, Lithuania has overtaken Estonia in per capita income, which few predicted, and which remains to be explained. The Baltic puzzles are not just regional curiosities. They point to open questions in political economy and security studies.

Kuokštis’ current research focuses on NATO burden-sharing. The standard story is that allies spend too little on defense because others will cover for them — but whether this actually happens, and how, is less clear than conventional wisdom suggests. He examines allied defense spending patterns using difference-in-differences methods, and separately runs a survey experiment in Lithuania testing whether the visible presence of allied forces changes how citizens view allied commitment and how much they are willing to spend on defense. Lithuania is a crucial case for this question: Germany has committed to stationing a full permanent brigade there, creating a real-world experiment that most NATO countries never experience. Can European power substitute for — or does it complement — American security guarantees? The answer matters a great deal for how alliances actually hold together.

About the speaker: Vytautas Kuokštis is an associate professor at Vilnius University's Institute of International Relations and Political Science (TSPMI), visiting Stanford's CISAC during 2025–26. His research spans international political economy and security, focusing on exchange rate regimes, labor market institutions, NATO burden-sharing, and fintech regulation. At CISAC, he is designing a survey experiment examining how changes in NATO allies' defense commitments shape Lithuanian public preferences on defense spending. He has published in journals including Political Science Research and Methods, European Journal of Political Economy, and JCMS. He previously held research positions at Harvard (Fulbright), Yale, and Hokkaido University.

 All CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

No filming or recording without express permission from speaker.

This event is hosted by the Indo-Pacific Policy Lab.

In-person registration is at full capacity and now closed. Online registration is still available.

About the event: In Retrench, Defend, Compete, Charles L. Glaser advances a thought-provoking strategy for securing vital US interests in the face of China's rise.

Many believe China's ascent will drive it to war with the United States. Yet this is far from inevitable; geography and nuclear weapons should ensure US security. The real danger, Glaser contends, lies in East Asia's territorial disputes, especially over Taiwan. To reduce the risk of war, Glaser makes a bold case for ending US security commitments to Taiwan and carefully calibrating its policies on protecting South China Sea maritime features. The United States should also strengthen its alliances with Japan and South Korea and eliminate unnecessarily provocative nuclear and conventional weapons policies. These measures, Glaser argues, would defuse China's biggest security concerns while preserving America's core strategic interests.

Fusing theoretical insights with policy analysis, Retrench, Defend, Compete lays out a distinctive and compelling approach for managing the world's most consequential geopolitical rivalry—before it's too late.

About the speaker: Charles L. Glaser is a Senior Fellow in the MIT Security Studies Program and Professor Emeritus of Political Science and International Affairs at George Washington University. He was the Founding Director of the Elliott School's Institute for Security and Conflict Studies.

Glaser studies international relations theory and international security policy. His research focuses on defensive realism and deterrence theory, as well as U.S. security policy regarding China, nuclear weapons, and energy security.

His books include Retrench, Defend, Compete: Securing America’s Future Against a Rising China, Rational Theory of International Politics and Analyzing Strategic Nuclear Policy; and two co-edited volumes—Managing U.S. Nuclear Operations in the 21st Century and Crude Strategy.

 All CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

No filming or recording without express permission from speaker.