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.

-

* Please note all CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

 

Seminar Recording: https://youtu.be/0Vs_njo0TcA

 

About the Event: The U.S. Department of Defense has been ahead of the curve on climate change.  They worry that the military’s likely use in responding to natural disasters is a potential distraction and strain on their resources and primary missions, and they are concerned that sea level rise and flooding put many of its installations at risk. Further, they see climate change increasing the competition for natural resources such as fresh water and arable land, in already volatile regions, and as “threat multiplier,” potentially leading to increased armed conflict.  What they haven’t addressed, even as they green the services, is the enormous scale of their own greenhouse gas emissions — larger than the annual emissions of most of the world’s countries.

Click to view draft paper

 

About the Speaker: Neta C. Crawford is Professor and Chair of Political Science at Boston University.  She is the author of more than two dozen peer reviewed articles on issues of war and peace and the author of three books, Soviet Military Aircraft (1987); Argument and Change in World Politics (2002), named Best Book in International History and Politics by the American Political Science Association, and Accountability for Killing: Moral Responsibility for America’s Post-9/11 Wars (2013).  Crawford has served on the governing boards of American Political Science Association and of the Academic Council of the United Nations System, and is a co-director of the Costs of War Project based at Brown and Boston Universities.  In 2018, the International Ethics Section of the International Studies Association gave her a Distinguished Scholar Award.

Virtual Seminar

Neta C. Crawford Professor and Chair of the Department Political Science Boston University
Seminars
-

* Please note all CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

 

Seminar Recording:  https://youtu.be/cU07s81-X8E

 

About the Event: President-Elect Biden was the person who announced the Obama administration’s Reset policy at the Munich Security Conference in 2009. U.S-Russian relations have deteriorated considerably since 2014, and in 2021 there will be no Reset.  Nevertheless, the incoming administration realizes the need to refocus the relationship on issues that represent core interests for the United States. My talk will review the legacy of the Trump administration’s policy toward Russia, its successes and failures and the unfinished business it has bequeathed to the incoming Biden-Harris team. It will focus on priorities going forward and areas where the U.S. and Russia may find common ground—and areas where they will not.

 

About the Speaker: Angela Stent is director of the Center for Eurasian, Russian and East European Studies and a professor of government and foreign service at Georgetown University. She is also a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and co-chairs its Hewett Forum on post-Soviet affairs. During the 2015 to 2016 academic year, she was a fellow at the Transatlantic Academy of the German Marshall Fund. From 2004 to 2006, she served as national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia at the National Intelligence Council.  From 1999 to 2001, she served in the Office of Policy Planning at the U.S. Department of State.

Virtual Seminar

Angela Stent Professor of Government and Foreign Service Georgetown University
Seminars
-

* Please note all CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

 

Seminar Recording:  https://youtu.be/F60rYpY5agw

 

About the Event: Russia is a country in economic and demographic decline, but it is still able to cause considerable disruption on the international stage. It compensates for its relative weakness with a willingness to act decisively, often breaking international norms, while its competitors are still debating what to do. The UK has got some things right in its response to hostile Russian actions, but it has failed to address some important vulnerabilities.

 

About the Speaker: Ian Bond joined the Centre for European Reform in 2013 after 28 years as a British diplomat.

He served in the British Embassy, Washington (2007-12), focusing on US foreign policy. He was Ambassador to Latvia from 2005-07. As deputy head of the UK delegation to the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) in Vienna (2000-04), he worked on the Balkans and the former Soviet Union. He was also posted in Moscow (1993-96) and at NATO HQ (1987-90), and worked in London on the former Soviet Union, on the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy and on NATO issues.

Virtual Seminar

Ian Bond Director of Foreign Policy The Centre for European Reform
Seminars
-

* Please note all CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

 

Seminar Recording: https://youtu.be/bphwqcK97zY

 

About the Event: A struggle is currently being waged for the soul of the West: to determine whether America and Europe can recover instincts for joint action or if they are doomed to pursue divergent paths. Much damage has been inflicted during the past four years, but the election of Joe Biden as president augurs well for the prospect of potentially the most trans-Atlanticist administration in decades. Yet, reinvigorating and reimagining the trans-Atlantic relationship will be an uphill battle. Success in that will affect, among other things, the West's ability to deal with Russia.

Based on their book, Partners of First Resort: America, Europe, and the Future of the West, David McKean and Bart M. J. Szewczyk will lay out a path for a trans-Atlantic renaissance to restore a community based on the same liberal objectives that animated the West and built a more peaceful, prosperous, and politically inclusive world order. America and Europe still need each other as partners of first resort, out of strategic necessity and commonality of interests. Moreover, the world needs a vibrant and energetic West to protect its fundamental values from illiberal forces. Modernizing the institutional links will help better address common challenges.

 

About the Speakers: 

David McKean served as Director of Policy Planning at the U.S. Department of State, and U.S. Ambassador to Luxembourg. He is currently a senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund. He is the author of four acclaimed political histories and biographies, and a forthcoming book: Watching Darkness Fall: Franklin Roosevelt and His Ambassadors in Europe (St. Martin’s Press, 2021)  

Bart M.J. Szewczyk (SHEF-chick) served as Member of the Policy Planning Staff at the U.S. Department of State and Senior Policy Advisor to the U.S. Ambassador to the UN, as well as Adviser on Global Affairs at the European Commission’s think-tank. He is adjunct professor at Sciences Po in Paris and author of two forthcoming books: Europe’s Grand Strategy (Palgrave Macmillan 2020) and European Sovereignty and Legitimacy(Routledge 2020).

Virtual Seminar

David McKean and Bart M. J. Szewczyk
Seminars
Authors
Steven Pifer
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

It took some time to count the ballots, but the American electorate has rendered its judgement. While there may be legal challenges and a recount or two, Joe Biden will become the 46th U.S. president next Jan. 20.  

This outcome will displease some in Moscow. The Russian government, in particular its security services, worked to support President Trump’s election in 2016 and again this year. It is not hard to understand why. Trump has divided Americans, weakened U.S. alliances, and badly tarnished the American reputation abroad. For those sitting in the Kremlin, what’s not to like? 

Trump’s loss thus may seem a defeat for Russia. But a Biden presidency can offer a silver lining for the Kremlin. 

First, Biden’s foreign policy will be predictable. Few jobs in Moscow could have been tougher the past four years than America-watcher. How to explain Washington’s policy under Trump to president Putin or Foreign Minister Lavrov? The U.S. president refused to criticize Putin or Russian misbehavior and talked about good relations. Meanwhile, the U.S. government sanctioned Russian individuals and entities, provided lethal military assistance to Ukraine, and bolstered the U.S. military presence in Central Europe. 

With Biden, the president’s attitude and the administration’s policy will match. The Kremlin may not like certain elements of that policy, but it will understand it.  

Second, Biden can be expected to professionalize relations, both on issues where interests coincide and where major differences divide the two countries. He recognizes that, even when bilateral relations are at a low point, dialogue matters. Trump proved an unreliable interlocutor. He had a weak grasp of the U.S.-Russia agenda, took little time to prepare, and paid no intention to implementation. The Trump-Putin encounters had, at best, insignificant results, and Secretary of State Pompeo had no regularized relationship with Lavrov to compensate.  

Under the Biden administration, the Russians can expect a return to more regular diplomatic dialogue at senior levels. 

Third, Biden will want guardrails to manage the adversarial aspects of the U.S.-Russia relationship, beginning with arms control.  Over the past six months, the Trump administration badly overplayed its hand on extending the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty.  The former vice president has said he would extend New START without conditions. That would continue the treaty’s limits and the flow of information from its verification and transparency provisions, benefiting the security interests of both countries.  

A Biden administration, moreover, could go beyond that. For example, a regularized military-to-military dialogue could prove useful at a time when U.S. and Russian military forces operate more frequently in close proximity.  Neither side has an interest in an accident or miscalculation triggering an inadvertent conflict. 

Fourth, Biden has the disposition to tackle problems that may require months, perhaps longer, to resolve. Trump wanted immediate results. Even had he bothered to take the time to get smart on a particular issue, he lacked the patience necessary to work out settlements to difficult disputes. 

Biden’s approach could help address the toughest nuts on the U.S.-Russia agenda, such as Moscow’s conflict against Ukraine — which U.S. officials have termed the biggest barrier to a more positive development of the bilateral relationship. The Kremlin manages policy on Donbas; no one will solve it without talking to Putin. Trump achieved nothing. While Biden has made clear his strong support for Ukraine, engaging his authority more directly alongside that of the German and French leaders could shake up a process that has devolved into stalemate. 

In may rankle in Moscow that Biden called Russia the main threat to the United States, but that is objectively true:  Russia is the only country in the world with the power to physically destroy America, and it has acted robustly in recent years to undermine U.S. authority and goals. (If it’s any consolation, Biden sees China as posing the long-term challenge.) 

The Biden presidency will not mean a new reset. The U.S.-Russia relationship has many troubled issues. Moscow should understand that Biden and his administration will push back against malign Russian activities. The Kremlin will have to rein its security services, which pursue unacceptable action such as stirring discontent in American domestic politics. 

However, if Putin and the Kremlin exercise some moderation, they can expect from the next American president a readiness for serious dialogue — including on differences — of a kind that has been noticeably absent in recent years. That will not produce rapid or broad agreement, but it could help the two countries better manage their competition and, perhaps over time, chip away at the problems that currently divide them. 

Originally for Moscow Times

Hero Image
President Trump speaking in front of a podium Evan Vucci / AP / TASS
All News button
1
Subtitle

If Putin and the Kremlin exercise some moderation, they can expect from the next American president a readiness for serious dialogue.

News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

FSI Center Fellow at APARC Oriana Skylar Mastro joins NPR's Weekend Edition host Scott Simon to discuss the rising tensions between China and Taiwan and how the United States should respond.

Listen to the complete interview below. This conversation originally appeared on NPR's website.

Read More

Portrait of Oriana Skylar Mastro and a 3D cover of her book, 'The Costs of Conversation: Obstacles to Peace Talks in Wartime'
News

FSI Center Fellow Wins Best Book in Security Studies Award

The American Political Science Association recognizes Oriana Skylar Mastro for her work on military strategy and mediation.
FSI Center Fellow Wins Best Book in Security Studies Award
Hero Image
NPR's audio streaming logo next to a portrait of Oriana Skylar Mastro.
All News button
1
Subtitle

"The current threat is that the CCP is running out of patience, and their military is becoming more and more capable. So for the first time in its history, there's the option of taking Taiwan by force," Mastro tells NPR's Weekend Edition host Scott Simon.

-

Seminar Recording: https://youtu.be/7uGcI3qswDw

 

About the Event: As relations between the West and Russia have sharply deteriorated in recent years, Germany has taken a leading role in shaping Europe's policy response, particularly that of the European Union.  That has included a tougher approach toward Kremlin misbehavior, such as various economic and other sanctions.  At the same time, Berlin has sought to keep an open line of communication with Moscow.

Amb. Thomas Bagger will discuss how Berlin views the challenge posed by Russia and how the West should respond.

 

About the Speaker: Thomas Bagger holds the rank of ambassador and is Diplomatic and Foreign Policy Advisor to the President of the Federal Republic of Germany.  He joined the German diplomatic service in 1992 and has served abroad in Prague, Ankara and Washington.  Before taking up his current position, he headed the Foreign Ministry's Policy Planning Office.    

Thomas Bagger Ambassador Federal Republic of Germany
Seminars
Authors
Ryan A. Musto
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Abstract: This paper examines the U.S. approach to the idea of arming the United Nations with nuclear weapons in the earliest decades of the Cold War. The main protagonist is Harold Stassen, who in 1945 publicly proposed a nuclear-armed UN air force as a way to control the bomb, stop proliferation, and strengthen the UN. The Truman Administration rejected the idea because of the questions it raised about the use of atomic weapons and the capabilities of the UN, as well as the threat it posed to the U.S. atomic monopoly. But the idea reemerged in the Eisenhower Administration. U.S. Ambassador to the UN Henry Cabot Lodge, Jr. and Secretary of State John Foster Dulles sought to provide the UN with agency in nuclear decision-making, a pitch that inspired Stassen to revisit his earlier enthusiasm for a nuclear-armed UN. Stassen again touted its deterrent effects, but, unlike before, looked to use the proposal to consolidate an unequal nuclear order. After the Eisenhower Administration rebuffed Stassen’s “Atoms for Police” proposal, the idea transitioned to plans for general and complete disarmament and became a tenuous feature of an initiative put forth by the Kennedy Administration. Overall, the idea spoke to the struggle of the United States to achieve progress in disarmament while it clung to its nuclear arsenal. To highlight its core principles, this paper concludes with a brief comparison to the UN’s 2017 Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.  

Read the rest at  The Wilson Center

Hero Image
man smiling
All News button
1
Subtitle

In commemoration of the UN’s 75th anniversary, Ryan Musto unveils the forgotten history of the dream to arm the UN with nuclear weapons and why three U.S. presidential administrations ultimately rejected the idea in the earliest decades of the Cold War.

0
brandon_1_1_.jpg PhD

Dr. Brandon Kirk Williams is currently on detail at the Department of Defense in the Office of Secretary of Defense, Force Development and Emerging Capabilities. Brandon is a senior fellow at the Center for Global Security Research at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Brandon’s research examines the intersection of emerging technologies, innovation, and national security policy. He earned a Ph.D. in history from the University of California, Berkeley, in May 2020.

Starting as a CGSR postdoctoral fellow, he focused on cybersecurity before developing into a research agenda on quantum and AI as a senior fellow. He organized three CGSR cybersecurity workshops in addition to assisting in workshops on AI, US-China strategic competition, and latent emerging technologies. His outside publications draw upon this research expertise to consider the effect of technology competition on shaping US national security policy. He also contributed to over-the-horizon reports for the National Nuclear Security Administration on emerging technology as well as the nuclear security enterprise’s workforce of the future.

Brandon was selected as a 2022-2023 Wilson Center China Initiative non-resident fellow that culminated in chapter titled "The Innovation Race: US-China Science and Technology Competition and the Quantum Revolution.” He designed and researched a chapter-length project analyzing Chinese initiatives to steer global innovation by seizing the commanding heights of science and technology. The chapter also investigated Chinese investments to incubate a thriving quantum technology ecosystem. Since, he has published on quantum competition that may disrupt security, economics, and everyday life.

As a Ph.D. student, Brandon was a Fulbright-Hays grantee in Indonesia, and conducted multi-sited dissertation fieldwork in Indonesia, India, Switzerland, and throughout the United States. Brandon uses his doctoral training in history to make sense of technology competition and to contribute to discussions on the future of U.S. national security.

Affiliate
Date Label
-

* Please note all CISAC events are scheduled using the Pacific Time Zone.

 

Seminar Recording: https://youtu.be/eGGzDeiGtIc

 

About the Event: Research on social media and politics has largely focused on two very different political contexts: authoritarian regimes and “normal” democratic polities. However, many countries’ political systems exist between these extremes: there is both “normal” online mobilization and efforts at manipulation that emanate in whole or in part from state-linked actors. In this article, we focus on a country with such a system: Pakistan. We investigate the politics of social media in the run-up to Pakistan’s 2018 general election. The campaign involved both intense, large-scale electoral mobilization and recurrent, credible allegations of influence by the country’s politically powerful army. We analyze millions of Twitter posts in English and Urdu by major political actors and their followers in Pakistan before and just after the 2018 election to identify patterns of 1) normal mobilization and 2) coordinated manipulation. Several findings emerge. First, the main political parties were highly active on social media, with the eventually-victorious Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) of Imran Khan showing a noticeable edge in online enthusiasm that matches the substantial victory of the PTI in the election. Second, there was a noticeable “dissident sphere” on Twitter, seeking to get around a campaign of censorship and media influence by the military. However, dissidents’ messages were largely swamped by the broader party competition and narratives favorable to the PTI and the military. Third, we find evidence of coordinated activities. This appears to have largely favored the PTI and pro-military messages, which saw a substantially higher rate of amplification. Finally, we see evidence of narrative alignment between the PTI and the military – the clusters of their followers seemed to advance pro-PTI and anti-PML-N messages; pro-PTI and anti-PML-N narratives were pervasive in the PML-N and dissident clusters.

 

About the Speakers: 

Asfandyar Mir is a Postdoctoral fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University. His research interests are in international security with current work focusing on counterterrorism, counterinsurgency, drone warfare, US counterterrorism policy, South Asia security issues, misinformation dynamics, and Al-Qaida. Some of his research has appeared in peer-reviewed journals, such as International Security, International Studies Quarterly, and Security Studies. My commentary has appeared in Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, H-Diplo, Lawfare, and Washington Post Monkey Cage.

 

Tamar Mitts is Assistant Professor at the School of International and Public Affairs and a Faculty Member at the Data Science Institute and the Saltzman Institute of War and Peace Studies at Columbia University. Her research applies machine learning and text analysis methods to study political behavior in the digital age, and has been published in the American Political Science ReviewInternational Organization, the Journal of Economic Perspectives, and Political Science Research and Methods, among other outlets.

 

Paul Staniland is Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago and a nonresident scholar in the South Asia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. His research focuses on political violence and international security in South Asia. Staniland’s first book, Networks of Rebellion: Explaining Insurgent Cohesion and Collapse, was published by Cornell University Press in 2014, and his second book, Armed Politics: Violence, Order, and the State in South Asia, will be published by Cornell in 2022.

Virtual Seminar

Asfanydar Mir, Tamar Mitts & Paul Staniland
Subscribe to International Relations