Conflict
0
Former Thomas Rohlen Center Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Former Assistant Professor of Political Science
phillip_lipscy_2018.jpg PhD

Phillip Y. Lipscy was the Thomas Rohlen Center Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and Assistant Professor of Political Science at Stanford University until August 2019. His fields of research include international and comparative political economy, international security, and the politics of East Asia, particularly Japan.

Lipscy’s book from Cambridge University Press, Renegotiating the World Order: Institutional Change in International Relations, examines how countries seek greater international influence by reforming or creating international organizations. His research addresses a wide range of substantive topics such as international cooperation, the politics of energy, the politics of financial crises, the use of secrecy in international policy making, and the effect of domestic politics on trade. He has also published extensively on Japanese politics and foreign policy.

Lipscy obtained his PhD in political science at Harvard University. He received his MA in international policy studies and BA in economics and political science at Stanford University. Lipscy has been affiliated with the Reischauer Institute of Japanese Studies and Weatherhead Center for International Affairs at Harvard University, the Institute of Social Science at the University of Tokyo, the Institute for Global and International Studies at George Washington University, the RAND Corporation, and the Institute for International Policy Studies.

For additional information such as C.V., publications, and working papers, please visit Phillip Lipscy's homepage.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

As its miracle growth continues seemingly unabated into a fourth decade, China's emergence as a global economic and political power is accepted as inevitable. China is changing and the world is changing in response.

There is, however, considerable disagreement about the nature of China's transformation and the consequences of its growth, with some predicting an inevitable crisis in China's political and economic systems. Yet social scientists gathering fresh data at China's grassroots see growing evidence of a profound transformation of institutions in both rural and urban China. The panelists will discuss and answer questions on the tensions and opportunities found in contemporary China, including: markets, governance, environment, and, inequities.

Cosponsored with the Center for East Asian Studies

Melanie Manion - Professor of Public Affairs and Political Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Professor Manion studied philosophy and political economy at Peking University in the late 1970s, was trained in Far Eastern studies at McGill University and the University of London, and earned her doctorate in political science at the University of Michigan. Her research has focused on institutions and institutionalization in Chinese politics. Her current research focuses on representation, especially the changing role of local congresses in mainland China.

Leonard Ortolano - UPS Foundation Professor of Civil Engineering in Urban and Regional Planning, Stanford University

Professor Ortolano's research stresses environmental policy implementation in developing countries, technology transfer, and the role of non-governmental organizations in environmental management. Several current projects concern air and water pollution control regulations in China.

Scott Rozelle - FSI Helen F. Farnsworth Senior Fellow, Shorenstein APARC, Stanford University

Before arriving at Stanford, Dr. Rozelle was a professor at the University of California, Davis (1998-2000) and an assistant professor in the Food Research Institute and Department of Economics at Stanford University (1990-98). His research focuses almost exclusively on China and is concerned with agricultural policy, the emergence and evolution of markets, and the economics of poverty and inequality.

Moderated by Andrew Walder - Director-Emeritus, Shorenstein APARC; FSI Senior Fellow and the Denise O'Leary and Kent Thiry Professor of Sociology, Stanford University

Professor Walder is an expert on the sources of conflict, stability and change in communist regimes, and his current research focuses on the impact of China's market reforms on income inequality and career opportunity. He is also conducting historical research on the Cultural Revolution of 1966-1969, with an emphasis on the Beijing Red Guard movement during 1966 and 1967.

Bechtel Conference Center

Encina Hall East, E404
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

0
Faculty Co-director of the Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions
Helen F. Farnsworth Endowed Professorship
Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Senior Fellow at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research
scott_rozelle_new_headshot.jpeg PhD

Scott Rozelle is the Helen F. Farnsworth Senior Fellow and the co-director of Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions in the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research at Stanford University. He received his BS from the University of California, Berkeley, and his MS and PhD from Cornell University. Previously, Rozelle was a professor at the University of California, Davis and an assistant professor in Stanford’s Food Research Institute and department of economics. He currently is a member of several organizations, including the American Economics Association, the International Association for Agricultural Economists, and the Association for Asian Studies. Rozelle also serves on the editorial boards of Economic Development and Cultural Change, Agricultural Economics, the Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, and the China Economic Review.

His research focuses almost exclusively on China and is concerned with: agricultural policy, including the supply, demand, and trade in agricultural projects; the emergence and evolution of markets and other economic institutions in the transition process and their implications for equity and efficiency; and the economics of poverty and inequality, with an emphasis on rural education, health and nutrition.

Rozelle's papers have been published in top academic journals, including Science, Nature, American Economic Review, and the Journal of Economic Literature. His book, Invisible China: How the Urban-Rural Divide Threatens China’s Rise, was published in 2020 by The University of Chicago Press. He is fluent in Chinese and has established a research program in which he has close working ties with several Chinese collaborators and policymakers. For the past 20 years, Rozelle has been the chair of the International Advisory Board of the Center for Chinese Agricultural Policy; a co-director of the University of California's Agricultural Issues Center; and a member of Stanford's Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center and the Center on Food Security and the Environment.

In recognition of his outstanding achievements, Rozelle has received numerous honors and awards, including the Friendship Award in 2008, the highest award given to a non-Chinese by the Premier; and the National Science and Technology Collaboration Award in 2009 for scientific achievement in collaborative research.

Faculty affiliate at the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law
Faculty Affiliate at the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center
Date Label
Scott Rozelle FSI Helen F. Farnsworth Senior Fellow Speaker Shorenstein APARC

Shorenstein APARC
Stanford University
Encina Hall E301
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

(650) 723-4560 (650) 723-6530
0
Senior Fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Denise O'Leary and Kent Thiry Professor
walder_2019_2.jpg PhD

Andrew G. Walder is the Denise O'Leary and Kent Thiry Professor at Stanford University, where he is also a senior fellow in the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies. Previously, he served as Chair of the Department of Sociology, Director of the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, and Head of the Division of International, Comparative and Area Studies in the School of Humanities and Sciences.

Walder has long specialized in the sources of conflict, stability, and change in communist regimes and their successor states. His publications on Mao-era China have ranged from the social and economic organization of that early period to the popular political mobilization of the late 1960s and the subsequent collapse and rebuilding of the Chinese party-state. His publications on post-Mao China have focused on the evolving pattern of stratification, social mobility, and inequality, with an emphasis on variation in the trajectories of post-state socialist systems. His current research is on the growth and evolution of China’s large modern corporations, both state and private, after the shift away from the Soviet-inspired command economy.

Walder joined the Stanford faculty in 1997. He received his Ph.D. in sociology at the University of Michigan in 1981 and taught at Columbia University before moving to Harvard in 1987. From 1995 to 1997, he headed the Division of Social Sciences at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology.

Walder has received fellowships and grants from the Guggenheim Foundation, the National Science Foundation, the National Academy of Sciences, the Henry Luce Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Social Science Research Council, and the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences. His books and articles have won awards from the American Sociological Association, the Association for Asian Studies, and the Social Science History Association. He is an elected member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

His recent and forthcoming books include  Fractured Rebellion: The Beijing Red Guard Movement  (Harvard University Press, 2009);  China Under Mao: A Revolution Derailed  (Harvard University Press, 2015);  Agents of Disorder: Inside China’s Cultural Revolution  (Harvard University Press, 2019); and  A Decade of Upheaval: The Cultural Revolution in Feng County  (Princeton University Press, 2021) (with Dong Guoqiang); and Civil War in Guangxi: The Cultural Revolution on China’s Southern Periphery (Stanford University Press, 2023).  

His recent articles include “After State Socialism: Political Origins of Transitional Recessions.” American Sociological Review  80, 2 (April 2015) (with Andrew Isaacson and Qinglian Lu); “The Dynamics of Collapse in an Authoritarian Regime: China in 1967.”  American Journal of Sociology  122, 4 (January 2017) (with Qinglian Lu); “The Impact of Class Labels on Life Chances in China,”  American Journal of Sociology  124, 4 (January 2019) (with Donald J. Treiman); and “Generating a Violent Insurgency: China’s Factional Warfare of 1967-1968.” American Journal of Sociology 126, 1 (July 2020) (with James Chu).

Director Emeritus of the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center
Director Emeritus of the Division of International, Comparative and Area Studies
Faculty Affiliate at the Stanford Center on China's Economy and Institutions
Faculty Fellow at the Stanford Center at Peking University, July to November of 2013
Graduate Seminar Instructor at the Stanford Center at Peking University, August to September of 2017
Andrew G. Walder Denise O'Leary and Kent Thiry Professor of Sociology Moderator Stanford University
Leonard Ortolano UPS Foundation Professor of Civil Engineering in Urban and Regional Planning Speaker Stanford
Melanie Manion Professor of Public Affairs and Political Science Speaker University of Wisconsin-Madison
Conferences
-

Nuclear weapons play a modest but significant role in the national security strategies of key states in the Asian security region. Relevant in a small number of situations and augmenting conventional forces, their role is frequently indirect. The primary role of nuclear weapons is basic or central deterrence.

Despite ongoing efforts, the offense and defense roles of nuclear weapons continue to be limited. Contemporary conceptions and practices of deterrence, however, span a wide spectrum and differ substantially from that of the Cold War. Absence of severe confrontations, multiple threats of unequal urgency, and the relatively small size of Asian nuclear forces have made general deterrence (as opposed to immediate deterrence) the norm. Extended deterrence continues to be relevant, but is largely psychological and symbolic to assure allies and prevent them from pursuing independent nuclear options.

Nuclear weapons have not fundamentally altered the strategic picture in Asia. They have had a limited impact on the distribution of power, lines of amity and enmity, alliances, and conflict resolution. Although there could be some destabilizing consequences, on net nuclear weapons have contributed to security and stability in Asia that is underpinned by several pillars.

Muthiah Alagappa is a distinguished senior fellow at the East-West Center in Honolulu, Hawaii. He has held several appointments at the East-West Center including director of the East-West Center Washington (2001-2007) and director of studies (1999-2001). He has been a visiting professor at Columbia University, Stanford University, Keio University, and the Nanyang Technological University, Singapore; senior fellow at the Institute of Strategic and International Studies, Malaysia; and adjunct faculty at George Washington University, University of Malaya, and National University of Malaysia.

Dr. Alagappa is the series editor for the Asian Security book series published by Stanford University Press and is on the editorial board of several journals. His research interests include international politics and security in Asia and the Pacific and comparative politics of Asia. He has a Ph.D. in international affairs from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.

His recent publications include Civil Society and Political Change in Asia: Expanding and Contracting Democratic Space, author and ed., Stanford University Press, 2004, Asian Security Order: Instrumental and Normative Features, Stanford University Press 2002, and Coercion and Governance: The Declining Political Role of the Military in Asia, Stanford University Press 2001. He is currently editing a book on nuclear weapons and security in twenty-first century Asia.

Philippines Conference Room

Muthiah Alagappa Distinguished Senior Fellow Speaker East-West Center, Honolulu, HI
Seminars
Date Label
-

Chang's presentation seeks to understand the emergence and evolution of social movements during the 1970s in South Korea. During the authoritarian years when Korea was ruled by Park Chung-Hee, various social groups participated in the movement to restore democracy and ensure human rights. Their activism was instrumental to democratic changes that took place in the summer of 1987 and they continued to play an important role even after democratic transition. Utilizing the novel Stanford Korea Democracy Project Datasets, Chang traces the increasing diversification of South Korea's democracy movement in the 1970s.

Chang is currently a Ph.D. candidate in the department of sociology at Stanford University. Chang's paper "Differential Impact of Repression on Social Movements" won the Robert McNamara Paper competition from the Association for the Sociology of Religion and the Goldsmith Paper Award from the Stanford Center on Conflict and Negotiation. He has published papers in Sociological Inquiry, Journal for Korean Studies, and Asian Perspective. Chang graduated from University of California, Santa Cruz where he double majored in psychology and religious studies. He received masters degrees in Sociology from both UCLA and Stanford University, and in Theological Studies from Harvard Divinity School.

Philippines Conference Room

Paul Y. Chang Ph.D. candidate in sociology, Stanford University Speaker
Seminars
Authors
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

Japan's ruling party suffered a historic defeat Sunday. For the first time since the conservative Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) was formed in 1955, an opposition party has become the largest party in the upper house.

The powerful message delivered by Japanese voters has significant implications not only for Japan but also for the rest of the world, not least for its close ally, the United States.

The election result revives momentum in Japan toward creation of a viable two-party system, potentially ending the conservative postwar monopoly on power. Japanese voters expressed deep anxiety about the impact of economic change upon their treasured social order. They embraced the campaign of the Democratic Party (the main opposition) against growing income inequality and the failure of the state to take care of an aging population.

Equally important, the vote was a humiliating defeat for Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's agenda of giving priority to revising Japan's antiwar Constitution and allowing its military to take on a global role in support of the US. Democratic Party leader Ichiro Ozawa effectively portrayed Mr. Abe as a man out of touch with the concerns of ordinary Japanese. But he also articulated an alternative vision of Japan's international role, calling for closer ties to its Asian neighbors and sending troops overseas only under the auspices of United Nations peacekeeping missions.

Since 9/11, Japan has been among the most loyal, if not unquestioning, of US allies. It sent troops to Iraq, provided logistical support to the war in Afghanistan, and outdid the US in putting pressure on North Korea. Most recently, Abe echoed the rhetoric of the Bush administration, calling for formation of a "values-based" alliance of democracies along with India and Australia, implicitly aimed at containing a rising China. The election results will certainly slow, if not reverse, this tight synchronization.

For the business community, the vote will raise concerns that needed economic policy actions such as fiscal reforms will get stalled in a gridlocked parliament. The vote reminds politicians that the economic recovery has left an awful lot of Japanese behind, with real wages falling, youth unemployment high, and the elderly drawing down their savings to survive. Abe's feel-good rhetoric and focus on security just angered those Japanese.

There remains strong support for gradual change. Most Japanese want the country to take on a more "normal" security role, but one that will stop far short of overdrawn fears of a remilitarized Japan. And many Japanese, particularly in the younger generation, back economic reform, though not at the expense of social stability.

The most intriguing question is the future of Japan's democracy. Abe is resisting calls for his resignation, attributing the vote to a series of scandals in his Cabinet and most of all to the revelation that the government's national pension system had lost the records of some 50 million people. The election result was bad luck, Abe claimed, not a repudiation of his administration's overall policies -- a view shared by Washington policymakers.

Exit polls do confirm that voters were strongly motivated by these issues. But they also express little faith in the personal leadership of Abe, who tried to cover up the pension debacle. He suffered from an unfavorable comparison to his predecessor, Junichiro Koizumi, one of Japan's most popular postwar leaders.

But the election suggests that Mr. Koizumi's personal charisma only temporarily reversed a longer trend of drift away from the ruling conservatives, particularly by unaffiliated swing voters in Japan's cities and suburbs. Mr. Ozawa, one of Japan's most brilliant politicians, managed to both regain those voters and steal away traditional conservative backers in rural areas among farmers and pensioners worried about their future.

Ozawa, whom I have known for more than two decades, is a man of uncommon political vision. He is a former LDP stalwart who has relentlessly pursued the goal of creating a clearly defined two-party system that can create real competition. He was the architect of a split in the LDP that briefly brought the opposition to power in the early 1990s.

Over dinner last fall, Ozawa laid out to me what seemed then like an incredibly audacious plan to regain power. First to win a series of local elections, leading up to a defeat of the LDP in the upper house election, forcing in turn the dissolution of the lower house and new elections. He clearly hopes to split the LDP again and pry away its coalition partner, the New Komeito Party, as part of his strategy of realignment.

The Democratic Party has yet to demonstrate its own ability to rule, but it would be unwise to underestimate Ozawa. And it would be foolish to dismiss the desire for change delivered by Japanese voters on Sunday.

Reprinted with permission by the Christian Science Monitor.

All News button
1
Paragraphs

For the past five years, the Bank of Japan (BOJ) has employed an unconventional monetary easing policy, called quantitative monetary easing. Under a zero interest rate regime, the BOJ shifted its tool for monetary easing from interest rates to quantity of money, thus providing the money market with much more money than it needs. It is difficult to find evidence that this monetary easing has contributed to the current economic recovery. What we can show is that this quantitative easing diluted the functions of interest rates in the money market, with the following consequences: quantitative easing hid the risks of the huge amount of fiscal debt and supported troubled commercial banks. Hence it helped to prevent both fiscal and financial crisis.

How did such a policy come about? It is misleading to suppose that the BOJ, which gained legislative independence in 1998, decides its policy on its own, or, conversely, to assume the government controls the BOJ completely. The conflict between the BOJ and the government should be carefully examined. In that sense, these two consequences have different stories. Preventing fiscal crisis had been an implicit agenda from the beginning of the conflict between the BOJ and the government. The BOJ tried to reject this implicit agenda at first, but finally accepted it to compensate for its own political failure in raising interest rates. The process shows that this implicit agenda has gradually become explicit. By contrast, supporting troubled banks was an unexpected consequence, which in the end helped the BOJ to defend its policy.

The situation has become complex amid the current economic recovery. The need to restore the function of interest rates has been rising. The need to support troubled banks has decreased, but supporting the fiscal debt still remains critical issue, since it has grown to a dangerous amount. Monetary policymakers therefore face a contradiction. Strategies for separating monetary policy from the management of government bonds, while avoiding fiscal crisis, are needed.

About the Author: Tetsufumi Arita has been a reporter for the Japanese newspaper, Asahi Shimbun, since 1990. He has extensive experience in reporting business and political news. Arita was a visiting fellow at the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center between 2004 and 2005.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Shorenstein APARC Corporate Affiliates Program
Authors
Tetsufumi Arita
-

On the morning of 26 December 2004, a massive earthquake and tsunami devastated coastal areas throughout the Indian Ocean region. Most damaged by far was the Indonesian province of Aceh. There, within 30 minutes, some 170,000 lives were lost. The international response was unprecedented. Governments, international agencies, and private citizens contributed massively to relief and reconstruction. The rest of the story is less well known: the difficult and critical transition from emergency aid to sustainable recovery. Based on his personal experience on the ground, Dr. Morris will analyze the successes and failures in managing this transition. He will examine issues of accountability, transparency, and equity. Particular attention will be paid to the convergence of tsunami recovery and conflict recovery in a province afflicted not only by a natural cataclysm but by thirty years of intermittent yet brutal conflict between the central government in Jakarta and the secessionist Free Aceh Movement.

Eric Morris, before his posting to Aceh, headed the New York Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees from 2002 to 2005. In 2000-2001 he served simultaneously as special envoy in the Balkans of the High Commissioner for Refugees and as UN humanitarian coordinator for Kosovo. In 1998-99 he was deputy special representative of the secretary general for the UN Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina. He received his Ph.D from Cornell University, an MA from Yale University, and a BA from Baylor University.

This is the Southeast Asia Forum's seventh seminar of the 2006-2007 academic year.

Daniel and Nancy Okimoto Conference Room

Eric Morris Practitioner in Residence, International Policy Studies, Stanford University, and United Nations Recovery Coordinator for Aceh and Nias (2005-2007) Speaker
Seminars
-

From 1976 to 2005 an intermittent but bloody guerilla insurgency raged in the Indonesian province of Aceh. Just a few years ago the conflict seemed intractable, with no end in sight. The two sides had irreconcilable nationalist visions and both appeared committed to violent solutions. However, in August 2005, following the devastating December 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, they signed a "Helsinki Agreement," committing themselves to a peaceful resolution. This breakthrough was possible, above all, because the chief secessionist organization, the Free Aceh Movement (GAM, Gerakan Aceh Merdeka) agreed to a compromise settlement by which it accepted Aceh's "self-government" within Indonesia.

How could an organization so intransigently committed to an ethno-nationalist vision of Acehnese independence, and for so long, have suddenly re-imagined Aceh as being compatible with Indonesia? Also surprisingly, the peace process has continued since 2005 with very few serious violations. (A former GAM leader, Irwandi Yusuf, was elected as the new governor of the province in December 2006.) In explaining these unexpected events, Aspinall will focus on the dynamics inside GAM. For evidence and illustration, he will draw on first-hand research in Aceh including interviews with former GAM leaders and combatants.

Edward Aspinall is writing a book on the Aceh conflict. Relevant publications include Opposing Suharto: Compromise, Resistance and Regime Change in Indonesia (2005); The Peace Process in Aceh: Why it Failed (2003), coauthored with Harold Crouch; and "Sovereignty, the Successor State and Universal Human Rights: History and the International Structuring of Acehnese Nationalism," Indonesia (April 2002). Before joining ANU, he taught Southeast Asian and Indonesia studies at the University of Sydney (2003-2005) and the University of New South Wales (1997-2001). Aspinall has a Ph.D from ANU and BA degrees from the Universities of Adelaide and Sydney.

This is the Southeast Asia Forum's fourth seminar of the 2006-2007 academic year.

Daniel and Nancy Okimoto Conference Room

Edward Aspinall Fellow, Department of Political and Social Change Speaker Austrailian National University
Seminars
-

The islamization process in Pakistan is at the core of the contradictions and identity conflict of Pakistan. It is the permanent attempt to rewrite the history whose founding fathers intended to make the homeland for the Muslims of the Indian Subcontinent, much the against the will of the clergy. However it is also an instrument of perpetuation in power of a largely secular military, which constantly manipulates Islamic symbols.

Although widely discussed, the process of islamization in Pakistan has remained relatively limited. No elected legislature went beyond the expression of the idea of the supremacy of the Islamic law. No elected legislature ever passed a somewhat substantial provision. Despite an increasingly strong, or at least vocal religious pressure, the constitution and the legislation of the Pakistani state are still based on a compromise between modernist institutions and ever more pressing religious demands, yet still limited. The supremacy of the Sharia is regularly reaffirmed, yet its implementation does not progress.

The presentation will analyze the impact of the islamization policies, less however on the legal and constitutional system than on the economic, political and social life of Pakistan. Starting from the observation that the islamization process is more limited that it may seem, the presentation will draw on to say that this process reinforces more than it challenges the existing political and social order, and its most salient political expression, the current military regime, by preventing, on the one side the emergence of any real alternative political project and, although in a more pragmatic manner, by bringing back in mainstream politics the fraction of the social body which could possibly be tempted by more radical means of actions.

In this perspective, four dimensions will be more specifically studied: 1) The evolution of the role of religious movements and parties within the Pakistani state; 2) The relationship between these same religious movements and parties and the Pakistani establishment; 3) The specific role of the madrasas in this relation; 4) The relation the religious parties entertains with democracy.

Frederic Grare is a visiting scholar with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He will lead a project assessing U.S. and European policies toward Pakistan and, where appropriate, recommending alternatives with Ashley J. Tellis and George Perkovich. Grare will focus on the tension between stability and democratization in Pakistan, including challenges of sectarian conflict, Islamist political mobilization, and educational reform. Grare also will facilitate interactions between U.S. experts and officials and European counterparts on the main policy challenges in South Asia.

Grare is a leading expert and writer on South Asia, having served most recently in the French embassy in Pakistan and from 1999 to 2003 in New Delhi as director of the Centre for Social Sciences and Humanities. Grare has written extensively on security issues, Islamist movements, and sectarian conflict in Pakistan and Afghanistan. He also has edited the volume, India, China, Russia: Intricacies of an Asian Triangle.

His most recent publications include: "India, China, Russia: Intricacies of an Asian Triangle, with Gilles Boquerat"(eds), (New Delhi, India Research Press, 2003); "Pakistan and the Afghan Conflict, 1979-1985: At the Turn of the Cold War" (Karachi, Oxford University Press, 2003); "Political Islam in the Indian Subcontinent: The Jamaat-i-Islami" (New Delhi, Manohar, 2001)

Grare has an advanced degree from Paris Institut d'Etudes Politiques and received his Ph.D. from the Graduate Institute of International Studies.

Dr. Grare's talk is the first seminar of the winter quarter South Asia Colloquium Series.

Philippines Conference Room

Frederic Grare Visiting Scholar Speaker Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Seminars
Subscribe to Conflict