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.
U.S. Naval Partnerships in the Asia-Pacific Region: Carrying Out the Rebalance
Leading the world's only global Navy, Secretary Mabus has traveled over 1.3 million miles, visited over 150 countries and territories to maintain and develop international relationships. He has focused efforts to rebalancing the U.S. Fleet to have 60% of all Navy and Marine Corps assets based in the Indo-Asia-Pacific by the end of the decade as a reflection of our commitment to this critical region. Additionally, he has established a Marine Rotational Force in Darwin on a rotational basis to conduct exercises and train with the Australian Defense Force and maintain a stronger presence in the Pacific region.
Secretary Mabus is also leading efforts to use alternative energy sources to improve our warfighting capabilities and reduce our reliance on foreign sources of fossil fuels, denying potential adversaries the opportunity to use energy as a weapon against us, and our partners. During the 2016 Rim of the Pacific Exercise, the largest naval exercise in the world, completed in August, the ships of nine partner nations took delivery of, and operated on, biofuel blends delivered from U.S. ships.
Ray Mabus is the 75th United States Secretary of the Navy, the longest to serve as leader of the Navy and Marine Corps since World War I. Responsible for an annual budget in excess of $170 billion and leadership of almost 900,000 people, Secretary Mabus has worked to improve the quality of life of Sailors, Marines and their families; decrease the Department's dependence on fossil fuels; strengthen partnerships with industry and internationally; and increase the size of the Navy fleet.
Program news from Shorenstein APARC
The Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (APARC) has named Yong Suk Lee as the deputy director of its Korea Program for a three-year term, starting Oct. 1.
Lee, the SK Center Fellow in the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, will work closely with Director Gi-Wook Shin to continue to expand the program’s research and teaching activities on policy-relevant topics on Korea.
Additionally, Thomas Fingar, a distinguished fellow at Shorenstein APARC, will be the acting director of the China Program when Director Jean Oi is on sabbatical leave during winter quarter this academic year.
Former China ambassador assesses foreign policy with Stanford experts
Three foreign policy experts explored U.S.-China relations in a panel discussion at Stanford earlier this week. In a wide-ranging conversation, they described current relations as often complementary, sometimes conflicting, and above all, unavoidably crucial.
The panel titled “The United States, China and Global Security” included He Yafei, former Chinese ambassador to the United Nations, and Stanford’s Michael Armacost, Shorenstein Distinguished Fellow and former U.S. ambassador, and Karl Eikenberry, a distinguished fellow and former U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan.
Jean Oi, a Stanford professor of political science, moderated the event, which was co-hosted by the China Program and the U.S.-Asia Security Initiative, two entities in the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies.
“The [U.S.-China] relationship is very complicated and full of complexity,” said He, a career diplomat who was recently appointed as a professor at Peking University.
Shifts in the international system that accompanied the end of the Cold War and China’s rapid growth have brought new demands and necessitated more engagement, He said, weighing the outcomes of “the great convergence,” or closing of the development gap between developed and developing countries, and its impact on the bilateral relationship.
“China has been a major beneficiary of the global system created by the United States,” He said, suggesting it would be unrealistic to assume China would have become the second largest economy without that context, moreover, that Beijing would seek its deterioration.
Uncertainty and the next U.S. administration
China and the United States, as two of the world’s most populous countries, face domestic politics and a range of challenges such as slowed economic growth, population aging and minority and ethnic issues.
“There’s a lot of uncertainty,” Oi said. “As you know, the U.S. presidential election will be taking place quite soon and China itself is going through a period of some uncertainty in its economic development.”
The panelists from the United States offered an optimistic view of the outcome of the presidential election. Armacost, who held a 24-year career in the U.S. government before coming to Stanford, said he foresees consistency in U.S. policy toward China, and more broadly, toward the region, during the next administration.
“Asia is destined to be a huge priority,” Armacost said. Two outstanding areas bound to be “sticking points” on the policy agenda are territorial issues in the South China Sea and international trade, he said. The Trans-Pacific Partnership, a trade agreement between 12 countries of which the United States is a party, has drawn tepid support in the U.S. Congress. And in July, China rejected a ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration on maritime rights in a case brought by the Philippines respective to the South China Sea.
Eikenberry shared a similar sentiment about the likelihood of policy continuity from the current U.S. administration to the next, and described the capacity for deepened cooperation between China and the United States as “profound.”
“And we’re already doing it,” he remarked. The Paris Agreement on climate change is one recent testament of the countries’ ability to successfully cooperate and galvanize support for solving global issues, he said.
The panelists agreed that the future of U.S.-China cooperation may well depend on youth, citing surveys of younger generations that show they are more amenable to engaging the other than older generations.
‘Global network of partnerships’
Asked to evaluate the China-Russia relationship, He said the countries have reached a “historic high” in their relationship, underscored by common interests, shared borders and a fraying U.S.-Russia relationship. Russia and China, however, have no intension of forming a formal strategic alliance, he added.
China’s approach to interaction with other countries is based on “a global network of partnerships” focused on trade, cultural exchange and relationships, He said.
The panelists highlighted the importance of striving for more dialogue and consultation between the United States and China on security, an area that is often superseded by economic aspects in bilateral talks.
Concluding the event, Oi emphasized the need for “frank discussions” about the challenges that affect the two countries. During the day, He held closed-door discussions with faculty members, senior research scholars and students focused on East Asia.
Thailand’s China Policy: Succumbing to Soft Power or Bending with the Wind?
Please note event's venue has changed to the Philippines conference room
Conditions of Entry:
Valid photo ID required all of attendees
No posters are allowed
No noise makers are allowed
On the surface, Thai-China relations have never been better, as the two countries work to raise their ties to a higher and broader plane. A five-year plan for strategic cooperation now under negotiation covers political, military, and security affairs; multi-sectoral trade and investment; health, education, information, technology, and culture; and regional and multilateral foreign policy. China is comfortable working with the military government that has ruled Thailand since 2014, and vice versa.
Beijing credits the exercise of Chinese “soft power” in Southeast Asia with having improved Thai views of China. Analysts characterize the warming as a new version of Thailand’s old habit of adapting to powerful outsiders by “bending with the wind.” Prof. Pavin will argue that, although the application of soft power has helped China’s cause in Thailand, it is not the main reason for the present warming of ties between the two countries. Indeed, in the long run, Chinese soft power could prove disastrous for Thailand.
Tae Ho Kim
Taeho Kim joins Shorenstein APARC as a Visiting Scholar during 2016-2017 academic year.
Kim's research interest is in South Korea's national security issues and preparation for reunification of the Korean Peninsula. He was a National Assembly Member from 2011 to 2016 and governor of South Gyeongsang Province from 2004 to 2010 in Korea. He holds a BA and an MA in agricultural education, and a PhD in education from Seoul National University
Walder receives award for Cultural Revolution research
Stanford professor Andrew Walder has been awarded the Founder’s Prize from the journal Social Science History for his paper, “Rebellion and Repression in China, 1966-1971.” The journal’s editorial board selects one recipient annually for exemplary scholarly work.
Using data from 2,213 historical county and city annals, the paper charts the breadth of the Chinese Cultural Revolution, its evolution through time and the repression through which state structures were rebuilt in the post-Mao era.
Walder, who is a senior fellow in the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and director emeritus of the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center, has long studied the sources of conflict, stability and change in communist regimes. He recently published China under Mao, a book that explores the rise and fall of Mao Zedong’s radical socialism.
The Arbitral Court’s Ruling on the South China Sea: Pros and Cons, Contexts and Consequences
Conflicting views of international law versus national interest are churning the South China Sea. In The Hague on 12 July 2016, an Arbitral Tribunal ruled in favor of the Republic of the Philippines and against the People’s Republic of China regarding the latter’s claims and behavior in the South China Sea. Beijing has denounced the decision and refuses to abide by it. The Philippines’ new and outspoken president has refused to press China toward compliance, seemingly preferring to seek economic benefits from China instead. The US and Japan, among other countries, have supported the ruling, but in a muted fashion, as if to avoid antagonizing China.
Did the Arbitral Court do the right or the wrong thing? Did the judges (in)correctly interpret the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)? Has the unwillingness of Manila and Washington to champion the court’s decision made the prospect of Beijing’s eventual dominance in Southeast Asia more likely? Has China’s self-assigned and so far successful impunity undermined global compliance with UNCLOS? Or does Beijing’s pragmatic emphasis on realpolitik over moralpolitik point the way toward a practical alleviation of tensions that global jurisprudence cannot achieve? And what if the court’s ruling were applied to other sweeping maritime claims to land features in the Pacific, including the exclusive economic zones drawn by Tokyo around Okinotorishima or by Washington around its mid-ocean “Minor Outlying Islands”? Would the US comply? And lastly: What next?