Security

FSI scholars produce research aimed at creating a safer world and examing the consequences of security policies on institutions and society. They look at longstanding issues including nuclear nonproliferation and the conflicts between countries like North and South Korea. But their research also examines new and emerging areas that transcend traditional borders – the drug war in Mexico and expanding terrorism networks. FSI researchers look at the changing methods of warfare with a focus on biosecurity and nuclear risk. They tackle cybersecurity with an eye toward privacy concerns and explore the implications of new actors like hackers.

Along with the changing face of conflict, terrorism and crime, FSI researchers study food security. They tackle the global problems of hunger, poverty and environmental degradation by generating knowledge and policy-relevant solutions. 

-

This event is being held virtually via Zoom. Please register for the webinar via the below link.

Registration Link: https://bit.ly/3n4NMpJ

 

This event is part of the Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center's Shifting Geopolitics and U.S.-Asia Relations webinar series.
 
For Japan’s new Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga, foreign policy might pose a most significant challenge as he faces a shifting geopolitical landscape with a more assertive China, an emboldened North Korea, an ever more ambivalent South Korea, and a seemingly less committed US in the region. In this international environment, what foreign policy options does Japan have and what can we expect from the Suga administration? To answer these questions, panelists Shinichi Kitaoka, President of the Japan International Cooperation Agency, and Susan Thornton, former US assistant secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, will discuss key diplomatic challenges for Japan including its management of the US-China-Japan trilateral relations, its handling of important neighboring countries such as North and South Korea and Russia, its larger strategies in the Indo-Pacific region, and its engagement with global institutions. This event will be moderated by Japan Program Director Kiyoteru Tsutsui.
 

SPEAKERS

Image
Headshot of Shinichi Kitaoka
Dr. Shinichi Kitaoka is President of the Japan International Cooperation Agency. Before assuming the present post, he was President of the International University of Japan. Dr. Kitaoka’s career includes Professor of National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies (GRIPS) (2012-), Professor ofGraduateSchools for Law and Politics, the University of Tokyo(1997-2004, 2006-2012), Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, Deputy Permanent Representativeof Japan to the United Nations (2004-2006), Professor of College of Law and Politics, Rikkyo University (1985-1997). Dr. Kitaoka’s specialty is modern Japanese politics and diplomacy. He obtained his B.A. (1971) and his Ph.D. (1976) both from the University of Tokyo. He is Emeritus Professor of the University of Tokyo. He has numerous books and articles in Japanese and English including A Political History of Modern Japan: Foreign Relations and Domestic Politics (Tokyo: Yuhikaku,2011), Political Dynamics of the United Nations: Where Does Japan Stand? (Tokyo: Chuokoron-Shinsha, 2007) and Japan as a Global Player (Tokyo: NTT Publishing, 2010). He received many honors and awards including the Medal with Purple Ribbon for his academic achievements in 2011.

 

Image
Headshot of Susan Thornton
Susan A. Thornton is a retired senior U.S. diplomat with almost 30 years of experience with the U.S. State Department in Eurasia and East Asia. She is currently a Senior Fellow and Research Scholar at the Yale University Law School Paul Tsai China Center, Director of the Forum on Asia-Pacific Security at the National Committee on American Foreign Policy, and a Non-Resident Fellow at the Brookings Institution. Until July 2018, Thornton was Acting Assistant Secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs at the Department of State and led East Asia policy making amid crises with North Korea, escalating trade tensions with China, and a fast-changing international environment. In previous State Department roles, she worked on U.S. policy toward China, Korea and the former Soviet Union and served in leadership positions at U.S. embassies in Central Asia, Russia, the Caucasus and China. Thornton received her MA in International Relations from Johns Hopkins SAIS and her BA from Bowdoin College in Economics and Russian. She serves on several non-profit boards and speaks Mandarin and Russian.

Via Zoom Webinar.

Registration Link: https://bit.ly/3n4NMpJ

Dr. Shinichi Kitaoka, President Japan International Cooperation Agency
Susan A. Thornton Former US Assistant Secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs
Panel Discussions
Authors
Oriana Skylar Mastro
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

This article by Oriana Skylar Mastro originally appeared in The Interpreter, a daily publication of the Lowy Institute.


There is no end in sight for the ongoing China-India border crisis. In June, China and India’s border dispute along the LAC (Line of Actual Control) resumed after a decades-long halt to the fighting, with the deaths of 20 Indian soldiers and an unspecified number of casualties on the Chinese side. After a few months of relative calm, tensions erupted in late August with “provocative military movements” near Pangong Tso Lake and a Tibetan soldier’s death in India’s Special Frontier Forces. Only a few weeks ago, both sides accused each other of firing warning shots, the first use of live fire in 45 years.

Although China and India’s foreign ministers recently agreed to disengage at talks in Moscow during the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation meeting, troops remain massed at the border. China is reportedly building military infrastructure. Many worry that increased tensions could lead to war, especially given India’s limited options.

[Sign up for our newsletters to get the latest commentary from APARC scholars.]

As the second- and fourth-largest militaries in the world – and two nuclear powers at that – soon enter the fifth month of a standoff, the world has been relatively silent. All countries, especially the United States, should help China and India avoid an armed confrontation. Wars happen, especially over territory. And it wouldn’t be the first time the two countries have fought over this issue. Fifty-eight years ago, the two countries found themselves at war when massed Chinese artillery opened fire on a weak Indian garrison in Namka Chu Valley, in an eastern area China considers Southern Tibet and India calls Arunachal Pradesh. China launched a simultaneous assault against the western sector, clearing Indian posts north of Ladakh. After 30 days of sporadic fighting, the war came to an end with a unilateral Chinese withdrawal from much of the territory it had seized.

But such a unilateral ceasefire is extremely rare. Most contemporary conflicts end through a negotiated settlement. This means getting the two countries to talk to each other face-to-face during a war can be necessary for war termination. But my research shows this does not come easily – states are often concerned that a willingness to talk will communicate weakness to their adversary, who, in turn, will be encouraged to continue the fighting. Only when states are confident their diplomatic moves will not convey weakness, and their adversary does not have the will or capabilities to escalate is a belligerent willing to come to the negotiating table.

Continue reading Mastro's comments in The Interpreter >>

Read More

An Indian army soldier watches a fighter plane from a convoy of trucks in Gagangir, India.
Commentary

India and China are Taking New Risks Along Their Border

Will diplomacy help defuse the current tensions brewing along the India-China border? Arzan Tarapore analyzes why restoring peace between the two countries may prove difficult.
India and China are Taking New Risks Along Their Border
A regiment of the Indian Army practices in dress uniform for Republic Day
Commentary

Rethinking the Defense Doctrine of India

The security threats India faces along its borders require new strategies, and in order to manage and prevent future risks, the military needs to overhaul its traditional playbook of deterring and defending against conventional attacks says Arzan Tarapore.
Rethinking the Defense Doctrine of India
Hero Image
Chinese President Xi Jinping (R) talks with India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh (L) during a meeting at the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse in 2013.
Chinese President Xi Jinping (R) talks with India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh (L) during a meeting in 2013. | Getty Images
All News button
1
Subtitle

Nations often hesitate to negotiate with opponents during conflict. But Oriana Skylar Mastro urges that this is precisely what India and China need to do in order to curb the potential for a protracted, costly war with devastating geopolitical implications.

-

This event is part of Shorenstein APARC's fall webinar series "Shifting Geopolitics and U.S.-Asia Relations."

This panel will review and assess various aspects of the relationship between the United States and South Korea under the leadership of President Donald Trump and President Moon Jae-in. The two leaders appeared able to work together quickly and make some bold moves on issues like North Korea, but the differences between the two have been stark on issues such as military burden sharing and policies toward China. The discussion will also compare the current dynamics of U.S.-ROK relations with that of during the George W. Bush and Roh Moo-hyun period (2003-2008), which is often referred to as the most turbulent yet the most transformative era in the history of the security relationship between the two countries.

Panelists:

Image
Laura Bicker
Laura Bicker, BBC Seoul Correspondent
Ms. Bicker has been a BBC Correspondent for 20 years. She is currently based in Seoul where she reports on both North and South Korea. She is known for her interviews with President Moon Jae-in and her coverage of the inter-Korean and US-North Korean summits. This year she has produced a number of reports on South Korea’s battle with Covid19 including the documentary "How to Fight Coronavirus." In her previous role as North America Correspondent she followed Donald Trump’s election to the White House and his first years in office, as well as a host of deployments covering a number of issues and breaking news across the United States.

Image
Mark Lippert
Mark Lippert, former US Ambassador to South Korea
A graduate of Stanford (BA, MA), Ambassador Lippert served as the United States ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary to the Republic of Korea from 2014-2017. He previously held positions in the Department of Defense, including as chief of staff to Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel (2013-2014) and as assistant secretary of defense for Asian and Pacific Security Affairs (2012-2013). Lippert also worked in the White House as chief of staff to the National Security Council in 2009. Lippert served in the uniformed military as an intelligence officer in the United States Navy, he mobilized to active duty from 2009 to 2011 for service with Naval Special Warfare (SEALs) Development Group that included deployments to Afghanistan and other regions. From 2007 to 2008, he deployed as an intelligence officer with Seal Team One to Anbar Province, Iraq in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Image
Myung Hwa Yu
Myung Hwan Yu, former Minister of Foreign Affairs, South Korea
Minister Yu has 37 years of distinguished service with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, including Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade from 2008 to 2010.  Minister Yu started his foreign service in Japan in 1976 as a young diplomat and returned as Ambassador to Japan in 2007. He advised on various political and economic issues concerning both the private and public sector with a view to revamp bilateral relation until his departure from Japan to join President Lee Myung Bak’s administration as a cabinet minister in 2008. He also served as Ambassador to the State of Israel; Ambassador for Anti-Terrorism and Afghanistan Issues; and also Minister of the Permanent Mission to the United Nations in New York. His experience extends across a broad range of issues in the international relations including trade and security issues, and negotiations with North Korea in particular.

Moderator:

Image
Gi-Wook Shin
Gi-Wook Shin, Director of Shorenstein APARC, Stanford University
Gi-Wook Shin is the William J. Perry Professor of Contemporary Korea; the founding director of the Korea Program; a senior fellow of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies; and a professor of sociology, all at Stanford University. As a historical-comparative and political sociologist, his research has concentrated on social movements, nationalism, development, and international relations.

Webinar: Register at https://bit.ly/3j7fIHa

Panel Discussions
Authors
Oriana Skylar Mastro
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

This essay by Oriana Skylar Mastro originally appeared in Cato Unbound.



In his lead essay, Eric Gomez cites profound technological changes as the main reason why the United States should rethink its nuclear policy. However, there is one drastic change he does not adequately take into account: the rise of China. This response essay, therefore, focuses on the China factor in U.S. nuclear policy.

Chinese Nuclear Modernization

Since the turn of the century, China has been modernizing its nuclear forces in earnest. Currently, Beijing’s nuclear arsenal is estimated to number in the 200s. From 2017 to 2018, warheads increased by ten, and the Pentagon anticipates that the stockpile will double over the next ten years. These modernization efforts, such as moving from silo-based liquid-fueled ICBMs to mobile solid-fueled delivery vehicles, have focused mainly on improving force survivability. China also added a sea leg to its nuclear deterrent in 2016 with the introduction of submarine-launched ballistic missiles (JL-2) on its Jin-class ballistic missile submarine.

Additionally, China is producing ballistic missile systems with multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) and maneuverable reentry vehicle (MaRV) technologies that enhance missiles’ effectiveness. To this end, China has launched more ballistic missiles for testing and training in 2019 than the rest of the world combined. Meanwhile, the PLA’s new hypersonic cruise missiles supposedly are capable of piercing existing missile defense systems. Furthermore, structural reforms in China’s military reveal the critical role nuclear weapons play in Chinese strategy. In 2016, the branch in charge of China’s nuclear deterrent, the Second Artillery, was upgraded to a service, the People’s Liberation Army Rocket Force. Its commander was added to China’s highest military body, the Central Military Commission.

[Sign up for our newsletters to get the latest from APARC's scholars.]

China’s drive to modernize, diversify, and expand its nuclear forces may cause some to argue with Gomez’s essential premise that new thinking is needed. This week, U.S. Strategic Commander Adm. Charles Richard remarked that China’s nuclear weapons buildup is “inconsistent” with their long-held no-first-use policy, emphasizing the need for the United States to pursue nuclear modernization. Indeed, there has been a resurgence in Cold War thinking about nuclear deterrence. For example, Former Senator Jon Kyl and Michael Morell argued for more low-yield nuclear warheads as part of an “escalate to deescalate” strategy. Similarly, Bret Stephens raised concerns that the U.S. arsenal is insufficient to prevent Chinese aggression.

However, I agree with Gomez that we need to rethink U.S. nuclear policy to ensure it can better meet contemporary challenges. Specifically, I argue that to best suit U.S. foreign policy interests, U.S. nuclear policy needs to minimize the role of nuclear weapons in U.S.-China great power competition and pave the way for arms control.

Continue reading Oriana Mastro's response essay in Cato Unbound >>

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
Portrait of Oriana Mastro with text: "Q&A with Oriana Skylar Mastro"
Q&As

FSI’s Incoming Center Fellow Oriana Skylar Mastro Discusses Chinese Ambitions, Deteriorating U.S.-China Relations

Mastro, whose appointment as a Center Fellow at Shorenstein APARC begins on August 1, considers the worsening relations between the world’s two largest economies, analyzes Chinese maritime ambitions, and talks about her military career and new research projects.
FSI’s Incoming Center Fellow Oriana Skylar Mastro Discusses Chinese Ambitions, Deteriorating U.S.-China Relations
Hero Image
A missile display in the Military Museum in Beijing, China.
A missile display in the Military Museum in Beijing, China. | Guang Niu, Getty Images
All News button
1
Subtitle

Oriana Skylar Mastro explains why U.S. nuclear policy needs to minimize the role of nuclear weapons in the U.S.-China great power competition and pave the way for arms control.

-

This event has been rescheduled to October 14, 2020

It is a good time to be interested in Southeast Asia-China relations. In addition to the three new books referenced in this webinar, additional books on the subject are forthcoming from other authors.  The timing is all the more propitious in view of the current animosity between Beijing and Washington as it may implicate Southeast Asia and American policy toward the region, depending in part on who wins the 3 November US election.  These books are both sweeping and granular.  Hiebert’s and Strangio’s country-focused chapters cover all ten members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), while Emmerson and his co-authors mix country studies with thematic arguments about China’s relations with its neighbors.

Given China’s clearly superior size and power, is Beijing’s incremental domination of its neighbors foreordained? Strangio says no: “Southeast Asia’s future will not be one of linear and inexorable Chinese advance, but rather one in which past dynamics and contradictions reproduce themselves over time at varying pitches of tension.” Is he right? Hiebert calls for the US “to support the region as it faces a rising and more assertive China”—to “remain an actively engaged partner that shows up, brings some resources, and rewrites the perception that it is often unreliable and missing in action.” Is that good advice?  For Emmerson, “strategic autonomy necessarily begins at home. Outsiders can help or hurt. But nothing can substitute for the creativity of Southeast Asian states in individual and joint pursuit of their own and their region’s security.” Is that true, and even if it is, so what?

The webinar will explore these and other aspects of Sino-Southeast Asian relations.

Image
Murray Hiebert 100520
Murray Hiebert, in addition to his position at CSIS, is research director for BowerGroup Asia. Before joining CSIS, he was senior director for Southeast Asia at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Earlier, he was a journalist in the China bureau of the Wall Street Journal. Prior to his posting to Beijing, he reported from Washingon on US-Asia relations for the Wall Street Journal Asia and the Far Eastern Economic Review. In the 1990s he worked for the Review while based in Kuala Lumpur and, earlier, in Hanoi, having joined the Review's Bangkok bureau in 1986 to cover developments in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Laos. He is also the author of two books on Vietnam, Chasing the Tigers (1996) and Vietnam Notebook (1993). He has a master’s degree in news media studies from American University.

 

Image
Sebastian Strangio 100520
Sebastian Strangio has written from and on Southeast Asia for many publications including Al Jazeera, The Atlantic, The Economist, Forbes, Foreign Policy, and The New York Times. In addition to living and working in Cambodia, where he spent three years with The Phnom Penh Post, he has reported from Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam, and China, among other countries. Other previous affiliations include New America’s International Reporting Project; the Future Forum, a policy institute in Phnom Penh; and Chiang Mai University’s Regional Center for Social Science and Sustainable Development. Foreign Affairs named his first book, Hun Sen’s Cambodia, a 2015 Book of the Year. He has a master’s degree in international politics from the University of Melbourne.

 

Image
don emmerson 2
Donald K. Emmerson, in addition to his position in APARC, is a faculty affiliate of Stanford’s Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law. So far in 2019-2020 he has spoken on Southeast Asian topics to audiences in Bangkok, Hanoi, Kuala Lumpur, New York, Singapore, and Washington, DC.  Recent publications include “‘No Sole Control’ in the South China Sea,” Asia Policy (2019) and ASEAN @ 50, Southeast Asia @ Risk: What Should Be Done? (edited, 2018). Before moving to Stanford in 1999, he taught political science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.  He has held visiting positions at the Institute for Advanced Studies and the Australian National University, among other institutions.  His doctorate in political science is from Yale University.

Via Zoom Webinar

Register at https://bit.ly/35WOb7o

Murray Hiebert senior associate, Southeast Asia Program, Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), Washington, DC, and author of <i>Under Beijing’s Shadow: Southeast Asia’s China Challenge</i> (2020)
Sebastian Strangio journalist, analyst, Southeast Asia editor of The Diplomat, and author of <i>In the Dragon’s Shadow: Southeast Asia in the Chinese Century</i> (2020)
0
Senior Fellow Emeritus at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies
Affiliated Faculty, CDDRL
Affiliated Scholar, Abbasi Program in Islamic Studies
aparc_dke.jpg PhD

At Stanford, in addition to his work for the Southeast Asia Program and his affiliations with CDDRL and the Abbasi Program in Islamic Studies, Donald Emmerson has taught courses on Southeast Asia in East Asian Studies, International Policy Studies, and Political Science. He is active as an analyst of current policy issues involving Asia. In 2010 the National Bureau of Asian Research and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars awarded him a two-year Research Associateship given to “top scholars from across the United States” who “have successfully bridged the gap between the academy and policy.”

Emmerson’s research interests include Southeast Asia-China-US relations, the South China Sea, and the future of ASEAN. His publications, authored or edited, span more than a dozen books and monographs and some 200 articles, chapters, and shorter pieces.  Recent writings include The Deer and the Dragon: Southeast Asia and China in the 21st Century (ed., 2020); “‘No Sole Control’ in the South China Sea,” in Asia Policy  (2019); ASEAN @ 50, Southeast Asia @ Risk: What Should Be Done? (ed., 2018); “Singapore and Goliath?,” in Journal of Democracy (2018); “Mapping ASEAN’s Futures,” in Contemporary Southeast Asia (2017); and “ASEAN Between China and America: Is It Time to Try Horsing the Cow?,” in Trans-Regional and –National Studies of Southeast Asia (2017).

Earlier work includes “Sunnylands or Rancho Mirage? ASEAN and the South China Sea,” in YaleGlobal (2016); “The Spectrum of Comparisons: A Discussion,” in Pacific Affairs (2014); “Facts, Minds, and Formats: Scholarship and Political Change in Indonesia” in Indonesian Studies: The State of the Field (2013); “Is Indonesia Rising? It Depends” in Indonesia Rising (2012); “Southeast Asia: Minding the Gap between Democracy and Governance,” in Journal of Democracy (April 2012); “The Problem and Promise of Focality in World Affairs,” in Strategic Review (August 2011); An American Place at an Asian Table? Regionalism and Its Reasons (2011); Asian Regionalism and US Policy: The Case for Creative Adaptation (2010); “The Useful Diversity of ‘Islamism’” and “Islamism: Pros, Cons, and Contexts” in Islamism: Conflicting Perspectives on Political Islam (2009); “Crisis and Consensus: America and ASEAN in a New Global Context” in Refreshing U.S.-Thai Relations (2009); and Hard Choices: Security, Democracy, and Regionalism in Southeast Asia (edited, 2008).

Prior to moving to Stanford in 1999, Emmerson was a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where he won a campus-wide teaching award. That same year he helped monitor voting in Indonesia and East Timor for the National Democratic Institute and the Carter Center. In the course of his career, he has taken part in numerous policy-related working groups focused on topics related to Southeast Asia; has testified before House and Senate committees on Asian affairs; and been a regular at gatherings such as the Asia Pacific Roundtable (Kuala Lumpur), the Bali Democracy Forum (Nusa Dua), and the Shangri-La Dialogue (Singapore). Places where he has held various visiting fellowships, including the Institute for Advanced Study and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. 



Emmerson has a Ph.D. in political science from Yale and a BA in international affairs from Princeton. He is fluent in Indonesian, was fluent in French, and has lectured and written in both languages. He has lesser competence in Dutch, Javanese, and Russian. A former slam poet in English, he enjoys the spoken word and reads occasionally under a nom de plume with the Not Yet Dead Poets Society in Redwood City, CA. He and his wife Carolyn met in high school in Lebanon. They have two children. He was born in Tokyo, the son of U.S. Foreign Service Officer John K. Emmerson, who wrote the Japanese Thread among other books.

Selected Multimedia

Date Label
Moderator/Discussant director, Southeast Asia Program, Shorenstein Asia Pacific Research Center (APARC), Stanford University, and editor/co-author of <em>The Deer and the Dragon: Southeast Asia and China in the 21st Century</em> (2020)
Seminars
Authors
Noa Ronkin
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

The Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (APARC) invites applications for three types of postdoctoral fellowship in contemporary Asia studies for the 2021-22 academic year. Appointments for all three fellowship offerings are for one year beginning in fall quarter 2021.

APARC is committed to supporting junior scholars in the field of Asia studies to the greatest extent possible and that has become even more important during COVID-19, as graduate students are especially vulnerable to the adverse impacts of the pandemic, facing the loss of funding opportunities and access to field research.

The Center offers postdoctoral fellowships that promote multidisciplinary research on contemporary Japan, contemporary Korea, and contemporary Asia broadly defined. Learn more about each fellowship and its eligibility and specific application requirements:

Postdoctoral Fellowship on Contemporary Japan

The fellowship supports multidisciplinary research on contemporary Japan in a broad range of disciplines including political science, economics, sociology, law, policy studies, and international relations. The application deadline is January 4, 2021.

Korea Foundation-APARC Korea Program Postdoctoral Fellowship

The fellowship supports rising Korea scholars in the humanities and social sciences. The application deadline is January 20, 2021.

Shorenstein Postdoctoral Fellowship on Contemporary Asia

APARC offers two postdoctoral fellowship positions to junior scholars for research and writing on contemporary Asia. The primary research areas focus on political, economic, or social change in the Asia-Pacific region (including Northeast, Southeast, and South Asia), or international relations and international political economy in the region. The application deadline is January 4, 2021.

Read More

A young men sitting at a desk in front of computer monitors
News

Student Documentary Celebrates Transnational Brain Linkages

‘Brain Bridges,’ a documentary produced by senior Dexter Sterling Simpson, illustrates the positive gains of global talent flows.
Student Documentary Celebrates Transnational Brain Linkages
(Left) Yuen Yuen Ang; (Right) Congratulations Yuen Yuen Ang, Winner of the Theda Skocpol Prize from the American Political Science Association
News

Dr. Yuen Yuen Ang Awarded Theda Skocpol Prize for Emerging Scholars

Former China Program postdoc and Stanford Ph.D alumna Yuen Yuen Ang has received the Theda Skocpol Prize for Emerging Scholars from the American Political Science Association for her scholarship on China’s transformation into a global superpower.
Dr. Yuen Yuen Ang Awarded Theda Skocpol Prize for Emerging Scholars
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
Encina Hall
All News button
1
Subtitle

The Center’s commitment to supporting young Asia scholars remains strong during the COVID-19 crisis.

Authors
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

This analysis by Arzan Tarapore was originally published at The Monkey Cage by The Washington Post.


Last week, the India-China border standoff came the closest it has yet to war. As Taylor Fravel explained, the long-standing border dispute dates from the 1962 Sino-Indian War. The dispute came to a boil in May when a large force of Chinese soldiers crossed the Line of Actual Control (LAC), the disputed border between the two countries since 1962. A deadly skirmish in June temporarily raised tensions, but it was the result of tragic happenstance rather than large and risky military maneuvers.

Tensions have escalated more seriously since late August because both sides have jostled for tactical advantage, creating incentives for each side to outflank or even fight the other.

Here’s where things stand in this crisis.

Aggressive tactical maneuvers led to rising tensions

A new phase of the four-month-long border crisis opened when Indian special forces quietly occupied several peaks in the mountainous Chushul sector of Ladakh during the night of Aug. 29-30. These peaks sit on India’s side of the LAC, just south of a divided lake — Pangong Tso — but had been left unoccupied in accordance with confidence-building agreements. They were the site of tenacious fighting in the 1962 border war and hold particular tactical significance because they overlook an important pathway through the mountains between India and China.

Occupying the high ground in Chushul was designed to prevent Chinese forces from establishing an even stronger position. India also may have calculated that it could negotiate a withdrawal from those tactically valuable peaks in return for a Chinese withdrawal from areas seized after May.

Tensions rose. Indian and Chinese troops also scrambled to secure high ground overlooking new Chinese fortifications on the north bank of Pangong Tso. They reinforced their positions with additional aircraft and armor and accused each other of firing the first gunshots on the LAC since 1975. Some Indian analysts warned that China might risk war to reverse India’s occupation of the Chushul peaks.

Continue reading Arzan's full analysis on Monkey Cage at The Washington Post >>

[Subscribe to our newsletters to get the latest commentary from APARC scholars.]

Read More

A regiment of the Indian Army practices in dress uniform for Republic Day
Commentary

Rethinking the Defense Doctrine of India

The security threats India faces along its borders require new strategies, and in order to manage and prevent future risks, the military needs to overhaul its traditional playbook of deterring and defending against conventional attacks says Arzan Tarapore.
Rethinking the Defense Doctrine of India
An Indian Army soldier looking through a military monocular over hills in the background
News

U.S. Policymakers Cannot Assume the Fixity of Indian Strategic Preferences, Argues South Asia Research Scholar Arzan Tarapore

In a special report published by the National Bureau of Asian Research, Tarapore analyzes possible scenarios for India’s strategic future that expose risks and tensions in current U.S. policy.
U.S. Policymakers Cannot Assume the Fixity of Indian Strategic Preferences, Argues South Asia Research Scholar Arzan Tarapore
Hero Image
An Indian army soldier watches a fighter plane from a convoy of trucks in Gagangir, India.
An Indian army soldier watches fighter plane from a convoy of trucks in Gagangir, India. | Yawar Nazir / Stringer, Getty Images
All News button
1
Subtitle

Will diplomacy help defuse the current tensions brewing along the India-China border? Arzan Tarapore analyzes why restoring peace between the two countries may prove difficult.

0
APARC Predoctoral Fellow, 2020-2021
anna_zhang.jpg

Anna Zhang joined the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center (APARC) as APARC Predoctoral Fellow for the 2020-2021 academic year. She is a PhD candidate at the political science department. Her research interests include civil conflict, state building, and internal migration. Her dissertation studies China's institutional solution to the challenges of territorial control. 

Authors
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs

This op-ed by Arzan Tarapore originally appeared in The Hindu.



Over four months ago, the Chinese army entered territory that India has long considered its own, and never left. In effect, the multiple incursions have changed the Line of Actual Control (LAC) and India has lost territory, at least for the time being. How could this happen?

In part, it was a failure of the warning-intelligence system. Either Indian intelligence services did not collect sufficient data of Chinese intentions and early moves, or they did not interpret it correctly, or their policy and military customers failed to take the warning seriously. Wherever the fault lay, the system apparently failed.

In part, however, the problem also lay in the Army’s concepts for defending the country’s borders. It is, as the current crisis shows, simply not postured or prepared for the type of security threat China presents. (Continue reading the full article in The Hindu.)

[Subscribe to our newsletters to get the latest commentary from APARC scholars.]

Read More

An Indian Army soldier looking through a military monocular over hills in the background
News

U.S. Policymakers Cannot Assume the Fixity of Indian Strategic Preferences, Argues South Asia Research Scholar Arzan Tarapore

In a special report published by the National Bureau of Asian Research, Tarapore analyzes possible scenarios for India’s strategic future that expose risks and tensions in current U.S. policy.
U.S. Policymakers Cannot Assume the Fixity of Indian Strategic Preferences, Argues South Asia Research Scholar Arzan Tarapore
Portrait of Arzan Tarapore and text: "Q&A with Arzan Tarapore"
Q&As

Internal Balancing Will Determine India’s Relationships with the US and China, Argues APARC’s Newest Research Scholar

Indo-Pacific security expert Arzan Tarapore, whose appointment as a research scholar at APARC begins on September 1, discusses India’s military strategy, its balancing act between China and the United States, and his vision for revitalizing the Center’s research effort on South Asia.
Internal Balancing Will Determine India’s Relationships with the US and China, Argues APARC’s Newest Research Scholar
Hero Image
A regiment of the Indian Army practices in dress uniform for Republic Day
A regiment of the Indian Army practices in dress uniform for Republic Day. | Mitul Gajera, Unsplash
All News button
1
Subtitle

The security threats India faces along its borders require new strategies, and in order to manage and prevent future risks, the military needs to overhaul its traditional playbook of deterring and defending against conventional attacks says Arzan Tarapore.

Authors
Noa Ronkin
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

U.S. policymakers are counting on India as a natural strategic partner. They focus on India’s increasing national power and its enticing potential as a counterbalance to China. But what happens if India’s strategic preferences shift? Will it fulfill its potential so that the U.S. strategic bet pays off?

In a special report, Exploring India's Strategic Futures, published by the National Bureau of Asian Research (NBR), APARC South Asia Research Scholar and NBR Nonresident Fellow Arzan Tarapore identifies a set of challenges for American strategists, illustrating alternative futures of India as a strategic actor and focusing on futures that may pose challenges to U.S. security interests.

Tarapore uses a novel method of major/minor trends to demonstrate that India’s strategic preferences are not fixed but could vary discontinuously under different environmental conditions. Based on detailed historical analysis, this method offers a powerful tool to sensitize decision makers to a range of possible futures. He analyzes three plausible scenarios:

First, a revisionist India driven by Hindu-nationalist ideology to settle the score with Pakistan, which will require it to keep the China front quiet and accommodate China’s Belt and Road Initiative in Eurasia. This scenario may severely complicate U.S. strategy in the Indo-Pacific and its efforts to counterbalance China.

Second, a risk-acceptant Indian military that engages in brinkmanship, which may endanger strategic stability with both Pakistan and China. In this scenario, rather than keeping the Chinese military in check, India may paradoxically have the opposite effect.

Third, an India that expands its competition with China into continental Eurasia, making common cause with U.S. rivals such as Russia and Iran. This scenario illustrates the tensions in a U.S. global strategy that lacks prioritization and prompts Washington to more carefully consider its preferences in Central Asia.

Tarapore by no means suggests that such futures are likely — they are decidedly unlikely — but rather that U.S. strategists should consider them plausible. Indeed, the three scenarios are all grounded in political processes that have long existed in India, from communalism to military adaptation, to the balancing of external threats. Therefore, argues Tarapore, U.S. policymakers should not assume Indian strategic preferences are stable. They must consider scenarios in which India might challenge U.S. security interests.

Read More

Portrait of Arzan Tarapore and text: "Q&A with Arzan Tarapore"
Q&As

Internal Balancing Will Determine India’s Relationships with the US and China, Argues APARC’s Newest Research Scholar

Indo-Pacific security expert Arzan Tarapore, whose appointment as a research scholar at APARC begins on September 1, discusses India’s military strategy, its balancing act between China and the United States, and his vision for revitalizing the Center’s research effort on South Asia.
Internal Balancing Will Determine India’s Relationships with the US and China, Argues APARC’s Newest Research Scholar
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe speaks at a podium with audience seen at the front
Commentary

Three Hits and Three Misses: What is Prime Minister Abe’s Legacy?

Despite this long period as prime minister, it is not entirely clear that Abe accomplished major policy goals.
Three Hits and Three Misses: What is Prime Minister Abe’s Legacy?
Leaders from the ASEAN league gather onstage at the 33rd ASEAN Summit in 2018 in Singapore.
Commentary

Southeast Asia's Approach to China and the Future of the Region

In an interview with The Diplomat, Donald Emmerson discusses how factors like the South China Sea, U.S.-China competition, and how COVID-19 are affecting relations between Southeast Asia, China, and the United States.
Southeast Asia's Approach to China and the Future of the Region
Hero Image
An Indian Army soldier looking through a military monocular over hills in the background
An Indian Army soldier guards the line dividing Kashmir between India and Pakistan. | Farooq Khan-Pool/ Getty Images
All News button
1
Subtitle

In a special report published by the National Bureau of Asian Research, Tarapore analyzes possible scenarios for India’s strategic future that expose risks and tensions in current U.S. policy.

Subscribe to Security