Stanford University

Borders

The North Korean Crisis: Human Stories and Taking Action

-

Mass famines, like those of the 1990s that killed a million people, are projected to happen again in North Korea. At any time, more than 220,000 people are held in the prison system, where "torture, assault, rape, infanticides, forced detention and public executions" are commonplace. The state medical system is in severe disrepair, allowing treatable diseases like tuberculosis to claim tens of thousands of lives per year. Unfortunately, North Korea's political and economic isolation often impedes those interested in reducing the hardships endured by the North Korean people. In "The North Korean Crisis: Human Stories and Taking Action," four experts on North Korea will discuss the North Korean humanitarian crisis and importantly, outline ways for members of the Stanford community and beyond to take action.

Presented by the Stanford Korean Students Association and sponsored by ASSU Speaker's Bureau, Korean Student Association at Stanford, Korean Studies Program, CDDRL, Steve Kahing

Bechtel Conference Center

Dr. Sharon Perry Senior researcher at the Division of Infectious Diseases and Geographic Medicine Speaker Stanford and North Korean
Jung Gwang Il Director of NK Gulag for Democracy Speaker A Seoul based-NGO
David Hawk Former Executive Director of Amnesty International USA Speaker
Dan Chung Communications Director of Crossing Borders Speaker
Conferences

American Public Diplomacy towards the Arab World in the Digital Age

Discourse on American public diplomacy has been traditionally focused on use of the broadcast media by the US government, such as Voice of America, to reach out to audiences in the Middle East and other regions. For example, much has been written about initiatives such as Radio Sawa and Al-Hurra television, and their struggles to gain credibility among Arab audiences.

International Voices Seminar

-

Anne Simonin is a historian at the CNRS in the IRICE lab (Identités, Relations Internationales, et Civilisations de l’Europe), which is affiliated with the universities of Paris I and IV. During her visit, she will focus on her latest groundbreaking work, published in 2008, Le Déshonneur dans la République, devoted to the concept of “indignity” in a cultural and legal context from the French Revolution to the emergence of the Fifth Republic (1789-1958).

The international visitors seminar series provides an opportunity for the Humanities Center's international scholars in residence to engage with the Stanford community by presenting and discussing their recent work in a congenial environment. Stanford faculty, students, and affiliates meet over lunch to hear a brief, informal presentation and engage in vigorous discussion. The series seeks to foster the exchange of ideas across borders and across disciplines, with the particular goal of enhancing interactions between researchers in the humanities and the social scientists.

Levinthal Hall

Anne Simonin Historian, CNRS, IRICE Laboratory, University of La Sorbonne, Paris; FSI-Humanities Center International Visitor, 2009-2010 Speaker
Seminars

Can Brain Drain Justify Immigration Restrictions?

-

Kieran Oberman's research focuses on the ethical implications of international migration.  My thesis, "Immigration and Freedom of Movement", argued that people have a human right to freedom of movement that entails a right to cross borders.  I conceded however that there may be extreme circumstances under which immigration restrictions could be justified.  In my post-doctoral work at Stanford I wish to consider this question of justified restrictions in more detail by focussing on the particular issue of medical brain drain from developing countries.  We know that medical brain can have devastating consequences so it may constitute justified grounds for restriction.  Another area of research I wish to focus on is the treatment of migrants after they have arrived within their state of destination.  I wish to consider, for instance, whether migrants must be granted equal rights to citizens and if so after how long and under what conditions.  The research I shall undertake in these areas will be included in an eventual book project on the ethics of immigration policy.

Download pdf

Encina Hall E207

Kieran Oberman Post Doctoral Fellow, Program on Global Justice and Ethics in Society Speaker Stanford University
Workshops

Open Borders and the Claims of Community

-

Joseph H. Carens is Professor of Political Science at the University of Toronto (Ph.D., Yale). He is the author of Culture, Citizenship and Community: A Contextual Exploration of Justice as Evenhandedness (OUP: 2000) as well as three other books and more than 60 articles or book chapters. He is currently writing a book on the ethics of immigration, tentatively titled Who Belongs? Immigration, Democracy and Citizenship.

Abstract
In this paper (which is a chapter from a book manuscript on the ethics of immigration), I explore the principled challenges to open borders that grow out of concerns for community. I begin with the claim that our moral commitments to freedom and equality apply only within the boundaries of the state. Next I consider the relationship between sovereignty and immigration. I then turn to the threats that some say free movement would pose to national security, to democratic values, and to public order. After that, I consider the argument that opening borders fails to give the priority that is due to compatriots. Next, I ask whether preservation of a welfare state might make limits on immigration morally permissible. Then I consider whether the desire to maintain a shared culture can justify restrictions on immigration. Finally, I take up the argument that free movement is incompatible with communal self-determination and with the shared responsibility that flows from collective self-governance and sustains it.

Spoiler alert. I think that none of these objections succeeds in undermining the fundamental case for open borders.

Download pdf
Download pdf

Encina Ground Floor Conference Room

Joseph Carens Professor, Political Science Speaker University of Toronto
Workshops

Kieran Oberman

Program on Global Justice
616 Serra St.
Encina Hall
Stanford, CA 94305-6055

(650) 723-0145
0
PGJ Fellow 2009-2011
P1010050.JPG

Kieran Oberman completed his PhD at Oxford University.  His thesis,  "Immigration and Freedom of Movement," argued that people have a human right to freedom of movement that entails a right to cross international borders. He thus concluded that immigration restrictions could not be justified outside of emergency situations.

In his post-doctoral workat Stanford, where he divides  his time between The Program on Global Justice and the Center for Ethics in Society, Kieran is continuing to focus on the ethical issues surrounding international migration.  While at Stanford he has completed an article, "Immigration, Global Poverty and the Right to Stay", that argues against using migration as a means to address the problem of global poverty.  The article is forthcoming in Political Studies.  He has also written an article that explores the question of whether the brain drain of skilled workers from poor states could justify the imposition of immigration restrictions.  He is currently working on a publication, based upon his dissertation, entitled "Immigration as a Human Right". 

In the spring Kieran will teach a class entitled Introduction to Global Justice. The course is designed to encourage students to think critically about some of the most important issues in international politics including global poverty, terrorism, war, development and climate change.

Power and Responsibility: Building International Order in an Era of Transnational Threats

Paragraphs

The post-World War II fabric of global security, designed and maintained by the United States, has dangerously frayed. Built for a different age, current international institutions are ill-equipped to address today's most pressing global security challenges, ranging from climate change and nuclear proliferation to civil strife and terrorism.

Revitalizing the institutions of cooperation will require a new conceptual foundation for global security. The "national sovereignty" of the twentieth century must give way to "responsible sovereignty"-a principle requiring nations not only to protect their own people, but also to cooperate across borders to safeguard common resources and tackle common threats. Achieving this will require American leadership and commitment to a rule-based international order.

In Power and Responsibility Bruce Jones, Carlos Pascual, and Stephen Stedman provide the conceptual underpinnings for a new approach to sovereignty and cooperation. They present ideas for the new U.S. administration, working with other global powers, to promote together what they cannot produce apart-peace and stability. Recommendations follow more than a year of consultations with policymakers and experts all over the world. They reflect the guidance of the Managing Global Insecurity Project Advisory Group, composed of prominent figures from the United States and abroad. They call for the new president and key partners to launch a 2009 campaign to revitalize international cooperation and rejuvenate international institutions.

As Washington prepares for a presidential transition, the time has arrived for a serious rethinking of American policy. For the United States, this is no time to go it alone.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Brookings Institution Press
Authors
Stephen J. Stedman
Number
978-0-8157-4706-2

Divided Lenses: Film and War Memory in Asia

-

The Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Research Center is currently in the midst of a three-year research project, “Divided Memories and Reconciliation.” Divided Memories is a comparative study of the formation of elite and popular historical consciousness of the Sino-Japanese War and Pacific War periods in China, Japan, Korea, Taiwan and the United States with the aim of promoting understanding and reconciliation. The first phase, which has been completed, is a comparative study of high school history textbooks from all five nations, focusing on the way the textbooks treat the wars and their aftermath. The second phase focuses on the impact of popular culture, especially films, on the formation of public memory.
 
The main goal of this international conference is to examine the role of dramatic cinema in shaping popular and elite perceptions of the historical period from 1931-1951, ranging from the treatment of Japanese colonialism to the post-war settlement and the beginnings of the Korean War. Panelists will survey the cinemas of Japan, China, Korea and the United States, identifying important films made during the post-war period and their impact on war memory. The conference will then focus on key issues of the wartime period as they are represented in film, including the Nanjing Massacre, nationalism in Japan, the colonial experience in Korea and the Korean war. Finally, we will examine other forms of popular culture, including manga and anime.
 
This conference is aimed at promoting public discussion crossing national borders and disciplinary boundaries – and producing an edited volume for publication. It will be preceded by a film series, featuring significant films on this wartime period from China, Japan, South Korea and the United States. The series will conclude on the evening of December 4, preceding the opening of the conference, with a showing and discussion of Letters from Iwo Jima with director Clint Eastwood.

Bechtel Conference Center

Michael Berry Associate Professor Panelist University of California, Santa Barbara
David Desser Director, Unit for Cinema Studies Panelist University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Aaron Gerow Assistant Professor of Film Studies and East Asian Languages and Literatures Panelist Yale University
Kyung Hyun Kim Associate Professor Panelist University of California, Irvine
Kyu Hyun Kim Associate Professor Panelist University of California, Davis
Hyangjin Lee Speaker University of Sheffield, UK
Chiho Sawada Visiting Fellow and Professor in the Kiriyama Chair, Center for the Pacific Rim, University of San Francisco & Research Fellow, Stanford University Stanford University Panelist
Robert Brent Toplin Professor of History Panelist University of North Carolina Wilmington
Ban Wang Professor of Chinese Literature Speaker Stanford University
Yingjin Zhang Director, Chinese Studies Program Speaker University of California, San Diego
Scott Bukatman Associate Professor Art and Art History Panelist Stanford University
Alisa Jones Northeast Asia History Fellow Panelist Stanford University
Jenny Lau Associate Professor Panelist San Francisco State University
Daniel C. Sneider Speaker
Conferences

U.S.-Russia Relations in the Aftermath of the Georgia Crisis

Paragraphs

Russia's invasion of Georgia last month seriously undermined peace and security in Europe for the first time in years. Russia's military actions and subsequent decision to recognize South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states also represent a fundamental challenge to the norms and rules that help to promote order in the international system.

The initial skirmishes between Ossetian and Georgian forces that first sparked this conflict in early August 2008 should have been contained. Had the international community – led by an attentive and proactive American government – engaged both the Russian and Georgian governments in an effort to first stop the violence immediately, and then more ambitiously, to mediate a permanent solution to Georgia’s border disputes, this war might have been avoided. It still remains unclear what sequence of events turned skirmishes into war -- an international investigation should be conducted to shed light on this question. Irrespective of who moved first to escalate, the Georgian government’s decision to use military force to reassert its sovereignty over South Ossetia, which included sending its forces into the South Ossetian capital, Tskhinvali, was short-sighted and ill-considered. Nonetheless, Georgian military action within its borders can in no way be equated with or cited as an excuse for Russia’s invasion and then dismemberment of a sovereign country. Russia’s actions were disproportionate and illegal. The tragic loss of life – soldiers and civilians alike – on all sides was regrettable, unnecessary and avoidable.

Because Georgia is a democracy, Georgian voters will someday judge the decisions of their government last month. But let’s not confuse that discussion with a clear-headed understanding of Russian motivations. Russia’s military actions last month and continued illegal occupation of Georgian territory today were not a mere defensive reaction to Georgian military actions in South Ossetia. On the contrary, the Kremlin’s moves represent the latest and boldest moves in a long-term strategy to undermine Georgian sovereignty, cripple the Georgian economy, and ultimately overthrow the democratically-elected government of Georgia. Moreover, Russia’s government actions in Georgia constitute just one front of a comprehensive campaign to reassert Russian dominance in the region through both coercive and cooperative instruments.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Testimonies
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
U.S. House of Representatives, House Committee on Foreign Affairs
Authors
Michael A. McFaul

If Citizenship is Political Community, then Which Communities Count? Borders and boundaries in France and Indonesia

-

Excerpt from page 4 of John R. Bowen's "If Citizenship is Political Community, then Which Communities Count? Borders and boundaries in France and Indonesia":

But these acts of invoking citizenship as participatory membership in order to support citizenship as the territorial state can open the door to other, alternative claims about political community, claims that challenge the postulates of territorial boundedness and legal uniformity.

It is these challenges to the national model that I wish to address, doing so by looking at some current developments in the two places where I continue to work, France and Indonesia. In France efforts to strengthen territorial control and internal uniformity have the upper hand, but they have encountered claims that cities should run their own affairs and that long-term residents must be fully incorporated into the political community. In Indonesia it is rather arguments based on participatory membership that are on the rise, and they draw on pre-national institutions of local control and Islamic norms; in turn, however, they are challenged by those in the state and the army who privilege a logic of the territorial state. The objects of debate are in some sense, mirror images - in France, external borders; in Indonesia, internal boundaries - but both debates concern the legitimacy of alternative ideas of political community.

About the Author

John R. Bowen is the Dunbar-Van Cleve Professor of Sociocultural Anthropology at Washington University in St. Louis. His research explores broad social transformations now taking place in the worldwide Muslim community, including special emphasis on Muslim life in Indonesia. His research focuses on the role of cultural forms (religious practices, aesthetic genres, legal discourse) in processes of social change. In most of his work he has looked outward from a longterm research site in the Gayo highlands of Sumatra, Indonesia, to the broader transformations taking place in the Indonesian nation and elsewhere around the globe.

Sponsored by the Program on Global Justice and the Stanford Humanities Center

Encina Ground Floor Conference Room

John Bowen Dunbar Van Cleve Professor of Sociocultural Anthropology Speaker Washington University, St. Louis
Workshops
Linda Randall Meier Research Workshop on Global Justice
Subscribe to Borders