Stanford University

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. 

Too Little, Too Late: The U.S. Role in Establishing the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

-

Zachary D. Kaufman is a CDDRL pre-doctoral fellow in the academic year 2005-2006. Mr. Kaufman is completing his DPhil (PhD) in International Relations at the University of Oxford, where he is a Marshall Scholar and he is writing a dissertation on U.S. policy on the establishment of war crimes tribunals. Afterwards, he will attend Yale Law School. Mr. Kaufman is also currently co-editing (with Dr. Phil Clark) a forthcoming book on transitional justice, post-conflict reconstruction, and reconciliation in Rwanda since the 1994 genocide.

Mr. Kaufman's professional experience has focused on the investigation, apprehension, and prosecution of suspected perpetrators of atrocities, including genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and terrorism. He has served at the United States Departments of State and Justice, the United Nations International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, and the International Criminal Court.

Mr. Kaufman is also the founder, president, and Chairman of the Board of Directors of the American Friends of the Kigali Public Library; co-founder and Executive Director of Marshall Scholars for the Kigali Public Library; and honorary member of the Rotary Club of Kigali-Virunga, Rwanda. Together, these three non-profit organizations are fundraising and collecting books for, raising public awareness about, and building Rwanda's first public library, the Kigali Public Library. Mr. Kaufman is also a Board Member and Senior Fellow of Humanity in Action, which, in order to engage student leaders in the study and work of human rights, sponsors an integrated set of education programs and internships for university students in Europe and the United States.

In 2004, Mr. Kaufman received his M.Phil (Master's) degree in International Relations from the University of Oxford. In 2000, Mr. Kaufman received his B.A. (Bachelor's) degree in Political Science from Yale University.

Mr. Kaufman's talk will discuss U.S. participation in establishing a UN-backed international war crimes tribunal for addressing the 1994 Rwandan genocide. The origin of the ICTR is complicated and controversial because of the number, attractiveness, and precedence of alternative mechanisms, as well as the pitfalls of establishing such a tribunal. Given the extent, recency, and persistence of atrocities, Mr. Kaufman's research is crucially relevant to academic and policy discussions in the post-9/11 world.

Encina Basement Conference Room

Zachary Kaufman

N/A

0
Pre-doctoral Fellow 2005 - 2006
Zachary_Kaufman.jpg MA

Zachary Kaufman is currently a Juris Doctorate (JD) candidate at Yale Law School, where he is Managing Editor of the Yale Human Rights & Development Law Journal, Articles Editor of the Yale Journal of International Law, Policy Editor of the Yale Law & Policy Review, and co-founder and co-president of Yale Law Social Entrepreneurs. At the same time, Mr. Kaufman is completing his D.Phil (PhD) degree in International Relations at the University of Oxford, where he was a Marshall Scholar from 2002-05.He was a CDDRL Pre-Doctoral Fellow (2005-2006).

Kaufman's dissertation is an analysis of the U.S. government policy objectives in supporting the establishment of four war crimes tribunals: the International Military Tribunal (the Nuremberg Tribunal), the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (the Tokyo Tribunal), the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, and the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

Kaufman's professional experience has focused on the investigation, apprehension, and prosecution of suspected perpetrators of atrocities, including genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and terrorism. He has served at the U.S. Department of State, the U.S. Department of Justice, the UN International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, and the UN International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. Kaufman also was the first American to serve at the International Criminal Court, where he was policy clerk to the first Chief Prosecutor.

Kaufman is the founder, president, and chairman of the Board of Directors of the American Friends of the Kigali Public Library; co-founder and Executive Director of Marshall Scholars for the Kigali Public Library; and an Honorary Member of the Rotary Club of Kigali-Virunga, Rwanda. Together, these three non-profit organizations are fundraising and collecting books for, raising public awareness about, and building Rwanda's first public library, the Kigali Public Library. Kaufman is also a Board Member and Senior Fellow of Humanity in Action, which, in order to engage student leaders in the study and work of human rights, sponsors an integrated set of education programs and internships for university students in Europe and the United States.

In 2004, Kaufman received his M.Phil (Master's) degree in International Relations from the University of Oxford. In 2000, Kaufman received his B.A. (Bachelor's) degree with honors in Political Science from Yale University.

Zachary Kaufman Pre-Doctoral Fellow Speaker CDDRL
Seminars

The Re-emergence of Eurasianism: Identity Debates and Russian-Turkish Rapprochement

-

Recently, a Russo-Turkish strategic relationship has emerged. Trade in general and energy (gas) supplies in particular play a key role in shaping ties between the two countries. But Moscow and Ankara seem to be on the same page too with regard to major regional issues as well: the Iraq war, Iran's nuclear program, security in the Black Sea-Caspian area, and "frozen conflicts" in the South Caucasus. Despite being a NATO member and an EU candidate country, Turkey appears to be much closer to Russia than to the West on all these issues.

Moreover, with the Iraq situation becoming ever more volatile in the aftermath of the U.S. invasion, and the anti-Turkish sentiments on the rise in many European countries, Ankara is deeply dissatisfied with the nature of its relations with Western powers and is, therefore, seeking new strategic allies. In this context, Moscow looks like a natural and valuable partner. Russia, for its part, is also going through a rough patch in its relations with the West and is looking for prospective allies.

Interestingly, the Turkish-Russian rapprochement is accompanied by heated internal debates on Russia and Turkey's international identities and the re-emergence in both countries of Eurasianism -- the ideology that, among other things, promotes historical and cultural affinity between Russia and Turkey.

Igor Torbakov is a historian and analyst who specializes in the political affairs of the former Soviet Union. He holds an MA in History from Moscow State University and a PhD from the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences. He was a Research Scholar at the Institute of Russian History, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow; a Visiting Scholar at the Kennan Institute, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington DC; a Fulbright Scholar at Columbia University, New York; and a Visiting Fellow at Harvard University. He is now based in Istanbul, Turkey and writes regularly on these issues for a variety of publications.

Encina Basement Conference Room

Igor Torbakov Historian and Journalist Specializing in the Political Affairs of the Former Soviet Union Speaker
Seminars

The Elusiveness of the Resource Curse: Oil Dependent by Vice or Virtue?

-

Christine Scheiber is the Microsoft Research Scholar on Corruption on the Rule of Law at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL). Her current research examines corruption in the extractive industries (in particular hydrocarbons and diamonds) and how international anti-money laundering instruments can help to prevent and combat political corruption and further the restitution of ill-gotten funds. She received her PhD from the London School of Economics. Her dissertation advances a functionalist theory of the design of international institutions with a focus on international institutions that deal with illicit flows of money, small arms, narcotics and conflict diamonds. She pursued her undergraduate studies in Switzerland and at the Institut d'Etudes Politiques (Sciences Po), Paris, France.

Encina Basement Conference Room

Christine Scheiber Speaker
Seminars

2006 Mexican Elections: A Challenge for Democracy

Paragraphs

This coming July, Mexicans will not only have the chance to democratically elect a president, but more importantly, they will have the opportunity to endorse democracy. On July of 2000, Mexico had its first democratic elections after being ruled by a single party - PRI - for seventy one years. The question is not whether Mexico has transited to democracy, but rather, whether Mexicans - the government, the politicians, the media, civil society, and the citizens in general can sustain and consolidate the new democratic system.

With the intent of shedding some light on this question, Mexicanos at Stanford University, the John S. Knight Fellowships for Professional Journalists, and Yost House organized the conference "2006 Mexican Elections: A Challenge for Democracy." The event took place on Saturday March 11, 2006 in Stanford's Kresge auditorium.

The Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law, The Charles F. Riddell Fund - Yost House, the Center for Latin American Studies, VPUE/DOSA - New Student Initiatives, Bechtel International Center, El Guiding Concilio - El Centro Chicano, Camacho Fund, ASSU Speakers Bureau, and United Airlines were co-sponsors of the conference.

The 2006 Mexican Elections conference proved to be wonderfully enriching for anyone with an interest in Mexican politics and/or in democratic consolidation. The conference consisted of three sections: a) a roundtable that discussed the role of the media in the 2006 electoral process; b) a keynote address given by one of the most respected figures in Mexican academia, the historian and essayist Enrique Krauze, on the progress that Mexico has achieved in the political arena in the last decade, and on the challenges that Mexicans will face in the coming 2006 presidential election; and, c) a political debate between representatives of the three main political parties in Mexico - PRI, PAN and PRD.

This report provides a brief summary of the main arguments addressed by each speaker, the most important themes and points of discussion that arose in each panel, a brief analysis of each section, and a conclusion.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date
Authors

Stabilizing Iraq: Options for Democracy, Security, and Development

Paragraphs

In March 2006, Stanford University's Center for Democracy Development and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) brought together 25 leading scholars and policymakers to discuss the political, security, and economic situation in Iraq.

The purpose of the conference was to consider what could be done to stabilize Iraq at a crucial moment after three elections and with the country in the midst of putting together a viable coalition. Participants were asked to generate candid analysis and constructive policy recommendations.

This report summarizes many of the key arguments, suggestions, thoughts and ideas that arose out of the two-day conference. It is offered in the hope of contributing to an understanding of the situation in Iraq and providing possible innovations to the country's ongoing challenges.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date

Presidential Term Limits as an Instrument for Democratization

-

Gideon Maltz is studying the role of presidential term limits in advancing democracy, strategies for more effectively enforcing term limits, and the question of term limits in the context of parliamentary systems. Maltz has worked as a Junior Fellow in the Democracy & Rule of Law program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and as a Business Analyst at McKinsey & Company. He has also spent time working on comparative constitutionalism as a part-time consultant at the National Endowment for Democracy, on Sudan and Zimbabwe at the International Crisis Group, and on international trade at the law firm of Hogan & Hartson.

Maltz is a pre-doctoral (law) fellow at CDDRL in 2005-2006.

Encina Basement Conference Room

Gideon Maltz

N/A

0
Pre-doctoral Fellow 2005 - 2006

Gideon Maltz is studying the role of presidential term limits in advancing democracy, strategies for more effectively enforcing term limits, and the question of term limits in the context of parliamentary systems. Gideon has worked as a Junior Fellow in the Democracy & Rule of Law program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and as a Business Analyst at McKinsey & Company. He has also spent time working on comparative constitutionalism as a part-time consultant at the National Endowment for Democracy, on Sudan and Zimbabwe at the International Crisis Group, and on international trade at the law firm of Hogan & Hartson.

Gideon graduated with a B.A. in Ethics, Politics & Economics from Yale and is currently a third-year student at Stanford Law School. He is also a graduate fellow at the Stanford Center for International Conflict and Negotiation (SCICN).

Gideon Maltz Speaker
Seminars

The Politics of Police Reform in Latin America: Or Why Reining in Cops May be Harder than Controlling Soldiers

-

Kent Eaton is Associate Professor at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California. A political scientist by training, Dr. Eaton is interested in political institutions and comparative political economy. He is the author of Politicians and Economic Reform in New Democracies and Politics beyond the Capital: The Design of Subnational Institutions in South America. Currently Dr. Eaton is conducting research on police reform and on the relationship between decentralization and security in Latin America.

Encina Basement Conference Room

Kent Eaton Associate Professor Speaker Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey
Seminars

Regularized Rioting: The Strategic Toleration of Public Protest in China

-

Peter Lorentzen's research addresses informal institutions that arise where formal institutions are absent. The paper to be presented at the seminar considers the high levels of popular unrest in contemporary China. Lorentzen argues that "regularized rioting" serves as a useful tool of the central government in solving two important information problems - it helps to monitor and limit corruption by local officials, and it helps the government to identify discontented groups, resolve their concerns, and maintain political stability.

Peter Lorentzen is a pre-doctoral Fellow at CDDRL in 2005-2006.

Encina Basement Conference Room

Peter Lorentzen Pre-Doctoral Fellow (Economics/GSB) Speaker CDDRL
Seminars

Civil war definition transcends politics

Authors
James D. Fearon
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
Is the conflict in Iraq a civil war or not? Debate over this question is largely political. James D. Fearon sets aside politics to explain the meaning of civil war and how it applies to Iraq.

Does the conflict in Iraq amount to a civil war? In many ways, the public debate over this question is largely political. Calling Iraq a "civil war" implies yet another failure for the Bush administration and adds force to the question of whether U.S. troops still have a constructive role to play.

Politics aside, however, the definition of civil war is not arbitrary. For some -- and perhaps especially Americans -- the term brings to mind all-out historical conflicts along the lines of the U.S. or Spanish civil wars. According to this notion, there will not be civil war in Iraq until we see mass mobilization of sectarian communities behind more or less conventional armies.

But a more standard definition is common today:

1) Civil war refers to a violent conflict between organized groups within a country that are fighting over control of the government, one side's separatist goals, or some divisive government policy.

By this measure, the war in Iraq has been a civil war not simply since the escalation of internecine killings following the bombing of a Shiite shrine in Samarra in February, but at least since the United States handed over formal control to an interim Iraqi government in June 2004.

Here's why: Although the insurgents target the U.S. military, they are also fighting the Shiite-dominated Iraqi government and killing large numbers of Iraqis. There is little reason to believe that if the United States were suddenly to withdraw its forces, they would not continue their battle to control or shape the government.

Political scientists who study civil war have proposed various refinements to this rough definition to deal with borderline cases. One issue concerns how much killing has to occur -- and at what rate.

2) For a conflict to qualify as a civil war, most academics use the threshold of 1,000 dead, which leads to the inclusion of a good number of low-intensity rural insurgencies.

Current estimates suggest that more than 25,000 Iraqis have been killed in fighting since the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003 -- a level and rate of killing that is comparable to numerous other conflicts that are commonly described as civil wars, such as those in Lebanon (1975-1990) and Sri Lanka (beginning in 1983).

The organization -- or rather, disorganization -- of the warring communities in Iraq means that a large-scale conventional conflict along the lines of the U.S. Civil War is unlikely to develop. More probable is a gradual escalation of the current "dirty war" between neighborhood militias that have loose ties to national political factions and are fighting almost as much within sectarian lines as across them.

This is roughly what happened in Lebanon and at a lower level in Turkish cities in the late 1970s. Ethnic cleansing will occur not as a systematic, centrally directed campaign (as in Bosnia), but as a result of people moving to escape danger.

And there's another twist to the terminology:

3) If the conflict in Iraq becomes purely a matter of violence between Sunni and Shiite communities driven by revenge and hatred rather than by political goals, many political scientists would say that it is something other than civil war.

Almost no one, for example, calls the Hindu-Muslim violence in India a civil war.

A civil war has to involve attempts to grab power at the center of government or in a given region, or to use violence to change some major government policy.

In Iraq's case, however, the vacuum of power at the center means that communal violence will inevitably be tied to struggles for political power and control.

A final complication concerns the nature of international involvement. Some argue, for example, that the war in Bosnia should be seen as an interstate war rather than a civil war, since the Bosnian Serb forces were armed and directed largely by Belgrade. Post-Mobutu violence in Congo is often termed a civil war, even though fighters have been closely tied to armies from neighboring states.

4) A conflict may be both a civil and an interstate war at the same time.

The Vietnam War, for instance, clearly comprised both a civil war in the South and an interstate war involving the North, the South and the United States.

Iraq may be moving in this direction. The United States and Britain are already openly involved, and such neighboring countries as Iran and Syria are more covertly involved. Not that it matters to the people dying there, but the next debate here may turn on whether what is already a civil war in Iraq should be viewed as an interstate war as well.

All News button
1

Trashcanistan: The Problem of Governance in Eurasia

-

Professor Kotkin is involved in a number of Princeton, academic and corporate activities. At Princeton, Professor Kotkin is currently the director of the Program in Russian Studies, Princeton University. He is also a member of the Advisory Board, Center of International Studies (2002), the Editorial Board and Trustees, Princeton University Press (2003) and a host of other organizations on campus.

In the academic field he is a member of the Social Science Research Council, Committee on Russia and Eurasia (2001) and has long been an editorial board member for International Labor and Working Class History (ILWCH, 1994), as well as acting in a number of other positions in Rem Koolhass Harvard Project on the City (2001), Kritika: Explorations in European and Eurasian History (1999), and many other organizations.

He is currently writing a book entitled Lost in Siberia: Dreamworlds of Eurasia. It's a study of the Ob River valley -- which runs from the Altai Mountains to the Arctic -- over seven centuries, based on local archives, and it combines approaches from the Annales school and from the twentieth-century avant-garde. His research interests range across Eurasia, from Japan to Britain, in the modern period, and include topics such as empire, nation building, political corruption, modernity and modernism.

Encina Basement Conference Room

Stephen Kotkin Speaker Princeton University
Conferences
Subscribe to Security