Podcast appearances and mentions of Stephen M Walt

From September 2007, Michael's conversation with John Mearsheimer, co-author of "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy." "The Israel Lobby," by John J. Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen M. Walt of Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government, was one of the most controversial articles in recent memory. Originally published in the London Review of Books in March 2006, it provoked both howls of outrage and cheers of gratitude for challenging what had been a taboo issue in America: the impact of the Israel lobby on U.S. foreign policy.

The Trump administration has upended the U.S. approach to the war in Ukraine, largely siding with Russia as it tries to broker an end to the fighting. With Washington no longer interested in acting as Ukraine's chief protector, the burden is shifting to Europe. But can it bear the load? To launch Season 2 of Counterpoint, we put that question to Nathalie Tocci and Stephen M. Walt. Tocci is the director of Italy's Istituto Affari Internazionali and has worked as an advisor to the government of Italy and to EU officials. She argues that Europe can fully replace the United States in supporting Ukraine. Walt, a professor of international affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School and longtime columnist at Foreign Policy, argues the other side of the case. Counterpoint is a production of Foreign Policy, in partnership with the Doha Forum. It is hosted by FP deputy editor Sasha Polakow-Suransky. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Nicholas Wheeler joins Cheap Talk to discuss his research program in international diplomacy; personal chemistry among leaders; the security dilemma; explaining Russia's aggression toward Ukraine; the policy utility of international theory; and Marcus is so excitedSubscribe and leave a review on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your podcast player of choicePlease send us your questions or comments! Send us an email or leave us a voicemailSupport the podcast by visiting our online store at cheaptalk.shopNick Wheeler's books include:Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International SocietyThe Security Dilemma: Fear, Cooperation and Trust in World Politics (with Ken Booth)Trusting Enemies: Interpersonal Relationships in International ConflictFurther Reading:Marcus Holmes. 2018. Face-to-Face Diplomacy: Social Neuroscience and International Relations. Cambridge University Press.Robert Jervis. 1976. Perception and Misperception in International Politics. Princeton University Press.Tuomas Forsberg and Heikki Patomäki. 2022. Debating the War in Ukraine: Counterfactual Histories and Future Possibilities. Routledge. Stephen M. Walt. 2022. “An International Relations Theory Guide to the War in Ukraine.” Foreign Policy.See all Cheap Talk episodes

ABD Dışişleri Bakanı Blinken'in, İsrail soykırımı başladığından bu yana bölgeye yaptığı 4'üncü-‘bir Yahudi olarak geldim' başlıklı İsrail ziyareti dahil-tur devam ediyor... Önceki ziyaretinde Ankara'da Dışişleri Bakanı Hakan Fidan tarafından karşılanmış ancak Cumhurbaşkanı Erdoğan tarafından kabul edilmemişti. Mesajı aldılar. Bu sefer makama da kabul edildi... Birçok konuyla beraber masadaki ilk üç maddeyi, F-16'lar, İsveç'in NATO üyeliği ve Gazze'nin oluşturduğunu herkes biliyor. İlk ikisinin bir takvimi var. Ancak gerilim sürüyor. Zamanı gelince işleriz... Gazze savaşı ise Amerika için aslında İsrail meselesi olduğundan, “sonrası” için kurulacak düzenin “imar planı”nı kotarmak istiyorlar. Siyasi tercümesini yapmadan önce, ABD için İsrail'in, bir, şu anki haritada hangi taşı ihtiva ettiğini, iki, siyaseten ne olduğu üzerinden kabaca geçelim... Aktüel çatışma cephesi boyunca; Avrupa'da Polonya karargâh, Almanya üstür. Pasifik'te ise Japonya hem karargâh hem üstür. Her iki bölgede ikincil hatta üçüncül siperleri de var ABD'nin. Ortadoğu'da ise daha pek çok kategoride oyuncu olmasına rağmen, mesela kâğıt üstünde Türkiye ve Katar da üstür (!), İsrail, hem üs hem karargâh hem lojistik merkezdir! Amerikan siyasetinde ise herhalde hiç anlatmaya gerek yok, Yahudi lobisi diye bir ‘fenomen' vardır. Çok söylenir, altı çizilir, hatta zaman zaman, ‘bu kadar atıf yapılması acaba bir efsaneyi mi besliyor' şüphesine dahi kapılırsınız ama gerçektir. Meraklısını yormaya, üzerine yazılmış binlerce kitap/metin içinde boğmaya gerek yok, 500 sayfadır; “The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy”. (John J. Mearsheimer, Stephen M. Walt, 2007.) Yahudi lobisinin yazarlarını hırpaladığını da ekleyerek diyebiliriz ki, kitabın adı, ‘bir süper güç parmakta nasıl oynatılır' da olabilirmiş. İç siyasetteki nüfuzunu anlamak için de zahmete gerek yok. Şu an gözümüzün önünde yaşanıyor. Tüm dünya ile İsrail'in arasında ABD duruyor. Nitekim Sayın Fidan'ın belirttiği, ‘ABD orada olduğu sürece kimsenin bir şey yapamayacağı' okumasını mealen hatırlatalım. Yani ‘duruşun' bir nedeni de ABD'de seçim yılı olmasıdır. Dünya bir yana Yahudi lobisi/İsrail bir yanadır... Bu halde.. Dördüncü turda ABD'nin meselesi nedir? Gazze savaşının bitmesiyle/düşük yoğunluğa geçmesiyle birlikte- ki Tel Aviv 2024 yılı boyunca da devam edeceğini söylüyor-İsrail'in bölgedeki varlığının değil, alanının yeniden inşasıdır. Eskisi

We already know that 2024 will be the year that more people vote than in any other time in history. That's an easy prediction to make. But what other global trends will impact the world this year? FP columnist and Harvard University professor Stephen M. Walt sits down with Ravi Agrawal to look ahead at the next 12 months. Suggested reading: Allison Meakem: Elections to Watch in 2024 Comfort Ero and Richard Atwood: 10 Conflicts to Watch in 2024 FP Contributors: 5 Issues to Watch in 2024 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A Aksa Tufanı'nın artçı sonuçlarından biri de Batı'da bilimsel kalitesi, özerkliği ve özgürlüğüyle şöhret bulmuş üniversitelerin özgürlüklerinin aslında nasıl bir baskı altında olduğunun ifşası oldu. Kimsenin telaffuz etmediği ama herkesin bildiği ve uyduğu çok katı kuralları, kesin sınırları olan bir özgürlük. Azıcık bir ihlalin çok ağır cezalarının olduğu, işte ifade özgürlüğü buraya kadar dedirten kurallarıyla bir özgürlük. Biraz aşıldığında ne üniversite özerkliği, ne bilim adamının ifade özgürlüğünün hiçbir anlamının olmadığı kırmızı çizgi İsrail ve Siyonizm. Aslında bu konuda daha önce de çok şeyler yazıldı, söylendi, kitaplar yayınlandı hatta (Mesela, John J. Mearsheimer ve Stephen M. Walt ‘ın İsrail Lobisi ve Amerikan Dış Politikası, Küre yayınları, çev. Hasan Kösebalaban). Ama İsrail'i koruyan faşizan baskıların bu kadar faal ve bu kadar katı olduğu Aksa Tufanı ile çok daha net ve çarpıcı bir biçimde ortaya çıktı. İsrail›in Gazze›de soykırım boyutlarına varan barbarca saldırılarına karşı ABD'de Filistinlilerle dayanışma gösterisi düzenleyen üniversite öğrencileri okul yönetimleri tarafından engellenmeye çalışılıyor. Ancak bu konuda kendisinden beklenen baskıyı yapmadığı ve protestoları engellemediği gerekçesiyle ülkenin en eski ve en prestijli üniversitelerinden Pennsylvania Üniversitesi rektörü Liz Magill Kongre'de, Harvard ve MIT rektörleri ile “kampüste antisemitizme izin verme” iddialarına karşı verdikleri ifadenin ardından açıkça antisemitizmle suçlandı. Suçlanmanın bir de yaptırım boyutu var tabi. İsrail yanlısı bağışçılar UPenn'e verdikleri 100 milyon dolarlık bağışı kesmekle tehdit edince rektör istifa etmek zorunda kaldı. İsrail'in saldırganlığının, işgalciliğinin, haksızlığının hiç bir açıdan gizlenebilir ve savunulabilir bir yanı kalmamış durumda. O yüzden üniversitelerin dünyanın gözü önünde soykırım uygulayan bu vahşeti göz ardı etmeleri kendilerini inkâr etmeleri anlamına geliyor. Ama işte gördük, kendilerini inkâr, vicdanlarını kurutma pahasına dünyanın en gözde bilim ve düşünce adamlarından bazıları (Mesela Habermas ve arkadaşları) nasıl bir baskı altında kaldılarsa, soykırımcı vahşeti gözardı etmekle kalmadı, İsrail'i aklayan ve savunan bildiriler bile yayınladı. Dünyanın prestijli üniversitelerinin bu konuda maruz kaldıkları baskıların bundan sonra üniversiteler üzerine söylenecek her sözü, yapılacak her türlü karşılaştırmayı etkileyecek bir referans oluşturacağını söyleyebiliriz. Aksa Tufanı bazı üniversite hocalarına maruz kaldıkları bu söylemsel baskıya karşı adeta intifadaya geçmek için bir cesaret de vermiş görünüyor. Harvard Üniversitesinin öğretim üyeleri UPenn üniversitesi rektörünün başına gelenler kendi rektörlerinin başına gelmesin diye 570 imzayla kendi rektörlerine sahip çıkan bir bildiri de yayınladılar. Akademik intifada küresel düzeyde yayılarak devam edecek gibi görünüyor. Türkiye'de ise akademi alanında TÜBİTAK ve TÜBA'nın yıllardır Cumhurbaşkanı Erdoğan himayesinde bilim adamlarına yönelik ödül programının bu yıl gerçekleşen töreninde çok anlamlı bir çağrı yapıldı. Cumhurbaşkanı Erdoğan, ödül töreninde yaptığı konuşmasında uluslararası üne sahip birçok eğitim kurumunda öğrenciler dâhil İsrail'i eleştiren herkese yönelik bir cadı avının başlatıldığını anlattıktan sonra bu cadı avına maruz kalan bilim adamlarına Türk üniversitelerinin kapılarının açık olduğunu duyurdu. Cumhurbaşkanı Erdoğan, “Tıpkı 80 yıl önce Nazi Almanyası'nda olduğu gibi bugün de Gazze'deki zulme ‘zulüm' diyebilme cesareti gösteren namuslu bilim insanları baskıya, şantaja ve tehdide maruz bırakılmakta” olduğunu söyledikten sonra çağrısını şu sözlerle ifade etti:

From wars on two continents to U.S. competition with China and the rise of artificial intelligence, 2023 has been yet another impactful year. FP Live looks back on the year with columnist and political scientist Stephen M. Walt.  Suggested reading: Stephen M. Walt: 5 Things in the World to Be Thankful for in 2023 Stephen M. Walt: Universities Shouldn't Ever Take Sides in a War Stephen M. Walt: The World Won't Be the Same After the Israel-Hamas War Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this edition of Parallax Views, Stephen M. Walt, Robert and Renée Belfer professor of international relations at Harvard University, joins Parallax Views to discuss the Israel-Hamas War, U.S. foreign policy failures in regards to Israel/Palestine, and his latest Foreign Policy column "Israel Could Win This Gaza Battle and Lose the War". We also discuss the two-state solution vs. one-state reality (see: Ian S. Lustick's Paradigm Lost: From Two-State Solution to One-State Reality), misconceptions about Walt's book The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (co-authored with John J. Mearsheimer), "kicking the can down the road" on the Israel/Palestine Question and its consequences, what the late international relations scholar (and one of Walt's mentors) Kenneth Waltz's would make of currents events involving Israel/Palestine, the Hamas attack of October 7th, Benjamin Netanyahu, the grievances of Palestinians and the reasons for their desire for a Palestinian state, and much, much more!

Merriam-Webster's Word of the Day for April 30, 2023 is: sinecure • SYE-nih-kyoor • noun Sinecure is a noun that refers to a usually paid job or position that requires little or no work. // The king was in the habit of rewarding his loyal supporters with sinecures. See the entry > Examples: “To make matters worse, the architects of failure are rarely, if ever, held accountable. Instead of acknowledging their mistakes openly, even discredited former officials can head off to corporate boards, safe sinecures, or lucrative consulting firms, hoping to return to power as soon as their party regains the White House. Once back in office, they are free to repeat their previous mistakes, backed by a chorus of pundits whose recommendations never change no matter how often they've failed.” — Stephen M. Walt, Foreign Policy, 3 Mar. 2021 Did you know? A sinecure (pronounced SYE-nih-kyoor) sounds like a pretty sweet deal: it's a job or title that usually comes with regular money but with little or no work. Who wouldn't want that? While the thing sinecure refers to might be desirable, the word itself is typically used with disdain—if someone refers to your job as a sinecure they don't think you earn the money you collect by doing it. The word's roots are likewise served with some side-eye: it comes from the Medieval Latin sine cura, meaning “without cure”—the lack of cure in this case being one for souls. The original sinecure was a church position that didn't involve the spiritual care or instruction of church members (theoretically, the church's sole purpose). Ecclesiastical sinecures have been a thing of the past since the late 19th century; positions referred to with the word these days are more likely to be board positions or academic appointments that require no teaching.

Stephen M. Walt, professor of international relations at Harvard University,  talks about the Israel lobby in the United States and the negative effect unconditional support for Israel has had on U.S. foreign policy in the Mideast and on Israel itself. Walt is the author, along with John Mearsheimer, of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy.  Published in 2007, the book was controversial when it first came out  but many of its arguments are now widely accepted. Walt discusses the political power of the lobby and changing views of Israel in the United States since the book was written. 

The 2022 Holberg Debate: "Will Fear Keep Us Safe?" How will the war in Ukraine and other geopolitical crises impact the global security order, and what do they mean for the power of deterrence ? Panel: John J. Mearsheimer and Carl Bildt Moderator: Cecilie Hellestveit Organizer: The Holberg Prize John J. Mearsheimer is the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago, where he has taught since 1982. He graduated from West Point (1970), has a PhD in political science from Cornell University (1981), and has written extensively about security issues and international politics. Among Mearsheimer's six books, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics (2001, 2014) won the Joseph Lepgold Book Prize; and The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (with Stephen M. Walt, 2007), made the New York Times bestseller list and has been translated into twenty-five languages. His latest book is The Great Delusion: Liberal Ideals and International Realities (2018), which won the 2019 Best Book of the Year Award from the Valdai Discussion Conference, Moscow. In addition, Mearsheimer has a forthcoming book (with Sebastian Rosato), Homo Theoreticus: Rationality in International Politics. He has also written numerous articles and op-eds that have appeared in International Security, London Review of Books, Foreign Affairs, The Financial Times, and The New York Times. In 2003, Mearsheimer was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and in 2020, he won the James Madison Award, which is given once every three years by the American Political Science Association to “an American political scientist who has made a distinguished scholarly contribution to political science.” Carl Bildt is Co-Chair of the European Council on Foreign Relations and contributing columnist to The Washington Post, as well as columnist for Project Syndicate. He serves as Senior Advisor to the Wallenberg Foundations in Sweden and is on the Board of Trustees of the RAND Corporation in the US. Bildt has served as both Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Sweden. In March 2021, Bildt was appointed WHO Special Envoy for the Access to COVID-19 Tools Accelerator (ACT-Accelerator). Subsequently he served in international functions with the EU and UN, primarily related to the conflicts in the Balkans. Bildt was Co-Chairman of the Dayton peace talks on Bosnia and become the first High Representative in the country. Later, he was the Special Envoy of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to the region. Cecilie Hellestveit (moderator) is a lawyer and social scientist with a PhD in international humanitarian law (IHL) from the University of Oslo. She has been associated with a number of research institutes in Norway and abroad. Hellestveit researches and teaches in the field of international law, use of force, and armed conflicts. holbergprize.org

Stephen M. Walt, Harvard University professor of international affairs, discusses the prospects for a negotiated ceasefire in the Russia-Ukraine war, the risk of nuclear escalation, and the potential for a prolonged stalemate. He also proposes a new future for NATO as well as suggestions for how to stabilize great power rivalry on both the economic and military fronts, particularly with China. Show NotesStephen Walt bioStephen M. Walt, “Russia's Defeat Would Be America's Problem,” Foreign Policy, September 27, 2022.Stephen M. Walt, “Which NATO Do We Need?” Foreign Policy, September 14, 2022.Stephen M. Walt, “Why Wars Are Easy to Start and Hard to End,” Foreign Policy, August 29, 2022.Dani Rodrik and Stephen M. Walt, “How to Build a Better Order: Limiting Great Power Rivalry in an Anarchic World,” Foreign Affairs 101, no. 5 (September/October 2022). Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

หมายเหตุประเพทไทยสัปดาห์นี้ ปองขวัญ สวัสดิภักดิ์ และต่อศักดิ์ จินดาสุขศรี รีวิวความเห็นของนักวิชาการด้านความสัมพันธ์ระหว่างประเทศต่อกรณีสงครามรัสเซียรุกรานยูเครน ทั้งจากสาย “Realism” หรือสัจนิยมอย่างเช่น John Mearsheimer ที่ให้บทบาทหลักเป็นชาติมหาอำนาจ และมองว่ายูเครนทำสิ่งที่โง่เขลา, กับกลุ่มที่วิพากษ์ฝ่ายสัจนิยมและเห็นว่าต้องพิจารณาบริบททางประวัติศาสตร์และความคิดเห็นของประชาชนมากขึ้นว่าเหตุใดชาติในยุโรปตะวันออกต่างพากันออกห่างจากอิทธิพลรัสเซียภายหลังสิ้นสุดสงครามเย็น, รวมทั้งฝ่ายที่เห็นว่าคำอธิบายต่างๆ เป็นคำอธิบายฝั่งโลกตะวันตกหรือ "Westplaining" มากเกินไป และทิ้งท้ายด้วยข้อเสนอของ Stephen M. Walt ที่เสนอว่ามนุษย์สามารถประเมินผิด หรือมีความรับรู้ที่ผิดพลาด นำไปสู่การติดสินใจทางนโยบายผิดพลาด รวมทั้งทำความเข้าใจ “Security Dilemma” หรือภาวะกลืนไม่เข้าคายไม่ออกด้านความมั่นคงที่อยู่ในการเมืองระหว่างประเทศ #หมายเหตุประเพทไทย #ยูเครน

Over the past few years, Israel's ongoing military occupation of Palestinian territory and repeated invasions of the Gaza strip have triggered a fierce backlash against Israeli policies virtually everywhere in the world -- except the United States. The Occupation of the American Mind takes an eye-opening look at this critical exception, zeroing in on pro-Israel public relations efforts within the U.S. Narrated by Roger Waters and featuring leading observers of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and U.S. media culture, the film explores how the Israeli government, the U.S. government, and the pro-Israel lobby have joined forces, often with very different motives, to shape American media coverage of the conflict in Israel's favor. From the U.S.-based public relations campaigns that emerged in the 1980s to today, the film provides a sweeping analysis of Israel's decades-long battle for the hearts, minds, and tax dollars of the American people in the face of widening international condemnation of its increasingly right-wing policies. Narrated by Roger Waters / Featuring Amira Hass, M.J. Rosenberg, Stephen M. Walt, Noam Chomsky, Rula Jebreal, Henry Siegman, Rashid Khalidi, Rami Khouri, Yousef Munayyer, Norman Finkelstein, Max Blumenthal, Phyllis Bennis, Norman Solomon, Mark Crispin Miller, Peter Hart, and Sut Jhally.

Llega la segunda temporada de Brussels Calling, con Cuando la Historia llama a la puerta, donde analizamos el actual momento europeo y los debates que marcarán 2022 en la UE y conversamos con Pol Morillas, director del CIDOB, sobre la crisis abierta en Ucrania y cómo esta desnuda nuestras debilidades en materia de política exterior y nos empuja a la búsqueda de autonomía estratégica. Recomendaciones: 1.-Liberal illusions caused the Ukraine crisis, de Stephen M. Walt en Foreign Policy https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/01/19/ukraine-russia-nato-crisis-liberal-illusions/ 2.- Demografía: la nueva división, de Ivan Krastev en Le Grand Continent https://legrandcontinent.eu/es/2022/01/17/democracia-demografia-y-la-division-este-oeste-en-europa/ 3.- Miss Marx de Susanna Nicchiarelli https://www.filmaffinity.com/es/film907343.html 4.- Volver la vista atrás de Juan Gabriel Vasquez https://www.casadellibro.com/libro-volver-la-vista-atras/9788420455600/12135121 Canción final: Nacho Vegas - El don de la ternura

On this edition of Parallax Views, we are hot off the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference aka COP25. Joining us in light of this is Prof. Anatol Lieven, a Senior Fellow at the Quincy Institute and a former academic at King's College in London. According to Lieven, in a new report he authored, climate change is our greatest national security threat. We discuss this and his book Climate Change and the Nation State: The Case for Nationalism (which, as you'll hear in the conversation in this episode I prefer the alternative British title of Climate Change and the Nation State: The Realist Case). In this conversation we discuss how Lieven became interested in climate change as someone who came out of security studies; civic nationalism and/or patriotism vs. ethno-nationalism, legitimate concerns over the concept and idea of nationalism, the need to reject ethno-nationalism, Lieven's critique of cultural individualism and Reagan/Thatcher-style politics, Lieven's criticism of power elites and especially Pentagon/military elites, Lieven's criticisms of how the Left approaches climate change and politics, unifying people in the fight against climate change, misconceptions about the Realist School of Foreign Policy in relation to issues like human rights and ethics, the potential of climate chaos to cause a refugee crisis, the need for international cooperation, the anarchic world system, migration and climate change, migration and radicalization of the right, the need to make individual sacrifices to combat climate crisis, why climate change is a bigger national security threat to the U.S. (and the world) than China, Teddy Roosevelt, the fossilization and atrophying of thought within the U.S. foreign policy "Blob" due to generational strangleholds, Lieven's support for the Green New Deal, mentioning the failings of the previous New Deal of FDR in terms of how it didn't necessarily help marginalized people in society enough, conservatism and environmentalism, why conservatives should be concerned about climate change and why it would fit within a broad definition of conservative thought and its intellectual tradition (also how supporting reform could fit into that tradition), the effect of climate change on the U.S. and Western nations already, how technological fixes are not enough in the near-term future, climate change as a threat multiplier, fights over water in places like Darfur, the capacity of climate change to cause food shortages (which in turn have historically caused revolutions, public unrest, and civil war), the need for a "new dispensation" as we saw under FDR, the need for social solidarity, the strains of American nationalism, at this current point only states can be pushed to introduce policies that will address climate change, the United Nations as a body of states, John Mearsheimer's The Great Tragedy of Power Politics, climate change may bring about the collapse of the nation state system, Lieven's belief that we cannot wait till the end of capitalism to deal with climate change, the need to reform capitalism at the very least, heatwaves and forest fires in the U.S., sea level rise and intensified storm and storm surged having the potential to causing damaging floods, comparing the U.S. national security elites of today to those of the Confucian elites in imperial China, the need to assess new threats rather than being unadopted to and blindsided by them, the problem of "residual elites" and their concern with "Great Power" threats, the worst offender in the world of climate change other than the Gulf states, the Glasgow summit and what it demonstrates, currently existing technological fixes for climate change aren't radical enough, the lessons of COP26 and the need for investments into new technologies, the need to invest in storage in relation to alternative energy, the need to research nuclear and fusion energy, carbon capture, tech is not a miracle cure, Biden's military spending and why Lieven views it as grotesque, America's radical individualism and the need for a renewal of civic duty, embittered cultural divisions and polarization being whipped up across the political spectrum, the U.S. neglect of Central America, Trump's hollowing out of the EPA and the threat of Trumpism to the American struggle against climate change, and much, much more. "Climate Change: The Greatest National Security Threat to the United States" by Anatol Lieven - Quincy Brief No. 18 10/25/21 "THE CLIMATE CRISIS IS OUR REAL CHALLENGE, NOT CHINA" by Anatol Lieven - InkStick 11/04/21 "Climate chaos: the global threat multiplier of our time" by Anatol Lieven - Responsible Statecraft 10/26/21 "Here's what world leaders agreed to — and what they didn't — at the U.N. climate summit" by Lauren Sommer - NPR 11/13/21 "Interview: Lawrence Wilkerson - A discussion of tensions in East Asia, and some possible solutions" by Emanuel Pastreich - The Diplomat 12/03/21 Anatol Lieven Discusses America Right or Wrong: An Anatomy of American Nationalism on C-Span "What do realists think about climate change?" by The Centre for Geopolitics & Security in Realism Studies (CGSRS) 11/13/21 "Abby Martin Confronts Nancy Pelosi Over Pentagon Spending at COP26" - Yoube 11/09/21 "We Can't Confront Climate Change While Lavishly Funding the Pentagon" by JP Sottile - Truthout 08/18/21 "The Realist Guide to Solving Climate Change" by Stephen M. Walt - The Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs 08/13/21

Pure theorizing versus applied research; positivist and non-positivist approaches in international relations; international relations is what the field says it is; the relevance of the international relations paradigms; a defense of methodological pluralism; and Marcus reads a quote from Kenneth Waltz several times Further reading: David A. Lake. 2011. “Why ‘isms' Are Evil: Theory, Epistemology, and Academic Sects as Impediments to Understanding and Progress.” International Studies Quarterly 55(2): 465–480. John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt. 2013. “Leaving Theory Behind: Why Simplistic Hypothesis Testing is Bad for International Relations.” European Journal of International Relations 19(3): 427–457.

In 1992, the United States stood at the pinnacle of world power and Americans were confident that a new era of peace and prosperity was at hand. 25 years later, those hopes have been dashed. Relations with Russia and China have soured, the European Union is wobbling, nationalism and populism are on the rise, and the United States is stuck in costly and seemingly endless wars that have squandered trillions of dollars and undermined its influence around the world. And it's only getting worse.

Emma and Gen chat with Anet McClintock and Professor Stephen M. Walt on the convergence of conflict and climate change on a global scale. Anet is completing her Bachelor of Arts (Honours) in International Relations and German at the University of Melbourne and is also a Senior Correspondent at the Young Diplomats Society, with a particular interest in Africa, development, gender and international security. Stephen M. Walt is the Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Affairs at the Harvard Kennedy School and is a Contributing Editor at Foreign Policy magazine. Emma and Anet discuss the Egypto-Ethiopian Nile dispute, international involvement in the conflict, the effects on regional communities, and whether we will see the militarization of the conflict. Gen and Professor Stephen M. Walt will discuss the intersection between conflict, climate change and sovereignty, the challenges facing the internationalisation of climate change, and the globalisation of the Amazon in the climate change debate. FOLLOW US: Follow Global Questions on Instagram, Facebook and Twitter for more content! Find more about Young Diplomats Society on our website. CREDITS: This episode is produced by the Young Diplomats Society on the lands of the Wurundjeri/Gadigal people. We pay our respects to the traditional custodians of the lands upon which we operate and live.

B Stephen M. Walt This episode is also available as a blog post: https://transnational.live/2021/03/22/americas-forever-wars-have-come-back-home/ --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/transnational-foundation/message

Are we heading towards a Cyberpunk future? A discussion of how Cyberpunk (the game and the genre) depict the state and other political entities. Other topics include balancing against threats in international relations and the concept of extended deterrence. I close with my thoughts on the game so far. Notes: 0:42 - Like many gamers, I was a big fan the Witcher 3. I was lukewarm on the preceding titles. 0:59 - Reviews seem very mixed at the moment and vary dramatically across platforms due, in large part, to the bugs and graphics issues                   that are more common on consoles. 2:51 - I use the term "heroes" loosely here. I think the anti-hero or non-hero are more common in the genre. 6:41 - Balancing is a big topic in International Relations with the political scientist Stephen M. Walt being one of the bigger names in the field. 9:19 - We call troops like these a "tripwire force." They are not present to repel an attack but to act as a tripwire that will trigger a larger                       response. 16:07 - Writer, journalist, and political commentator Thomas Friedman has written extensively about globalization and its effects on the world. 21:40 - Side Rant. 24:11 - The Delemain car that takes you to the fancy hotel where you're supposed to steal the chip. 25:54 - That would be the club "Afterlife." Not the actual afterlife that he unfortunately shuffles off to. Intro and outro music: "Swim below as Leviathans" by Fireproof_Babies (featuring Ben Shewmaker) is licensed under CC BY.

Hello! And welcome to another edition of Inside The Newsroom. Today’s guest is… Art Markman, cognitive scientist and psychology professor at the University of Texas in Austin. Art is the first guest to appear on the podcast for a second time, having got into why the majority of people who believe in climate change aren’t willing to sacrifice anything from their own lives back in March. This time around we went deep into risk profiles and how they make us make the decisions we make. Before we get into it, you can add Inside The Newsroom directly to your preferred podcast app using this link. Below is a post-game of everything we talked about and more. Enjoy 🤓Art Markman 👇Knowing Our Own Risk ProfileKnowing our own risk profile is important. It requires looking inward to identify why we make certain choices: What we like or dislike doing, what makes us scared or confident, and how we can overcome our fears. Quick question: do you consider yourself a risk-taker or risk-averse?Risks can be broken down into five types, according to Art, also known as “risk domains”. First up is financial risk, which is pretty self-explanatory… How willing are you to spend money without knowing exactly what you’ll get in return? For example, are you willing to spend thousands of dollars for a graduate degree without knowing whether future earnings will be worth the initial outlay? Next up is social risk, i.e. are you willing to make a fool of yourself in a group of new people in order to make friends? Third, is ethics. Then comes recreational risk… Are you more of a softball player or bungee jumper? And lastly is health risk, which is probably something none of us consciously think of when we have a pint or glass of wine, or smoke a cigarette or a blunt. Next task: I went through each domain and wrote down a couple of examples for each of what kind of risk raker I am, and it made my outlook a little clearer. So how about you? What kind of risk taker are you?Art Markman for Fast CompanyAnalysis ParalysisOne risk domain Art didn’t mention in his article was that of time. More than any other domain, how to spend free time is my most agonizing. Whether its freelancing on the side of my regular job which has an obvious financial incentive, writing this newsletter which has no financial incentive, or simply debating how best to spend a free hour I have. Ironically, my brain works its hardest when trying to figure out how to relax.Fortunately there’s a term for extreme indecisiveness: free-time paralysis, or 'analysis paralysis’. Essentially, it’s the idea that having too much choice, or too much time, leaves our brain overwhelmed with all the possibilities that we end up doing nothing. But the first-world problems don’t stop there. Shame and guilt then creep into our psyche over the complete failure to achieve anything. One technique you can try tomorrow is what Barry Schwartz, author of The Paradox of Choice, calls ‘going for good enough’. Instead of agonizing over perfection or completing every single task on your list, settle for good enough and it will unlock more happiness and satisfaction. Daniella Scott, CosmopolitanIf you like what you read, how about clicking the ❤️ up top. I’ll be very grateful. 😘The Power of IntrovertsIf you’re like me, going to a work event or conference is more of a burden than a pleasure. Standing around making aimless smalltalk with people wIouldn’t socialize outside of work isn’t my idea of fun. It’s excruciating. I thought I was part of the minority feeling like this, but thanks to Susan Cain’s amazing book Quiet, it turns out that I’m not alone. In fact, there was a time when introverts were among the majority. A time when extroverts weren’t so excessively and misguidedly respected by society. A time when we didn’t make only extroverts the CEOs of our companies or the political leaders of our countries. Cain cites the increase of mass media and communication since the start of the industrial revolution as the primary reason behind why the loudest and boldest people are rewarded over the contemplative and well-informed.Sarah Cain, Author of QuietSocial Media and Introverts Don’t MixIf you’re like me, you know you should probably get off social media completely, but enjoy keeping in touch with what’s going on in the world without having to talk to anyone. Unfortunately, that comes with a price. According to a study by the Royal Society for Public Health, the majority of Britons aged 14-24 believed that Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat and Twitter had negative effects on their mental health and wellbeing. Personally, Instagram is the most poisonous of them all. Unlike the other major platforms — Facebook has fake news, Twitter has trolls that troll — Instagram goes one worse. Instagram exacerbates our worst traits of social comparison. Posting pictures with the sole aim of getting as many people (often strangers) to click that little red heart button has unnatural and extremely damaging effects to our mental state. When I posted pictures, I checked my phone literally every two minutes to see how many likes I’d received. My target was usually to get to three figures. Let’s think for a minute: How insane is that? Waiting by your phone until you got to 100. Regardless of how many likes I got, it was a lose-lose situation.That’s because it’s completely unnatural for our brains to generate such an intense rush of dopamine, only to crash hard once we don't get to 100 likes. Even if it did, masking your unhappiness isn't worth it.The EconomistLast week…#57 — Stephen M. Walt (Harvard) on whether the U.S. could have a successful foreign policy againRelated podcasts#44 — Sebastian Junger (Tribe) on the history of tribal societies#43 — Kashmir Hill (New York Times) on what it’s like cutting Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google and Microsoft from our livesJob CornerEach week I’ll feature a selection of new journalism jobs. This week, The Seattle Times has a number of cool positions…Business ReporterEditorial WriterGraphic ArtistInvestigative ReporterPolitical EditorProject Homeless ReporterSports ProducerTech Editor/Assistant Business Editor Get on the email list at insidethenewsroom.substack.com

Hello! And welcome to another edition of Inside The Newsroom. Today’s guest is… Stephen M. Walt, professor of international affairs Harvard University’s Kennedy School, columnist at Foreign Policy magazine and author of several books on foreign affairs. I saw Stephen speak in person at LSE a few weeks ago and, after hearing Stephen talk on whether the U.S. could have a successful foreign policy again, I had to get him on the pod. The timing couldn’t have been better as it came days after Donald Trump sporadically decided to withdraw troops from northern Syria, leaving his Kurdish allies to be butchered by Turkish forces. Stephen and I took it all the way back to the early 2000s to figure out where the U.S. went wrong, and what events led to the U.S. still being at war with the Taliban in Afghanistan 18 years later. Below is a post-game of everything we covered. Enjoy 🤓Like Me, PleaseBefore you read on, please like this edition of Inside The Newsroom by clicking the ❤️ below the title. That way I’ll appear in clever algorithms and more people will be able to read. Cheers.Can the U.S. Still Have a Successful Foreign Policy?The simple answer to this complicated question is yes. Measuring how successful foreign policies are can be put down to a) whether the U.S. (or any country for that matter) has made another country a safer and more stable place b) whether the U.S. has made more friends than enemies after its operation and c) whether its enemies are stronger or weaker. Some say the last time the U.S. had a successful foreign policy was when the Cold War ended back in 1991, but since then things have largely been a failure. Starting with Bill Clinton when he took over the reins in 1993, carried on by George W. Bush and Barack Obama, and now hopelessly continued as we speak by Donald Trump, both Republicans and Democrats have got it wrong. And that’s exactly where a common misconception lies. The Republicans are often perceived as the party that supports war and the military, and rhetoric in speeches and debates often supports that theory. But when it comes down to real action, the past two presidents from each party have increased the number of troops in war zones, and have all been lousy in looking after its veterans. That said, surveys have shown that in more recent times, younger veterans tend to lean Republican.That brings us to the worst U.S. conflict of the modern era, a war that is still going on after 18 years: the war in Afghanistan.The Unwinnable WarIt came as a shock to me that the war in Afghanistan was still going on. I thought it was done and dusted and that U.S. troops were there to maintain stability. But that’s not the case and the war in Afghanistan has slowly become a deadly quagmire. Since Bush invaded Afghanistan in 2001, and seemingly wiped out the Taliban within months, he went for another bite of the cake and invaded Iraq in 2003. By doing so, Bush transferred the majority of his military’s power and resources more than a 1,000 miles west to eliminate Saddam Hussein, and left open the possibility for the Taliban to return to Afghanistan after hiding out in safe havens across the border in Pakistan. After 18 years of war, thousands of lives lost and hundreds of billions of dollars spent, the U.S. is still trying to ‘win’ the war in Afghanistan. But the fact is the Taliban haven’t been vanquished and remain a threat to the U.S. and its allies, even more so after Trump cancelled secret peace talks with the group in September. The Taliban have warned that more U.S. lives would be lost as a result.Stephen M. Walt for Foreign PolicyRealism vs IdealismSo how did the U.S. get into this Middle Eastern mess via Bush, make no apparent progress under Obama and, well, have all of its credibility shattered under Trump? It remains in this quandary because it has consistently sided with idealism, instead of realism.As we discussed earlier, when Bush thought he’d steamrolled through the Taliban in Afghanistan, he went for the jackpot in Iraq to remove Hussein, but as his military jumped from one country thousands of miles away to another, the inevitable game of Whac-A-Mole began. Then Obama announced he’d withdraw troops from the region, reversed his decision, then went ahead with his plan until there were just less than 10,000 troops in the country at the end of his presidency. And then we have Mr. Trump, who has never experienced realism in his life, and opened the door to a bloody Turkish invasion of northern Syria and killing thousands of Kurdish allies in the process.Idealism trumped (pardon the pun) realism in all of these cases, and explains why the U.S. is still in a conflict with the Taliban, the rise and fall of ISIS, and potential rise again of the Islamist group. Stephen M. Walt for Foreign PolicyWhy Do Countries Go To War?As I wrote back in July after I interviewed author Sebastian Junger, there’s something in the brain that keeps humans engaging in war. I was always taught that wars were fought over for money or religion, which is true, but what I wasn’t told was that going to war has positive psychological effects. Wars bring people together, create a sense of unity, and can provoke human qualities that often lie dormant in ordinary life, such as courage and self-sacrifice. It seems that the emotion of war has gotten the better of U.S. foreign policy for the best part of the past two decades, preventing economically and politically stable nations to be built. Instead, a series of power vacuums were created that see no end in sight. Peace depends on creating societies rich with opportunities and democracy. The fact that so many nations fail to do this makes our future prospects of peace look very bleak.Steve Taylor for the GuardianLast week…#56 — Jamil Smith (Rolling Stone) on voter suppression and the life of congressman Elijah CummingsRelated podcasts…#51 — Jason Kander (Democratic Party) on PTSD and how the U.S. has neglected its veterans #44 — Sebastian Junger (Tribe, The Perfect Storm) on why countries go to warJob CornerEach week I’ll feature a selection of new journalism jobs. This week, Cal Matters has a number of cool positions including… California Divide ReporterCollege Journalism Network EditorData JournalistDeputy News EditorEngagement EditorEvents DirectorHealth ReporterNewsletter Editor Get on the email list at insidethenewsroom.substack.com

A Harvard professor believes that international powers could start pressuring (and even threatening) Brazil due to its environmental shortfalls. Guest: Stephen M. Walt, professor of international affairs at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government.

A Harvard professor believes that international powers could start pressuring (and even threatening) Brazil due to its environmental shortfalls. Guest: Stephen M. Walt, professor of international affairs at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government.Support the show (https://brazilian.report/subscribe)

On the podcast: George Packer, in conversation with Stephen M. Walt, on America’s long-serving diplomat. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

US foreign policy since the end of the Cold War has been a resounding failure, argues Stephen M. Walt in his new book “The Hell of Good Intentions.” What’s worse, the failure is our fault, a direct result of America’s chosen grand strategy of liberal hegemony, he says. But Walt has an alternative, as he explains in this week’s Deep Dish podcast.

America is at war all over the planet and the American public doesn’t seem to care. Since the end of the Cold War, Americans have largely checked out of foreign policy concerns. Today on War College, American foreign policy analyst Stephen M. Walt walks us through how we got here, and how to fix it.Walt’s new book is The Hell of Good Intentions: America's Foreign Policy Elite and the Decline of U.S. Primacy. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

What happens when a libertarian, a conservative hawk, and a constitutional powers specialist walk into a podcast studio? 'Net Assessment' happens. Welcome to the hottest new national security podcast hosted by Melanie Marlowe, Christopher Preble, and Bryan McGrath. This is a show about competing visions of America's role in the world. In each episode, they will be discussing a featured article, airing their grievances, and giving attaboys.  In the first episode of this bi-weekly series, our hosts introduce themselves and their hopes for this podcast. They tackle this episode's featured article, Adrian Lewis' "The Ivory Tower and Academic Ignorance of What the Armed Forces Actually Do," published by Task & Purpose. They also discuss the role of American seapower and, of course, Twitter feuds. Don't forget to subscribe to Net Assessment on your podcast app of choice.    Adrian Lewis, “The Ivory Tower And Academic Ignorance Of What The Armed Forces Actually Do,” Task and Purpose, September 20, 2018. Ken Buck, “Congress, Take Your War Powers Back,” Wall Street Journal, September 24, 2018. Dion Nissenbaum, “Top U.S. Diplomat Backed Continuing Support for Saudi War in Yemen Over Objections of Staff,” Wall Street Journal, September 20, 2018. Nicholas Kristof, “Be Outraged by America’s Role in Yemen’s Misery,” New York Times, September 26, 2018. Claudia Grisales and Corey Dickstein, “Vice Adm. Faller: 'I Was Cleared of All Wrongdoing' in 'Fat Leonard' Case,” Stars and Stripes, September 25, 2018. Chico Harlan, “Vatican and China Reach ‘Provisional’ Deal on Appointment of Bishops,” Washington Post, September 22, 2018. Corey Dickstein, "House Lawmakers Confused over US Military’s Goals in Syria as Pentagon Maintains Focus on ISIS," Stars and Stripes, September 26, 2018. Joshua Keating, “Why John Bolton is So Obsessed with the International Criminal Court," Slate, September 10, 2018.   Base Redevelopment Forum, Association of Defense Communities, Portland, Maine, October 8-10, 2018. The Hell of Good Intentions: America’s Foreign Policy Elite and the Decline of U.S. Primacy by Stephen M. Walt, Book Forum with the author, Cato Institute, October 17, 2018.   Music and Production by Tre Hester.

What happens when a libertarian, a conservative hawk, and a constitutional powers specialist walk into a podcast studio? 'Net Assessment' happens. Welcome to the hottest new national security podcast hosted by Melanie Marlowe, Christopher Preble, and Bryan McGrath. This is a show about competing visions of America's role in the world. In each episode, they will be discussing a featured article, airing their grievances, and giving attaboys.  In the first episode of this bi-weekly series, our hosts introduce themselves and their hopes for this podcast. They tackle this episode's featured article, Adrian Lewis' "The Ivory Tower and Academic Ignorance of What the Armed Forces Actually Do," published by Task & Purpose. They also discuss the role of American seapower and, of course, Twitter feuds. Don't forget to subscribe to Net Assessment on your podcast app of choice.    Adrian Lewis, “The Ivory Tower And Academic Ignorance Of What The Armed Forces Actually Do,” Task and Purpose, September 20, 2018. Ken Buck, “Congress, Take Your War Powers Back,” Wall Street Journal, September 24, 2018. Dion Nissenbaum, “Top U.S. Diplomat Backed Continuing Support for Saudi War in Yemen Over Objections of Staff,” Wall Street Journal, September 20, 2018. Nicholas Kristof, “Be Outraged by America’s Role in Yemen’s Misery,” New York Times, September 26, 2018. Claudia Grisales and Corey Dickstein, “Vice Adm. Faller: 'I Was Cleared of All Wrongdoing' in 'Fat Leonard' Case,” Stars and Stripes, September 25, 2018. Chico Harlan, “Vatican and China Reach ‘Provisional’ Deal on Appointment of Bishops,” Washington Post, September 22, 2018. Corey Dickstein, "House Lawmakers Confused over US Military’s Goals in Syria as Pentagon Maintains Focus on ISIS," Stars and Stripes, September 26, 2018. Joshua Keating, “Why John Bolton is So Obsessed with the International Criminal Court," Slate, September 10, 2018 Base Redevelopment Forum, Association of Defense Communities, Portland, Maine, October 8-10, 2018. The Hell of Good Intentions: America’s Foreign Policy Elite and the Decline of U.S. Primacy by Stephen M. Walt, Book Forum with the author, Cato Institute, October 17, 2018.   Music and Production by Tre Hester.

Foreign policy expert Stephen M. Walt, Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Affairs and Faculty Chair of the International Security Program, talks about everything from Spider-man to ISIS. Watch highlights from this interview on YouTube: https://youtu.be/WMIcY8NB9ww?list=PLp1QSxtgPnf5jtL09yzdIlpSuNMOijtm9 More about Stephen Walt: http://www.belfercenter.org/experts/213/stephen_m_walt.html Original Release Date: October 27, 2015

As difficult it is to accept, there may be no loosening of the grip ISIS currently holds over its territory, at least not any time soon. Our guest, Stephen M. Walt, begins to come to terms with this unpleasant situation in a new article for Foreign Policy magazine,“What Should We Do if the Islamic State Wins?” His answer is not an inspiring one, but one based on the facts as he sees them: We will have to live with it. On Point of Inquiry this week, Walt, a professor of international affairs at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government and a Fellow of the Academy of Arts and Sciences, explores with host Josh Zepps the historical precedence for successful revolutionary movements and their near-intractability once they’ve claimed power. According to Walt, once established, these revolutionary regimes will either continue to act as dangerous rogues who are isolated and contained by neighboring countries, or eventually moderate themselves to the point where even the U.S. may eventually be able to make formal connections and begin to do business.   The Islamic State’s potential to become a major power (or rather its lack of potential), the unreliability of personal accounts from inside ISIS, and American moral hubris all weigh into this fascinating discussion on Point of Inquiry.

Former Open Society Fellow Evgeny Morozov, Anne Nelson, Stephen M. Walt, and Scott Malcomson discuss whether repressive governments have actually benefitted from the Internet, and what activists need to know to avoid the mistakes of the past. Speakers: Evgeny Morozov, Anne Nelson, Stephen M. Walt, Scott Malcomson. (Recorded: February 7, 2011)

A panel featuring John J. Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago and Stephen M. Walt of Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government. "The Israel Lobby" was originally published in the London Review of Books in March 2006. It provoked both howls of outrage and cheers of gratitude for challenging what had been a taboo issue in America: the impact of the Israel lobby on U.S. foreign policy. Now in a work of major importance, Mearsheimer and Walt deepen and expand their argument and confront recent developments in Lebanon and Iran. From the World Beyond the Headlines Series.