Paragraphs

A favorite icon for cigarette manufacturers across China since the mid-twentieth century has been the panda, with factories from Shanghai to Sichuan using cuddly cliché to market tobacco products. The proliferation of panda-branded cigarettes coincides with profound, yet poorly appreciated, shifts in the worldwide tobacco trade. Over the last fifty years, transnational tobacco companies and their allies have fueled a tripling of the world's annual consumption of cigarettes. At the forefront is the China National Tobacco Corporation, now producing forty percent of cigarettes sold globally. What's enabled the manufacturing of cigarettes in China to flourish since the time of Mao and to prosper even amidst public health condemnation of smoking? 

 

In Poisonous Pandas, an interdisciplinary group of scholars comes together to tell that story. They offer novel portraits of people within the Chinese polity—government leaders, scientists, tax officials, artists, museum curators, and soldiers—who have experimentally revamped the country's pre-Communist cigarette supply chain and fitfully expanded its political, economic, and cultural influence. These portraits cut against the grain of what contemporary tobacco-control experts typically study, opening a vital new window on tobacco—the single largest cause of preventable death worldwide today.

You can read the Introduction and Chapter 1 online.

About the editors

 
Matthew Kohrman is Associate Professor of Anthropology at Stanford University.
 
Gan Quan is the Director of Tobacco Control of the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease.
 
Liu Wennan is Editor for the Institute of Modern History at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

 

Robert N. Proctor is Professor of the History of Science at Stanford University.
All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Books
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Stanford University Press
Authors
Matthew Kohrman
Gan Quan
Liu Wennan
Robert Proctor
Number
978-1503602-06-9
Paragraphs

This report was produced for the Abe Fellows Global Forum 2017 symposiums on climate change, held in partnership with Stanford University's Walter H. Shorenstein Asia Pacific Research Center (Abe Global | Stanford, October 20, 2017) and the Asia Society Texas Center (Abe Global | Houston, October 18, 2017), respectively. 

Energy-intensive production has been both a leading contributor to climate change as well as one of the keys to modern economic growth over the last several centuries. In the post-WWII era, the “economic miracles” of Asian growth—starting with Japan, and followed by South Korea, Taiwan, China, and now increasingly India—have lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. At the same time, these “economic miracles” have created huge pollution problems which have adversely affected the health of millions of people while speeding up the effects of climate change.

Some early developers from this group—including Japan—have made efforts to clean up their air and water, created more energy efficient economies, lowered their carbon footprints and contributed to initiatives to slow global warming. The Fukushima nuclear power plant disaster forced Japan to take even more aggressive action to reduce energy consumption and lessen its impact on the global environment. In contrast, the United States, as a sizeable nation-state both in its geographic area and economy, is one of the world’s largest polluters and recently made recent headlines when it withdrew from the Paris Agreement negotiated at the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP21).

Putting into place effective measures to curtail climate change while creating sustainable societies requires international cooperation. The series of extreme weather events in the US in 2017 are only some the most recent disasters to remind us of climate change’s threat to our economy, our society, and our individual daily lives.

 

All Publications button
1
Publication Date
Journal Publisher
Abe Fellowship Program and Social Science Research Council
Authors
Arimura, Toshi H, Buntrock, Dana, Knox-Hayes, Janelle, Lipscy, Phillip Y and Tanaka, Shinsuke
Authors
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

Young Russian and U.S.-based scholars from a variety of science and social science disciplines met at Stanford to tackle emerging issues in nuclear security.

How can a new generation of scholars from around the world work together to prevent the use of nuclear weapons, from nuclear terrorism to developments in North Korea? A summit hosted at Stanford’s Center for International Security and Cooperation sought answers to that question—and more.

The third meeting of the Stanford-National Research Nuclear University MEPhI (Moscow Engineering Physics Institute) Young Professionals Nuclear Forum, held May 2-4 at CISAC, brought together young Russian and U.S.-based scholars from a variety of science and social science disciplines to explore how to use thoughtful, cooperative approaches to solve these pressing international nuclear security issues.

Dr. Siegfried Hecker, a senior fellow at the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, emeritus, and an internationally recognized expert in nuclear risk reduction, organized the summit. Opening the forum, Dr. Hecker stressed that while U.S.-Russian relations continue to be complicated and cooperation in the nuclear sphere has virtually come to a stop, “the younger generation of nuclear professionals should be prepared to collaborate again once the relations between the two governments turn for the better.”

The group of Stanford and Russian scholars took part in two day-long exercises. Day one included an exercise in risk analysis of the threat of radiological terrorism from the perspective of the attacker, tasking the participants with comparing the risks of carrying out an attack using a radiological dispersal device versus carrying out an attack on a spent nuclear fuel cask. On the second day, scholars engaged in a detailed simulation of U.S. and North Korean approaches to the denuclearization of North Korea to be discussed at the proposed June summit between the U.S. and North Korea. CISAC affiliates Larry Brandt, Chaim Braun, and former national lab experts Len Connell (SNL) and James Toevs (LANL) joined Dr. Hecker to advise the teams.

Working in mixed groups of Russian and Stanford scholars, one group represented the U.S. perspective; the other the North Korean. They explored the risks of maintaining or eliminating different nuclear facilities and activities in North Korea. In the exercise, it quickly became clear that the North Korean team was aiming to keep a hedge for the future and not give away all nuclear options. Meanwhile, the U.S. team sought to eliminate much of the immediate risk posed by North Korea’s nuclear program, claiming some peaceful nuclear facilities and activities might eventually be possible but they cannot allow North Korea the ability to reconstitute its weapons quickly.

So—who won the exercise?

For Dr. Hecker: “nobody won.” That wasn’t the point. But, he said,  “what was really interesting was that they came up with really reasonable compromises—on both the North Korean and American sides.”

View photos from the summit

About CISAC

The Center for International Security and Cooperation tackles the most critical security issues in the world today. Founded in 1983, CISAC has built on its research strengths to better understand an increasingly complex international environment. It is part of Stanford's Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies (FSI). Though scholarly research, fellowships, and teaching, CISAC is educating the next generation of leaders in international security and creating policy impact on a wide variety of issues to help build a safer world.

 

 

Hero Image
All News button
1
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

This is an excerpt of the the article, which was first published in Stanford News. You can read the whole article here.

A Stanford-led study in China has revealed for the first time high levels of a potentially fatal tapeworm infection among school-age children. The researchers suggest solutions that could reduce infections in this sensitive age range and possibly improve education outcomes and reduce poverty.

The study, published in PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, focuses on Taenia solium, a tapeworm that infects millions of impoverished people worldwide and can cause a disorder of the central nervous system called neurocysticercosis. The World Health Organization estimates that the infection is one of the leading causes of epilepsy in the developing world and results in 29 percent of epilepsy cases in endemic areas. It is thought to affect about 7 million people in China alone.

All News button
1
616 Serra StreetEncina Hall E301Stanford, CA94305-6055
0
chin_hao_huang.jpg
Ph.D.
Chin-Hao Huang joins the Walter H. Shorenstein Asia-Pacific Center as the Lee Kong Chian NUS-Stanford Fellow on Contemporary Southeast Asia from Yale-NUS College where he is assistant professor of political science. His research interests focus on the international relations of East Asia, Southeast Asian politics, and Chinese foreign policy. During his time at Shorenstein APARC, Huang will carry out research on the conditions under which the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is more or less likely to achieve cooperation from external major powers like China, particularly in such regional flashpoints as the South China Sea. Huang’s research has been published in The China QuarterlyThe China Journal, and International Peacekeeping, and in edited volumes through Oxford University Press and Routledge, among others. He received the American Political Science Association (APSA) Foreign Policy Section Best Paper Award (2014) for his research on China’s compliance behavior in multilateral security institutions. His book manuscript under preparation for review is on Power, Restraint, and China’s Rise and explains how, when, and why Chinese foreign policy decision-makers exercise restraint in international security. He received his PhD in political science from the University of Southern California and BS with honors from Georgetown University.  chinhao.huang@yale-nus.edu.sgT (US): (765) 464.9578T (Singapore): +65.8661.4050
Visiting Scholar
2018-2019 Lee Kong Chian NUS-Stanford Fellow on Contemporary Southeast Asia
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

On April 27, 2018, the Shorenstein APARC Korea Program held a special public panel discussion following the dramatic summit that took place but hours earlier that day between North Korea’s Kim Jong-un and South Korean President Moon Jae-in at the village of Panmunjom. Titled “North Korea Summit Diplomacy: Round 2,” the panel featured Gi-Wook Shin, director of APARC; Kathleen Stephens, the William J. APARC fellow in the Korea Program and former ambassador to South Korea; Philip Yun, executive director and chief operating officer of Ploughshares Fund; and Yong Suk Lee, Korea Program deputy director, who moderated the discussion.

Same Movie, Different Actors?

Panelists admitted to feeling a sense of déjà vu. “We’re watching a replay of an old movie,” observed Professor Shin. “There are new actors, but will it be more than that?” They agreed, however, that the fact the summit happened at all was still a sign of progress. “It’s great that inter-Korean dialog is back after a decade of confrontation,” stated Professor Shin. “But is it really possible to achieve complete denuclearization?” he continued. “How far will the North go, and what will it get in return?”

Noting that similar optimism surrounded talks held by the Koreas in 2000—only for it to ultimately amount to little—the panel argued that a key difference between this summit and previous ones was the nature of the actors, particularly the North Korean representation.

“What has changed from past efforts?”, Shin asked the audience. “Kim Jong-un grew up; he was groomed to behave like a king, and we saw him [at the summit] acting like one.” Ambassador Stephens added that “Kim wants to present himself as a different kind of Korean leader, a respected leader of a normal state; the complete opposite style from his predecessors.”

Breaks from the past exist on the South Korean side as well. “This was a process driven by South Korea in a way we’ve never seen before,” said Stephens. “For South Koreans, it’s amazing to see that the leaders were not using interpreters, they were just speaking Korean; it underscores the nationalist issue underpinning this conflict, which the Americans need to be aware of.”

No seats at the Table

The U.S. administration’s reaction to the summit was swift, with President Trump tweeting both that the U.S. people should be proud and, perhaps more interestingly, praising President Xi of China for his support that has made the recent breakthrough possible.  

However, Yun expressed concern about “Japan and China feel[ing] left out.” He noted that this might yet again prove to be another instance of a Kim dynasty member setting other actors against each other for North Korea’s benefit, and that regional actors have doubts about the American level of commitment. “I think the Japanese are afraid the United States is going to cut a deal on long range missiles and then go home.”

“What we’re going to see regionally is a competition or a battle for Trump’s word,” he continued. “Who can be the last person to talk and convince him that their perspective is the correct one.”

Korea Summit Panel From left to right, Yong Suk Lee, Korea Program deputy director; Philip Yun, executive director and chief operating officer of Ploughshares Fund; Kathleen Stephens, the William J. APARC fellow in the Korea Program and former ambassador to South Korea; and Gi-Wook Shin, director of APARC.

(From left to right, Yong Suk Lee, Korea Program deputy director; Philip Yun, executive director and chief operating officer of Ploughshares Fund; Kathleen Stephens, the William J. APARC fellow in the Korea Program and former ambassador to South Korea; and Gi-Wook Shin, director of APARC.)

What Comes Next

Any optimism expressed by the panelists was further tempered with calls for patience on further progress. “Denuclearization of the North isn’t only difficult, it will take time,” said director Shin. “I want to be optimistic, but I must also be cautious.”

Additionally, change in the North will likely need to happen at a measured pace. “[I]n a place like the North, you can’t move from zero to 100,” said Yun.

Ambassador Stephens looked to the Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland as a hopeful precedence. While the sentiment of “we’ve tried this before” very much surrounded that process, it ultimately paved the opportunity for a final breakthrough, noted Stephens.

Time will only tell whether the summit is a true success or simply a repeat of the past. At the panel’s conclusion, Shin swapped out the earlier film analogy for one about sports. Comparing the recent diplomacy to a soccer game, Shin observed that “President Moon did a nice pass to Trump. But can Trump now score the goal?”

 

Watch their Coverage

http://abc7news.com/politics/whats-next-after-north-south-korean-leaders-meeting/3400659/

 


ABC 7 News reported on the panel event. Watch their coverage.

 

 

 

All News button
1
Paragraphs

On April 27, 2018, the leaders of the two Koreas are set to meet on the southern side of the demilitarized zone and sign a declaration of peace. In a carefully planned summit, negotiated in detail down to the dinner menu, Kim Jong Un and Moon Jae In will claim to have ended the suspended state of war between them and set the Korean peninsula firmly on the path to peace.

Do not be deceived, writes Daniel Sneider

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Commentary
Publication Date
Authors
Daniel C. Sneider
Subscribe to Northeast Asia