Landing the Paris Climate Agreement - Todd Stern on a Groundbreaking Document and What It Took to Make It Happen

In this interview with Nusrat F. Jafri, we explore her much-acclaimed biographical fiction, This Land We Call Home (Penguin, 2024). The novel traces the evolution of the Bhantu caste from the 1800s to the 2000s, offering a nuanced perspective on the shifting contours of minority identity across northern India. Jafri delves into the history of the Bhantu, a community labeled as “criminal tribe” under the British Criminal Tribes Act of 1871. She examines how the repeal of this Act in 1952, followed by the denotification of these communities, brought little respite. The replacement of the Act with the Habitual Offenders Act (1952) perpetuated systemic discrimination, continuing to single out and criminalize certain communities. Jafri critiques Indian democracy for failing to protect marginalized groups like the Bhantu—not only neglecting them but actively perpetuating systemic violence. The novel also sheds light on the community’s encounters with both social and state-sponsored violence, emphasizing the emancipatory potential of religious conversions. Yet, Jafri presents a complex view of this process, highlighting how conversion did not always equate to liberation, particularly for women and poorer members of the community. Drawing on her personal family history and extensive ethnographic research across northern and western India, Jafri raises a profound question for all democracies: How can democratic systems address historical prejudices and work toward creating a truly inclusive society? Nusrat F. Jafri is an award-winning cinematographer and author. Her debut non-fiction book, This Land We Call Home (Penguin, 2024), traces her family’s century-long history through themes of caste, identity and politics – shaping modern India. Her filmography includes Kuchh Bheege Alfaz, Pilibhit, Sujata, and Chacha Vidhayak Hain Hummare. Born in Lucknow, she currently resides in Mumbai. The interview was conducted by Anubha Anushree and Ishita Prasher. Lilit Hakobyan edited the podcast.

In the last decade the Court of Justice of the EU has rapidly developed its case-law on the enforcement of EU values. Following multiple cases in which the Court enforced provisions that instrumentalize the Rule of Law in actions involving the 'backsliding' Member States of Poland and Hungary, the question now arises as to whether EU action may be justified to protect the co-foundational value of democracy during national elections in the EU's Member States. The upcoming elections in the Federal Republic of Germany in February will bring these issues into sharp relief. In the latest RevDem Rule of Law podcast, Oliver Garner discusses these themes with Miriam Schuler (King's College London), whose PhD research analyzes the protection of values within the European Union.

In this conversation at the Review of Democracy, Marija Bartl – author of Reimagining Prosperity: Toward a New Imaginary of Law and Political Economy in the EU – warns that the post-2008 crisis of neoliberalism created an ideological vacuum that would either be filled by a new vision of shared prosperity or by tribal imaginaries. She explains why the EU, despite its neoliberal origins, might be uniquely placed to articulate such a new vision of prosperity, and argues that European law is already being transformed to support it.  Marija Bartl is a Professor of Private Law at Amsterdam Law School. Reimagining Prosperity: Toward a New Imaginary of Law and Political Economy in the EU has been published by Cambridge University Press and is available in open access.

In this conversation at the Review of Democracy, Zsuzsanna Szelényi discusses key questions in contemporary politics with a focus on European affairs. She explores the main priorities of Ursula von der Leyen’s second Commission and what might change as compared to her previous term. She also discusses the main challenges the EU faces when it comes to transatlantic relations and how Trump’s second term could impact the unfolding and outcome of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine – and whether the position and role of Hungary’s Orbán regime might change in international politics. Zsuzsanna Szelényi is the Director of the CEU Democracy Institute Leadership Academy, a former Member of Parliament in her native Hungary, and the author of Tainted Democracy. Viktor Orbán and the Subversion of Hungary.

We are thrilled to bring you the newest episode of our monthly special in cooperation with the Journal of Democracy. In the framework of this new partnership, authors discuss outstanding articles from the latest print issue of the Journal of Democracy. In this conversation, Harvard professors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt examine the various types of countermajoritarian institutions and reflect on which are democracy-enhancing and which can potentially subvert democracy. Levitsky and Ziblatt show the connections between the strong countermajoritarian features of the U.S. political system and its ongoing democratic backsliding. They also consider how the trade-offs between countermajoritarianism and democratic stability have played out across the globe. The conversation is based on Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt’s article “When Should the Majority Rule?” which has been published in the January 2025 (36/1) issue of the Journal of Democracy.

In this conversation at the Review of Democracy, Tom Theuns – author of Protecting Democracy in Europe: Pluralism, Autocracy and the Future of the EU – reflects on EU institutions’ rather narrow conception of democracy and their complicity in democratic backsliding in EU member states; considers how a more coherent and effective response to the latter processes could be designed; critiques the EU’s ‘membership fatalism’ and explains why he has proposed an expulsion mechanism; and positions his approach within political theory and discusses the reception of his ideas also beyond that field. Tom Theuns is a Senior Assistant Professor of Political Theory and European Politics at the Institute of Political Science, Leiden University. Protecting Democracy in Europe: Pluralism, Autocracy and the Future of the EU has been published by Hurst Publishers and Oxford University Press (US).

In this conversation with Sheri Berman, Professor of Political Science at Barnard College, we engage with her key argument that growing support for right-wing populism is primarily a consequence of mainstream parties’ failure to address popular concerns about immigration. We dissect the ‘representation gap’ argument, discuss alternative explanations (namely, the issue of racism and xenophobia), explore salient differences between center-left and center-right parties, and highlight strategies that mainstream parties have used and could use to respond to citizens’ concerns and demands on immigration. The conversation is based on Sheri Berman’s article, “Democracy and Diversity in Western Europe,” published in the October 2024 (35/4) issue of the Journal of Democracy

What were the defining events of 2024? Which new publications impressed us the most? What do we expect from the upcoming year in global politics and in terms of new intellectual trends?  Today, we, editors of the Review of Democracy bring you our traditional end of the year podcast. 2024 has been another exciting year for our journal. We have managed to expand in new directions, doubling our core team of editors and opening global horizons, while continuing to focus on our main thematic priorities – Democracy and Culture, the History of Ideas, Political Economy, and the Rule of Law. This episode features no fewer than nine speakers: co-managing editors Robert Nemeth – who acted as our host – and Ferenc Laczó, global editors Anubha Anushree, Ece Ozbey, and Gabriel Pereira as well as section heads Oliver Garner, Adrian Matus, Alexandra Medzibrodszky, and Kristóf Szombati. Enjoy the holidays – and don’t forget to return in early 2025 when we shall bring you more fresh analyses and reflections!

In this conversation at the Review of Democracy, Todd Stern – former United States Special Envoy for Climate Change – explains what made the Paris Climate Agreement such a groundbreaking document and what kind of bargaining and compromises it took to make it happen; discusses the place and role of the US within its broad coalition as well as his extensive engagement with his crucial Chinese partners; and considers major new possibilities to tackle climate change effectively and current obstacles to do so.

International law is a live instrument in the current global geopolitical crisis. This latest RevDem Rule of Law podcast, conducted by Konstantin Kipp with Professor Tom Ginsburg, reflects upon the potentially authoritarian nature of international law in its function of enabling relations between states. Authoritarian regimes have traditionally been reluctant to engage in robust forms of international cooperation. Reasons for this may include strong nationalist views, and concerns that cross-border engagement could invite interference in domestic affairs or constrain the government’s autonomy. Consequently, international law has largely been shaped by liberal democracies. However, this stance appears to be shifting in the 21st century. Just as authoritarian regimes once recognized the strategic value of adopting new constitutions and utilizing seemingly democratic institutions in order to gain legitimacy, they are now beginning to see international law as a potential tool to legitimize their policies and strengthen the pursuit of their preferences. This development was identified by Professor Tom Ginsburg in his 2020 article “Authoritarian International Law?” published in the American Journal of International Law. Half a decade on from this publication, Professor Ginsburg discusses his findings on this still-emerging phenomenon and considers its potential future developments. Past, Present, and Future Authoritarian International Law Ginsburg provides an introduction to the history of Authoritarian International Law (AIL), highlighting the pivotal turning point as marked by the year 2006. He claims that this was the peak for global democracies and that subsequently the story is one of decline.  The conversation explores current developments in international law, raising a concern that the United States’ potential shift towards isolationism could cede the international playing field to authoritarian forces like China or Russia, thereby fueling the development of AIL. Ginsburg describes AIL as “designed to extend the survival and reach of authoritarian rule across space and/or time.” AIL is seen as having the potential not only to secure the persistence of existing authoritarian regimes, but also to be a possible trigger for further authoritarianism. The podcast addresses the extent to which this feature is inherently embedded within AIL, given that liberal democracies tend to pose a challenge to authoritarian regimes. Ginsburg reflects upon whether there is a danger that authoritarians might create entirely new international legal systems and institutions, or else seek to capture and transform existing bodies. While an American return to isolationism might fuel the development of AIL, there is also significant concern that the U.S. could veer toward dictatorship during Donald Trump’s second presidency. Statements by President-elect Trump, such as suggestions that people “won’t have to vote anymore,” imply at the very least authoritarian aspirations. Ginsburg reflects upon whether U.S. isolationism is truly the main danger to international law, or instead whether a government under Donald Trump may actively engage in promoting AIL. Ginsburg offers his view on why, despite his authoritarian nature, Donald Trump will not be able to become the dictator of the United States of America. Authoritarian European Union Law? While the European Union continues to embody relatively strong democratic values among most Member States compared to other regions, right-wing populism with authoritarian aspirations has also been on the rise. The EU's most notable authoritarian leader, Viktor Orbán, has recently advocated that right-wing populists should “occupy” Brussels. Ginsburg considers whether the emergence of authoritarian EU law may be possible. One of the EU’s current strategies for addressing “backsliding” on its values, including democracy and the Rule of Law, is financial conditionality. It remains to be seen whether this tool may effectively halt the trend towards authoritarianism in the long term, or whether it may indeed exacerbate it. Ginsburg concludes his reflections on the supranational dimension of AIL by musing upon whether the Eurasian Economic Committee, discussed in his 2020 article, could evolve into a serious competitor that promotes authoritarian rather than democratic values in the Europe-Asia region. Preventing the Emergence of Authoritarian International Law Tom Ginsburg suggests that there is a strong possibility that the 21st century will be known more as an authoritarian century rather than a democratic one. The notion that international law guarantees a right to democratic governance has faced substantial criticism; Ginsburg challenges this idea as well. The podcast concludes with reflection upon the options for democratic countries to prevent international law becoming authoritarian. Could civil society – whether or not such societies aspire to be ‘open’ or not – prevent the authoritarian transformation of international law? Ginsburg concludes his contributions by emphasizing how recent developments in South Korea illustrate the vital role of civil society in the struggle for democracy. Such struggle, for democracy and against authoritarianism, is set to continue in the second half of the 2020s.