The Blurry Lines of Belonging (with Talia Shiff, Anna Skarpelis, and Elke Winter)

Massachusetts has long been a welcoming state to immigrants and migrant families. In the summer of 2023, its one-of-a-kind “right to shelter” law was put to the test when emergency shelters reached capacity. It was called a humanitarian crisis, and images of families sleeping on the floor of Logan Airport flooded the media. Although it is most noticed on a local level, migration is an ongoing global process that requires a structural response at all levels. In this episode, we speak to a lawyer/scholar, a nurse practitioner, and a city government official deeply involved with immigrant services and policies to better understand the scope of migration, the needs of newly arrived families, and also the varied responses of host communities.Monique Nguyen directs the Boston mayor’s office for immigrant advancement and explains why the word “crisis” mischaracterizes the realities of global migration. Massachusetts has made a moral and ethical commitment to helping people in need, and her office works to give migrants a pathway to stability and a foothold in their communities. Nurse practitioner and fellow with the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Maggie Sullivan delivers primary care to families in shelters. She offers a vivid picture of a migrant family’s experience in temporary shelters, and also describes the fortitude and skills individuals bring to Boston.Attorney and human rights scholar Jackie Bhabha directs the Weatherhead Center’s Research Cluster on Migration, where Sullivan is an affiliate. Bhabha eloquently describes both the theory and practice of helping migrants and immigrants within the framework of human rights. She also provides insights on other countries’ experiences hosting influxes of migrants and the need for preparation and coordination involving the highest levels of government.Guests:Jacqueline Bhabha, Faculty Associate; Chair, Weatherhead Research Cluster on Migration. Professor of the Practice of Health and Human Rights, Department of Global Health and Population; Director of Research, François-Xavier Bagnoud Center for Health and Human Rights, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health; Jeremiah Smith Jr. Lecturer on Law, Harvard Law School.Monique Tú Nguyen, Executive Director, Mayor's Office for Immigrant Advancement, City of Boston. Margaret (Maggie) Sullivan, Instructor and Health and Human Rights Fellow, FXB Center for Health and Human Rights, Harvard University; Board-Certified Family Nurse Practitioner, Boston Health Care for the Homeless. Host:Jessica Barnard, Program Manager for the Weatherhead Research Clusters on Migration and Global History.Related Links:Weatherhead Research Cluster on Migration, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs, Harvard UniversityMayor’s Office for Immigrant Advancement, City of BostonFrançois-Xavier Bagnoud (FXB) Center for Health and Human Rights, Harvard University“Reproductive healthcare in immigration detention: The imperative of informed consent” by Margaret Sullivan, Jacqueline Bhabha, et al. (The Lancet Regional Health—Americas, Volume 10, 100211, June 2022)“Health Rights for All: The Imperative of Including All Migrants” by Jacqueline Bhabha (Health and Human Rights Journal, Vol 25/1, 2023, pp. 223-226, March 30, 2023)“The imperative of sustaining (rather than destroying) frontline empathic solidarity for distress migrants” by Jacqueline Bhabha (Boston University International Law Journal, Volume 40:49, August 2022)“A Bridge Towards Tomorrow: Sampan speaks with Monique Tú Nguyen – Executive Director of the Mayor’s Office for Immigrant Advancement” by Christopher John Stevens (Sampan, Volume 53, Issue 9, May 10, 2024)Music Credits:“Goldfinch: Flight to the North” by Axletree. Source: Free Music Archive (CC BY 4.0 DEED)“Dorian” by Xylo-Ziko. Source: Free Music Archive (CC BY 4.0 DEED) This episode was produced, edited, and mixed by Michelle Nicholasen, Editor and Content Producer at the Weatherhead Center.Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:Weatherhead Center WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastYouTubeVimeo

People aged sixty-five and older make up the fastest growing population around the world, posing unique challenges to societies. A Harvard initiative called Social Technology for Global Aging Research is founded on the belief that there’s a great potential for technologies and interventions to benefit the elderly, but only if they are developed with a deep understanding of day-to-day life. In the scope of this collaboration, technology for the elderly covers a wide range of needs—from engineering hardware for mobility to designing living environments and even tackling the logistics of meeting friends for tea. It’s an expansive collaboration between Harvard scholars and their Chinese counterparts. We speak with four collaborators who share fascinating examples of their work.The founder of the initiative, Arthur Kleinman, believes that aging societies represent an unprecedented transformation of the global population that introduces a range of challenges. He emphasizes the need to bring together various disciplines—such as medical practitioners, engineers, and anthropologists, to name a few—to collaboratively solve problems the elderly face in their day to day lives. Much of the team’s research is conducted on the ground in China, where about 30 percent of the population of China will be sixty-five or older by 2050.Fawwaz Habbal points out the particular challenges of engineering products and services for this constituency, but also highlights the great insights that emerge from using a multidisciplinary approach. Ann Forsyth discusses the desire of the elderly to “age in place,” and what that means from an urban planning and housing perspective. The locations that may be desirable at one stage in life often change in older age. In China, for example, many older people have moved from the rural areas to the cities, and culturally it’s frowned upon to relocate parents to assisted living facilities.Designing social interventions can be just as powerful as designing an effective piece of hardware. Drawing on his vast experience with older patients and elder resources, Hong-Tu Chen describes a simple method for fostering connections between children and their elderly parents. All four scholars share fascinating stories about unintended consequences of new technologies, and surprisingly simple interventions that can have a powerful impact on quality of life.Guests:Arthur Kleinman, Faculty Associate. Esther and Sidney Rabb Professor, Department of Anthropology, Harvard University; Professor of Medical Anthropology in Global Health and Social Medicine; Professor of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School.Hong-Tu Chen, Assistant Professor of Psychology, Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School.Ann Forsyth, Faculty Associate. Ruth and Frank Stanton Professor of Urban Planning; Interim Chair, Department of Urban Planning and Design, Harvard Graduate School of Design.Fawwaz Habbal, senior lecturer in applied physics, Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences. Related Links:Social Technology for Global Aging Research Initiative at Harvard University“Social Technology: An Interdisciplinary Approach to Improving Care for Older Adults”By Arthur Kleinman, Hong-Tu Chen, Fawwaz Habbal, et al. (Frontiers in Public Health, December 9, 2021) “Making Communities Age-Friendly: Lessons From Implemented Programs” by Ann Forsyth et al. (Journal of Planning Literature, 2023)“Climate Change, Aging, and Well-being: How Residential Setting Matters” by Ann Forsyth et al. (Housing Policy Debate, Volume 33, 2023)“Technological Devices To Help Older People beyond the Home: An Inventory and Assessment Focusing on the Neighborhood and City Scales” by Ann Forsyth et al. (Cities & Health, 2022)Reshaping Engineering Education: Addressing Complex Human Challenges by Fawwaz Habbal et al. (forthcoming, Springer, January 2024)The Soul of Care: The Moral Education of a Husband and a Doctor by Arthur Kleinman (Penguin Random House, 2019)“How Are China and Its Middle Class Handling Aging and Mental Health?” by Arthur Kleinman in The China Questions: Critical Insights into a Rising Power edited by Jennifer Rudolph and Michael Szonyi (Harvard University Press, 2018)Music credit: Cinematic Documentary by Aleksey Chistilin, Pixabay This episode was produced, edited, and mixed by Michelle Nicholasen, Editor and Content Producer at the Weatherhead Center.Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:Weatherhead Center WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastYouTubeVimeo

When the Wagner mercenary group staged a near coup in Moscow in June, it was seen as the greatest challenge to Vladimir Putin’s regime in decades. Though it didn’t come to fruition, it nevertheless exposed some of the fissures in Putin’s ironclad control over the military and the course of the war on Ukraine. Could it be a harbinger of future revolts? How do Russian citizens feel about the continuation of the war? We speak with three scholars of history and political science to find out what this event might mean for Russia’s war machine and for Ukraine’s counteroffensive.The Wagner rebellion may open the possibility of future revolts, but only if Ukraine’s counteroffensive makes more progress, says Serhii Plokhy. He reminds us of Russia’s past defeats and its pattern of regime change linked to failures on the battlefield.In spite of its grave losses, Ukrainian morale remains high, says Alexadra Vacroux. But the war is forcing the population to undergo a major demographic shift, which will have a profound impact on the country’s recovery.  Sasha de Vogel gives insight into public opinion in Russia, the consequences for speaking out against the war, and why there is so little civil resistance. She dispels Western myths about the suppression and repression of Russian citizens and believes Putin will keep fighting this war until death.Finally, the scholars share their opinions on what is needed to end this devastating war. This episode was produced in collaboration with the Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies and the Ukrainian Research Institute, both at Harvard University.Host:Erin Goodman, Executive Director of the Weatherhead CenterGuests:Sasha de Vogel, Postdoctoral Researcher, Authoritarian Politics Lab, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Former Raphael Morrison Dorman Memorial Postdoctoral Fellow, Weatherhead Scholars Program.Serhii Plokhy, Faculty Associate. Mykhailo S. Hrushevs'kyi Professor of Ukrainian History, Department of History; Director, Ukrainian Research Institute, Harvard University.Alexandra Vacroux, Executive Director, Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies, Harvard University. Producer/Director:Michelle Nicholasen, Editor and Content Producer, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs.Related Links:“A War With No End in Sight” by Sasha de Vogel (Dissent Magazine, April 2023)“Anti-opposition crackdowns and protest: the case of Belarus, 2000–2019” by Sasha de Vogel (Post-Soviet Affairs, Volume 38, 2022)“Feminized forced migration: Ukrainian war refugees” by Alexandra Vacroux et al. (Women's Studies International Forum [Women and the 2022 War in Ukraine]:1-10 2023)“How to Help Ukraine Stand Its Ground” by Alexandra Vacroux (Boston Globe, February 23, 2023)“Are the West’s Sanctions on Russia Working?” by Alexandra Vacroux et al. (Just Money, October 31, 2022)“Insight on Syria: What Are Putin's Motives?” by Alexandra Vacroux et al. (Epicenter, April 3, 2018)The Russo-Ukrainian War: The Return of History by Serhii Plokhy (W. W. Norton, May 2023)The Frontline: Essays on Ukraine’s Past and Present by Serhii Plokhy (Harvard University Press, November 2021)“Through the Ashes of the Minsk Agreements” by Lidia Powirska (Epicenter, May 18, 2022)Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:Weatherhead Center WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastYouTubeVimeo This episode was produced, edited, and mixed by Michelle Nicholasen, Editor and Content Producer at the Weatherhead Center.Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:Weatherhead Center WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastYouTubeVimeo

The presidential election in Turkey this spring is shaping up to be the most consequential in decades. Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has led the country for twenty years, is facing the staunchest opposition in his career in the form of an unprecedented coalition of six parties, called the “Table of Six.” Their presidential candidate, Kemal Kilicdaroglu, has been widely described as low-key, bland, and uncharismatic. But could he be the perfect person to unseat Erdogan? To get us up to speed on this exciting election, we speak with three Graduate Student Associates whose research takes us into the governance, politics, and culture of Turkey—past and present.SZ sets the stage by invoking the typical raucous mood of Turkish elections through political songs that celebrate various social identities. Although Erdogan silenced the usual soundscape of elections this year by banning public music out of respect for earthquake victims, music nonetheless has emerged. How does a leader go from being called a “democratizer” to a “strongman”? Andrew O’Donohue explains how Erdogan consolidated the power of the presidency and weakened government institutions during his twenty-year leadership. He notes there are some signs of weakening support for Erdogan, including recent defections from his party and public protests last year against the conviction of the mayor of Istanbul—and would-be presidential contender— for insulting public officials.Voter polarization makes it difficult to predict the outcome of the elections, explains Ahmet Akbiyik, and his own research has shown the media landscape is equally polarized. He points out the pitfalls of government-friendly businesses owning powerful entities like television stations, newspapers, and even weapons manufacturing.The scholars emphasize that Turkey holds a unique geopolitical position in central Asia, as it remains a top trading partner with Russia, but also supplies weapons to Ukraine. It’s also a member of NATO and has been seeking membership in the European Union, so any change of government will have an impact on all these factors.If Erdogan loses, will he accept the outcome of the elections and let go of power? If he wins, will the elections be seen as fair? Will the one million citizens displaced by the earthquake be able to vote? The scholars debate how the public may respond to the election outcome, and whether or not a new regime can strengthen Turkey’s democracy. Host:Erin Goodman, Director, Weatherhead Scholars Program.Guests:Ahmet Akbiyik, Graduate Student Associate. PhD Candidate, Program in Political Economy and Government, Harvard Kennedy School.Andrew O’Donohue, Graduate Student Associate. PhD Candidate, Department of Government, Harvard University.SZ, Graduate Student Associate. PhD Candidate, Department of Music, Harvard University.Producer/Director:Michelle Nicholasen, Editor and Content Producer, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs.Related Links:Ahmet Akbiyik personal websiteDemocracies Divided: The Global Challenge of Political Polarization, edited by Thomas Carothers and Andrew O'Donohue (Brookings Institution Press, 2019)“Turkey’s Changing Media Landscape” by Andrew O’Donohue et al. (Center for American Progress)“A Turkish court sentenced Erdogan’s rival to prison. That could backfire.” by Andrew O’Donohue et al. (Monkey Cage, The Washington Post)“Eirini Tornesaki: Exploring Intercultural Dialogue through Greek Music” by SZ (American Music Research Center)The songs featured in this podcast episode include "Hadi bakalım, kolay gelsin," “Bayraktar - Ukrainian War Song,” and “Müslüm Gürses.”Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:WCFIA WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastYouTubeVimeo This episode was produced, edited, and mixed by Michelle Nicholasen, Editor and Content Producer at the Weatherhead Center.Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:Weatherhead Center WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastYouTubeVimeo

Green technology has come a long way, to the extent that it can, in theory, be scaled up to solve the world’s energy problems. If this is true, then why does the US lag so far behind in transitioning away from fossil fuels? This episode addresses the politics of climate change by looking at the sources of public distrust. To frame the discussion, three scholars investigate the nature of major economic transformations, the youth movement, and what we can learn from other countries.Traveling into the heart of US fossil fuel communities, Dustin Tingley reports on the work of his team to uncover the sentiments of the citizens who will be most affected when fossil fuel plants are closed. The common theme is a lack of belief that the government will offer a social safety net when workers lose their jobs and when towns lose their revenue. Jeff Colgan takes us through some major energy transitions of the past and explains why green energy is different. He also points to strategies citizens in other countries have leveraged to move their governments forward. Drawing on original research, Aleksandra Conevska explores differences between youth and adult political behavior regarding climate action, and separately on the unintended consequences of green party politics. Ending on a hopeful note, the group explains there are definitely new green jobs on the horizon, especially in the trades, and it’s time to give vocational education more attention.Host:Erin Goodman, Director, Weatherhead Scholars Program.Guests:Dustin Tingley, Faculty Associate; Chair, Weatherhead Research Cluster on Climate Change. Professor of Government, Department of Government, Harvard University. Jeff Colgan, Richard Holbrooke Associate Professor, Department of Political Science and Watson Institute for Public and International Affairs, Brown University.Aleksandra Conevska, Graduate Affiliate, Weatherhead Research Cluster on Climate Change. PhD Candidate, Department of Government, Harvard University. Producer/Director:Michelle Nicholasen, Editor and Content Producer, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs.Related Links:Climate Solutions Lab at Brown UniversitySailing the Water's Edge: The Domestic Politics of American Foreign Policy (Princeton University Press, 2016)“Embedded Liberalism from the Ground Up: Credibility and Climate Transitions” by Dustin Tingley et al. (Working Paper).“International Cooperation and Natural Disasters: Evidence from Trade Agreements” by Aleksandra Conevska (International Studies Quarterly, 2021).“Weathering Electricity Demand? Seasonal Variation in Electricity Consumption among Off-Grid Households in Rural India” by Aleksandra Conevska et al. (Energy Research & Social Science, 2020).Uncertain Futures: How to Break the Climate Impasse by Dustin Tingley (forthcoming).Partial Hegemony: Oil Politics and International Order by Jeff D. Colgan (Oxford University Press, 2021).Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:WCFIA WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastSoundcloudVimeo This episode was produced, edited, and mixed by Michelle Nicholasen, Editor and Content Producer at the Weatherhead Center.Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:Weatherhead Center WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastYouTubeVimeo

There’s a shadow over World Cup Soccer this year, and it’s become impossible to separate the sports from the politics. Host country Qatar gained notoriety for bribes, exploitation of workers, and antigay laws. In this episode, a group of athletes and scholars take a close look at the concept of “sportswashing” and consider what’s at stake for professional athletes who might want to take a stand against a host country’s civil and human rights abuses. In his role as an activist, Justin Morrow explains some of the successes of Black Players for Change, an organization he cofounded to address discrimination against Blacks in soccer and all sports. Susie Petruccelli talks about her efforts to challenge FIFA’s wage gap for women players. Sociologist Isabel Jijón gives examples of how sportswashing can backfire for a host country. She shares some feedback from her students about the backlash against athletes who stand up.High-profile players can bring attention to important issues but also expose themselves to retaliation by their governments. The group talks about the video created by the Australian National Soccer team representing a collective action to speak out against human rights abuses in Qatar. They also consider whether high-profile athletes have a moral obligation to use their platform and influence to bring injustices to light.Disclaimer: This podcast was recorded on November 10, 2022, before the Iranian national team refused to sing the national anthem at its first game against England; before Iranian soccer player Voria Ghafouri was arrested for his criticism of his government’s crackdown on women’s rights protesters; and before FIFA threatened to ban players who wore rainbow armbands. Guest Host:Ted Gilman, Executive Director, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs.Guests:Susie Petruccelli, Global Sports Fellow, Weatherhead Research Cluster on Global Transformations (WIGH). Author and Producer.Justin Morrow, 2021–2022 Visiting Fellow, Weatherhead Research Cluster on Global Transformations (WIGH). Executive Director, Black Players for Change; Technical Development Manager, Maple Leaf Sport and Entertainment.Isabel Jijón, Harvard College Fellow, Department of Sociology, Harvard University. Research Consultant, Child Protection and Development Team, UNICEF.Producer/Director:Michelle Nicholasen, Editor and Content Producer, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs.Related Links:“Australia's National Soccer Team Talks Human Rights Ahead of Qatar's World Cup” (NowThis News, YouTube)“World Cup Teams Drop Rainbow Armbands After FIFA Threats” (CBC Sports, November 21, 2022)Raised a Warrior: A Memoir of Soccer, Grit and Leveling the Playing Field (Apollo Publishers, 2021)Black Players for Change“The Moral Glocalization of Sport: Local Meanings of Football in Chota Valley, Ecuador” by Isabel Jijón et al. (International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 2017)Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:WCFIA WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastSoundcloudVimeo This episode was produced, edited, and mixed by Michelle Nicholasen, Editor and Content Producer at the Weatherhead Center.Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:Weatherhead Center WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastYouTubeVimeo

Lebanon has been called many different things: a gem of the Middle East, a failed state, a geopolitical Gordian knot (or nightmare). Its financial system has recently collapsed, people cannot find basic services, and residents are still recovering from the massive Beirut explosion of 2020. It may be a complex country to wrap your mind around, but our four scholars tell you everything you need to know about daily life in Lebanon: how are people getting by, who is in control, the geopolitics of the region, and the history behind it.Lana Salman shares a detailed account of daily life in Lebanon, where people must wait hours in line to obtain goods and services. The civil uprising really began back in October 2019, and it was different from others, explains Carmen Geha, because it was so widespread. Citizen protests have continued since then, and have increased in the aftermath of the Beirut explosion in 2020 for which no one has taken responsibility, they note.After decades of witnessing corruption at the highest levels, the Lebanese may be at a tipping point. Geha and Salman share examples of citizens creating their own organizations to address humanitarian needs, as an alternative to relying on the default sectarian sponsored hand-outs.To understand the levers of control, Melani Cammett explains the power-sharing structure of the government, and she and Geha emphasize that the current leaders are the unpunished perpetrators of war crimes (“warlords”) from the chaotic, multiparty Lebanese civil war (1975–1990).Nate George offers important background on the steps leading up to the current financial crisis and describes the geopolitical crossroads Lebanon occupies today in the Middle East. He also explains why Western countries are no longer eager to support Lebanon during the current fiscal crisis.Lebanon indeed has a complex history and remains an important player in the Middle East. With a mix of anecdote and history, our conversation is a sobering primer on the many layers and realities of Lebanon.Host:Erin Goodman, Director, Weatherhead Scholars Program.Guests:Melani Cammett, Director, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs; Clarence Dillon Professor of International Affairs, Department of Government, Harvard University; Professor in the Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. Carmen Geha, Visiting Scholar, Weatherhead Scholars Program (fall 2021). Associate Professor of Public Administration, Department of Political Studies and Public Administration, American University of Beirut. Nate George, Raphael Morrison Dorman Memorial Postdoctoral Fellow, Weatherhead Scholars Program. PhD, Department of History, Rice University. Lana Salman, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Middle East Initiative, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs. Related Links:“The United States and the Middle East” by Nate George (America in the World, 1776 to the Present: A Supplement to the Dictionary of American History, Charles Scribner’s Sons, 2016)“Commitment to the “National” in Post-Conflict Countries: Public and Private Security in Lebanon” by Melani Cammett, Dominika Kruszewska, Christiana Parreira, and Sami Atallah (Journal of Conflict Resolution, forthcoming 2022)“Coethnicity Beyond Clientelism: Insights from an Experimental Study on Religion and Political Behavior in Lebanon” by Melani Cammett, Dominika Kruszewska, Christiana Parreira, and Sami Atallah (Politics & Religion, forthcoming 2022)“Debtscapes: The Politics of Social Reproduction in the Post-Revolution City” by Lana Salman (Paper, Middle East Initiative, August 2021)Civil Society and Political Reform in Lebanon and Libya: Transition and Constraint by Carmen Geha (Routledge, 2016)Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:WCFIA WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastSoundcloudVimeo This episode was produced, edited, and mixed by Michelle Nicholasen, Editor and Content Producer at the Weatherhead Center.Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:Weatherhead Center WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastYouTubeVimeo

Pulling out of Afghanistan was the top foreign policy event of 2021. Perhaps overlooked in the collective relief to be done with this twenty-year war is the fact that the US had to negotiate with terrorists to get there. In fact, it ceded an entire country to a violent, extremist group. Throughout history, leaders—including those from the US—have vowed never to negotiate with terrorists, but then reverse course. In this two-part episode, three scholars of history, international relations, and foreign policy discuss historic examples and the complexities of negotiating with violent—even murderous—groups.While part 1 explores the caveats of labeling a group “terrorist,” part 2 addresses how to negotiate with terrorists without legitimizing their methods or ideology, and address what happens to a nation’s reputation when they give in, give up, or back down in the face of extremist groups. If the US is willing to negotiate with the Taliban, should it also be open to negotiating with Hamas or ISIS or Al-Qaeda? Jytte Klausen points out that if the demands of the adversaries are reasonable and pragmatic, there is usually an opportunity to work together, the operative word being “if.” Annette Idler describes the successful negotiations with the FARC in Colombia as an example of careful planning and evaluation before the actual talks, and emphasizes the importance of understanding the attitudes, opinions and experiences of local citizens in a conflict zone.The concern that negotiating with groups that use terror and violence will somehow encourage or legitimize their methods does not bear out, according to Fredrik Logevall. He compares the US retreat from Vietnam to that of Afghanistan and finds fascinating similarities, but also key differences, such as lack of public engagement on the latter.Non-state armed groups are part of the new global security picture, Klausen believes, and she highlights regions that are volatile today, such as India/Pakistan/Kashmir. We should not underestimate the importance of Afghanistan in regional stability, she warns. Since extremists groups are likely here to stay, Idler describes a multilevel approach to incorporating non-state actors into foregin policy strategies.Host:Erin Goodman, Director, Weatherhead Scholars Program.Guests:Annette Idler, Weatherhead Center Visiting Scholar, Weatherhead Scholars Program. Director, Global Security Programme, Pembroke College, Oxford University. Jytte Klausen, Lawrence A. Wien Professor of International Cooperation, Brandeis University.  Fredrik Logevall, Weatherhead Center Faculty Associate. Laurence D. Belfer Professor of International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School; Professor of History, Department of History, Harvard University. Producer/Director:Michelle Nicholasen, Editor and Content Producer, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs.Related Links:Transforming the War on Drugs: Warriors, Victims and Vulnerable Regions edited by Annette Idler and Juan Carlos Garzón Vergara (Hurst, 2021)The Changing Character of Conflict PlatformCONPEACEJytte Klausen's Western Jihadism ProjectWestern Jihadism: A Thirty Year History by Jytte Klausen (Oxford University Press, 2021)JFK: Coming of Age in the American Century, 1917–1956 by Fredrik Logevall (Penguin Random House, 2021)“How to Talk to Terrorists” by Jonathan Powell (The Guardian, October 2014)Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:WCFIA WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastSoundcloudVimeo This episode was produced, edited, and mixed by Michelle Nicholasen, Editor and Content Producer at the Weatherhead Center.Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:Weatherhead Center WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastYouTubeVimeo

Pulling out of Afghanistan was the top foreign policy event of 2021. Perhaps overlooked in the collective relief to be done with this twenty-year war is the fact that the US had to negotiate with terrorists to get there. In fact, it ceded an entire country to a violent, extremist group. Throughout history, leaders—including those from the US—have vowed never to negotiate with terrorists, but then reverse course. In this two-part episode, three scholars of history, international relations, and foreign policy discuss historic examples and the complexities of negotiating with violent—even murderous—groups.Part 1 explores the caveats of labeling a group “terrorist.” Jytte Klausen explains the importance of having an internationally recognized designation, while Annette Idler notes that labels can be used for political reasons such as to garner aid or rally public support. Using Indochina and the Viet Cong as examples, Fred Logevall sheds light on early terrorist tactics. Sometimes violent groups evolve into conventional political actors, as did Sinn Fein, the political faction of the IRA, or the FARC in Colombia. (A few days after this recording the Biden Administration took FARC off the State Department’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations because it no longer engages in violence.) From Nixon, Reagan, and Thatcher to leaders in Spain, Turkey, and China: many heads of state have taken an absolutist position against working with violent groups, only to renege on that promise later. Our scholars discuss why leaders change their minds, and how timing can be a critical factor in determining when conditions are ripe for productive talks.Part 2 takes up the questions of how to negotiate with terrorists without legitimizing their methods or ideology, and what happens to a nation’s reputation when they give in, give up, or back down in the face of extremist groups.Host:Erin Goodman, Director, Weatherhead Scholars Program.Guests:Annette Idler, Weatherhead Center Visiting Scholar, Weatherhead Scholars Program. Director, Global Security Programme, Pembroke College, Oxford University. Jytte Klausen, Lawrence A. Wien Professor of International Cooperation, Brandeis University.  Fredrik Logevall, Weatherhead Center Faculty Associate. Laurence D. Belfer Professor of International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School; Professor of History, Department of History, Harvard University. Producer/Director:Michelle Nicholasen, Editor and Content Producer, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs.Related Links:Transforming the War on Drugs: Warriors, Victims and Vulnerable Regions edited by Annette Idler and Juan Carlos Garzón Vergara (Hurst, 2021)The Changing Character of Conflict PlatformCONPEACEJytte Klausen's Western Jihadism ProjectWestern Jihadism: A Thirty Year History by Jytte Klausen (Oxford University Press, 2021)JFK: Coming of Age in the American Century, 1917–1956 by Fredrik Logevall (Penguin Random House, 2021)“How to Talk to Terrorists” by Jonathan Powell (The Guardian, October 2014)Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:WCFIA WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastSoundcloudVimeo This episode was produced, edited, and mixed by Michelle Nicholasen, Editor and Content Producer at the Weatherhead Center.Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:Weatherhead Center WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastYouTubeVimeo

We think of citizenship as a binary category: you’re either a citizen or you’re not. But the levels of membership can be complex. Refugees and asylum seekers often find that the criteria for acceptance change, as states devise rationales to exclude them. Three Weatherhead Center sociologists reveal the motivations behind various immigration policies, from the colonial past to the present, and discuss the ethics and impact of open borders.In this episode, Elke Winter explains the different pathways to citizenship, not only for “economic immigrants” but also for refugees and asylum seekers. From an historical perspective, Anna Skarpelis reminds us that some groups have had citizenship imposed on them, in the case of territorial annexation. In the United States, asylum and immigration laws seem to change with each new administration, and Talia Shiff documents some of the impact of the recent changes during the Trump administration.After World War II, the UN Declaration of Human Rights established that all human beings have the right to basic food, shelter, and security, and the right to freedom of movement—even if they cannot access these rights in their own countries. But nations have likely always strayed from these humanitarian values as their geopolitical goals change. Our scholars show how strategic interests and even race come into play, unofficially, to drive prevailing immigration policies. Finally, our scholars delve into the philosophical and ethical context for having more open borders and touch on the economic impact of immigration. On a philosophical level, they raise the questions: What do we owe others? Can a nation redress its colonial legacy through immigration policy? Do developed nations have a moral obligation to those in poorer regions who are trying to find a secure home?With an estimated eighty million people on Earth in flux and looking for permanent settlement, our scholars stress that no single country can resolve this crisis on its own. Host:Erin Goodman, Director, Weatherhead Scholars Program.Guests:Talia Shiff, Affiliate, Weatherhead Research Cluster on Comparative Inequality and Inclusion. Assistant Professor, Tel Aviv University; Lecturer in Sociology, Harvard University.Anna Skarpelis, Affiliate, Weatherhead Research Cluster on Comparative Inequality and Inclusion. PhD, Department of Sociology, New York University.Elke Winter, William Lyon Mackenzie King Visiting Professor of Canadian Studies, Canada Program; Affiliate, Weatherhead Research Cluster on Comparative Inequality and Inclusion.Professor of Sociology, School of Sociological and Anthropological Studies, University of Ottawa.Producer/Director:Michelle Nicholasen, Editor and Content Producer, Weatherhead Center for International Affairs.Related Links:Us, Them and Others: Pluralism and National Identity in Diverse Societies by Elke Winter (University of Toronto Press, 2011)“Multicultural Citizenship for the Highly Skilled? Naturalization, Human Capital, and the Boundaries of Belonging in Canada’s Middle-Class Nation-Building” by Elke Winter (Ethnicities, October 27, 2020)“When States Take Rights Back: Citizenship Revocation and Its Discontents” edited by Émilien Fargues, Elke Winter, Matthew J Gibney (Routledge, 2020)Country Report on Citizenship Law: Canada, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, by Elke Winter (2016)“Reconfiguring the Deserving Refugee: Cultural Categories of Worth and the Making of Refugee Policy” by Talia Shiff (Law & Society Review, January 29, 2020)“Revisiting Immutability: Competing Frameworks for Adjudicating Asylum Claims Based on Membership in a Particular Social Group” by Talia Shiff (University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, spring 2020)“Regulating Organizational Ambiguity: Unsettled screening categories and the making of US asylum policy” by Talia Shiff (Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, November 28, 2019)“What Is It Like to Be a Nazi? Racial Vision and Scientific Selves in German Portrait Photographic Practice” by Anna Skarpelis (book chapter in Against the Background of Social Reality: Defaults, Commonplaces and the Sociology of the Unmarked, edited by Carmelo Lombardo and Lorenzo Sabetta. Routledge, forthcoming)"Dresden Will Never Be Hiroshima: Morality, the Bomb and Far-Right Empathy for the Refugee" by Anna Skarpelis (book chapter in Far-Right Revisionism and the End of History: Alt/Histories, edited by Louie Dean Valencia-García. Routledge, 2020)Music credits:Rainbow Bridge by Siddhartha Corsus is licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.Choir by XendomArts https://pixabay.com/users/xendomarts-11117859/Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:WCFIA WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastSoundcloudVimeo This episode was produced, edited, and mixed by Michelle Nicholasen, Editor and Content Producer at the Weatherhead Center.Follow the Weatherhead Center for International Affairs:Weatherhead Center WebsiteEpicenter WebsiteTwitterFacebookSimplecastYouTubeVimeo