Inspires - Department of Politics and International Relations ...

inspiresTrinity Term 2011The Magazine for Oxford Politics and International Relations Alumni

A letter from the editorsWelcome to the inaugural issue of Inspires, the alumni magazine of the University of Oxford’s Department ofPolitics and International Relations (DPIR).Inevitably, the contents of this first edition are selective. However, we hope that our choices will appeal to awide spectrum of Politics and International Relations alumni – both those that did undergraduate degreesincluding Politics (‘Philosophy, Politics and Economics’ and ‘Modern History and Politics’), and those whohave done more specialised graduate degrees (MSc, MPhil and DPhil) in Politics and International Relations,at Oxford.Many of you will be surprised to see just how much Politics and International Relations in Oxford has grownand developed over the years. Indeed, one of the purposes of this magazine is to convey the scale, varietyand value of the teaching and research that is now undertaken in the Department. In particular, we havesought to provide a sense of the Department’s contemporary impact on, and interaction with, the wider world.Inspires will be an annual publication, and we hope that it will form part of a growing engagement withour alumni. However, our success in developing a conversation with readers will depend, in part, on yourresponse. We hope that you will let us have your comments on this edition, make suggestions for futurecontent and volunteer to contribute to future editions yourselves. Our contact details are set out opposite.We look forward to hearing from you.Kate Candy and David LeopoldPhoto: Keiko Ikeuchie2

ContentsTrinity Term 2011: Issue 14 WelcomeStephen Whitefield6 Law and WarJennifer Welsh8 Learning to ExperimentRay Duch10 Crunching the Numbers12 Theory and PracticeStuart White14 Nation States, Capitalism and the CrisisDavid Soskice16 Life After PPE18 International Relations in OxfordAndrew Hurrell20 Recent Books22 Media and PoliticsSara Kalim24 Undergraduate TeachingElizabeth Frazer26 DPIR on the Internet28 Dates for Your DiaryPhoto: Sue SrawleyAcknowledgementsIn addition to all the excellent contributors,the editors would like to thank the followingfor their advice and help of various kinds:Lucy CrittendenJanice FrenchDavid HineIain McLeanMarc StearsAdam SwiftShepherd and WoodwardGet in touch:Department of Politics andInternational Relations,University of Oxford,Manor Road, Oxford OX1 3UQ,United KingdomEmail: alumni@politics.ox.ac.ukPhone: +44 (0)1865 278700Design Keiko Ikeuchi (www.keikoikeuchi.co.uk)Photography Sue Srawley (info@susantphotographer.co.uk)Keiko Ikeuchi (www.keikoikeuchi.co.uk)The opinions expressed in Inspires arethose of the contributors, and are notnecessarily shared by the DPIR or theUniversity of Oxford.Cover Photo: Keiko Ikeuchie3

WelcomeStephen Whitefield has been the Head ofDepartment since 1 September 2010. Here hewelcomes readers and explains some of thecontemporary challenges and opportunitiesfacing the Department of Politics andInternational RelationsEveryone knows Gilbert Ryle’s oldphilosophical joke: a prospectivestudent visits Oxford and sees Balliol,Christ Church and Exeter Colleges, and asksthe tour guide, ‘But where is the university?’,having been under the assumption that it isa different place altogether. But, for those ofyou who matriculated fifteen years ago andread PPE at Merton, St John’s, Somervilleor elsewhere or perhaps did the MPhil atNuffield or St Antony’s, the question might be:‘But where is the Department of Politics andInternational Relations?’Until ten years ago, Politics matters in Oxfordwere managed by the Sub-Faculty of Politics.You may recall that its administrative heart, sofar as it had one, was located in George Streetin the same building as the Social StudiesLibrary. It was pleasant, with a commonroom and small seminar room. Coordinationacross Politics as a whole was rather limited,and colleges and college tutors were central.But, the world was already changing. Thegovernment inspectors were inspecting ourteaching; research funding was becomingmore important (and we were subject to yetmore inspection); our graduate programmeswere growing. And so, to meet the challengesof modernity, the Department of Politics andInternational Relations was born. And, judgingby its enormous growth over the last ten years,the external recognition we have achieved asthe top-ranked Department in the UK for ourteaching and the student experience, and bythe fact that we have the largest number oftop-rated researchers of any Department inthe country too, we have responded to thosechallenges tremendously well.So, the simplest answer to the question,‘Where is the Department of Politics andInternational Relations (along with Economicsand Sociology)?,’ is that its administrativeheart is now located on Manor Road in anappropriately modern new building designedby Norman Foster, with many lecture andseminar rooms as well as offices and a largecafé. Students come to visit the relocatedSocial Sciences Library and attend lecturesthere more frequently than they attendSchools. Many of our graduate students onMPhils and DPhils have desks and computers,and some academics also have (largelyshared) offices there too, particularly whenthey are involved in burgeoning Departmentaladministration. I am the third Head ofDepartment, after Mark Philp and mostrecently Neil Macfarlane each served fiveyears. They were the institutional builders.I am trying hard not to mess things up.But, the simplest answer won’t really do.For one thing, our building could not housethe nearly 100 academics and hundredsof students, even if the various ‘teethingproblems’ in the building with the heatingand air conditioning were sorted out and theywanted to leave their colleges. But moreimportantly, the Department is and wants to bespatially and intellectually diversely located.We are self-avowedly pluralist in our teachingand research with enough of us to operate onthe ‘zoo principle’ – two of everything. And wework, happily but with occasional friction, in aCollegiate University, which means that almostall of us wear two hats of Department andCollege, if seldom at the same time. So, as mycolleague Sudhir Hazareesingh at Balliol put it:Where is the Department? It is really locatedall over the University!My hope is that some of that spirit ofpluralism of academic endeavour as well aspluripresence will be evident in this the firstissue of the Department’s Alumni magazineInspires. Why are we launching Inspiresnow? Because the challenges – from thegovernment, for the needs of our students(graduate and undergraduate) and to continueour research – keep on coming, if anythingever more briskly, and to meet them we needthe support and understanding of our closestfriends, our alumni. So, we aim to show youhere a few of the many exciting things that arehappening in the Department in the hope thatyou will want to be involved with us in years tocome.4

“We are veryconfidentabout ourstanding inthe academicworld andconfident tooabout ourcapacity toprogress infuture.”Photo: Sue SrawleyJennifer Welsh writes about the work of theinter-departmental and inter-disciplinaryOxford Institute for Ethics, Law and ArmedConflict (ELAC), particularly about theemerging doctrine of ‘responsibility to protect’that the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moondiscussed eloquently in a recent lecturesponsored by the Department and which isplaying a major legal role in currently ongoingintervention in Libya. Ray Duch writesabout his work, based in Nuffield College’sCentre for Experimental Social Sciences,involving pioneering research that tries tofind new ways to get at the vexed issue ofdetermining causality when people makepolitical judgements or decide on politicalaction. Stuart White discusses how PoliticalTheory should engage with the real world ofpolitics, which of course is already central toour teaching and research. As, for example,David Soskice shows when he engages withthe pressing issue of the financial crisis. SaraKalim writes about the work being done onmedia and politics in the Reuters Institute forthe Study of Journalism, which is based in theDepartment with generous core funding fromthe Thompson Reuters Foundation. And LizFrazer reflects on how teaching has changedin Oxford over the years – Liz recentlywon (with Scot Peterson who is also in theDepartment) an award for innovation in use ofe-resources in teaching.We are very confident about our standingin the academic world and confident tooabout our capacity to progress in future. Butwhat, finally, are the main challenges facingour Department as we aim to maintain andenhance our teaching and research? You willhave read a great deal about the proposedincreases in undergraduate fees, much ofwhich will simply be used to make up forcuts in government funding with most of theremainder going to much needed bursaryand access schemes that will help ensure thatno-one is put off of applying for and attendingOxford. But much less is heard about thepressing need the Department has to offerscholarships for students on our mastersand doctoral research programmes, wheregovernment funding has also been cut. Togive an example, both the Economic andSocial Research Council and the Arts andHumanities Research Council have announcedthat they will no longer fund the college fee,so colleges and the Department will need towork together to make up the shortfall. TheDepartment has put in place a scheme fromour own resources that will see funding forgraduate scholarships increase significantlyover the next four years, but even then wewill be far behind our competitors for the bestresearch students at Harvard, Princeton andelsewhere in the US. Our number one fundingpriority is to make that difference up. But,we will need your help through joint collegedepartmentalfunds to do so.So, this is what will be the first of many futurealumni magazines and the first in what will bea stream of invitations to you to get involvedwith the Department. Come to the UniversityAlumni weekend in Oxford this September.And bear in mind events to be announcedsoon that will commemorate the appointment100 years ago of the first Gladstone Professorof Government and not long after that the100th anniversary of PPE as well. Visit ourwebsite. And please be in touch throughKate Candy (Communications Officer withresponsibility for alumni relations) about howyour careers and lives connect with Politics inOxford.We look forward to hearing from youand seeing you in the Department soon.Remember, you can find us all round theUniversity.Stephen WhitefieldHead of Department, Professor of Politics,University Lecturer in Politics, RhodesPelczynski Tutorial Fellow in Politics,Pembroke College5

“Some recent examples of our research andpolicy work include:The Responsibility to PreventThe principle of the ‘responsibility to protect’(or ‘R2P’), endorsed by heads of states andgovernments in 2005, has gained tractionin recent years as a way both to clarifythe nature of the international community’srole in responding to the commission ofmass atrocities – such as genocide, ethniccleansing, and crimes against humanity – andto build the political will to act when thesegross violations of human rights occur. In 2009ELAC was pleased to be awarded fundingby the Australian Responsibility to ProtectFund to advance the implementation of theprinciple of R2P by elaborating on how oneof its key elements – prevention – can beWe believe that the challenges of modern warfarecannot be met without significantly strengtheningthe authority of both international law and theinstitutions that implement and interpret”it.operationalised in international society. We areworking closely with our partner organisationsin Canada, Norway and Singapore, andin 2011 will be hosting a series of globaldialogues in the USA, Europe and Asia.A Code of Professional Military EthicsOur Co-Director David Rodin is currentlyadvising the US Army on the creation of its firstformal Code of Professional Military Ethics.This will be a landmark document that willserve as a baseline for the conduct of themore than one million soldiers who serve in theUS Army, and is being developed under thedirection of General Casey, Chief of Staff. InOctober 2010 representatives from the UnitedStates Military Academy at West Point visitedOxford and also took time to speak at anELAC seminar on the implications of the Codefor future US military policy and operations.The project was formally commenced with aworking group at the US Military Academy atWest Point in November and will proceed withthe drafting of a White Paper for disseminationlater in the year.The International Criminal CourtDapo Akande focuses much of his researchon international criminal law and transitionaljustice, including the role of the InternationalCriminal Court (ICC). He recently co-authoreda paper for the influential South AfricanInstitute for Security Studies, which exploredthe tensions between the Court and theAfrican Union over the arrest warrant issuedfor Sudanese president Omar Al-Bashir forwar crimes including genocide during theDafur conflict. The paper was launched at themeeting of the Assembly of States Parties tothe ICC Statute in December 2010.Relationships within the Oxford community andbeyond are crucial in meeting ELAC’s coreaim. We have forged a network of internationalcontacts with other academics, governments,NGO’s, international institutions and themedia. Without compromising our strong andprincipled commitment to the ethical and legalrestraint of war, ELAC has also developedtrusted relationships with the practitionercommunity – military personnel and defenceofficials – that enable us to have demonstrableimpact.One of ELAC’s most notable successes is thecreation of the Oxford War Group, a network ofthe world’s foremost philosophers on the ethicsof war. October 2010 saw the Group’s secondannual meeting, ‘Why We Fight: The Purposesof Military Force in the 21st Century’, and weare pleased that this conference has grownin size and reputation to become a leadingforum for the discussion of the ethical andlegal challenges of modern warfare. The groupincludes promising early career researchersand brings in students from DPIR and beyond.We look forward to the third conference inSeptember 2011.ELAC also hosts an extremely variedprogramme of events to bring togetheracademics and students across disciplinesand encourage new thinking. Recent highlightsinclude our series of lectures on ‘Peace andDiplomacy’. Speakers have included MartinGriffiths, Director of the Centre for HumanitarianDialogue, one of the world’s most prominentprivate conflict mediation organisations,and a fascinating behind the scenes lookat the impact of the Nobel Peace Prize byGeir Lundestad, Director of the NorwegianNobel Institute in Oslo and Secretary of theNorwegian Nobel Committee. In addition, wehost a popular lunchtime seminar series inassociation with the Oxford programme on theChanging Character of War (CCW). If you can’tbe there in person, download the podcastsfrom our website.Further details of all our activities andevents can be found on our website at:www.elac.ox.ac.uk.Jennifer WelshProfessor in International Relations,Co-Director of ELAC,Fellow of Somerville CollegeJennifer Welsh will be representing PPEat the Alumni Weekend on 17 September.Please see the back cover for details.7

Learning toExperimentRay Duch explains theappeal of experimentalresearch in the socialsciences, and introducesthe work of the Centrefor Experimental SocialSciences (CESS) atNuffield CollegeExperimental research has experienceda significant renaissance in the socialsciences. It is no longer confinedto psychology but has increasingly beenembraced by other social science disciplines(including economics, political science andsociology). The results of experimentalresearch can be found informing decisionmaking in the retail industry, finance,health care, and government. For example,experiments that measure skin conductanceresponse and hormonal data have beenconducted on professional traders offinancial instruments in order to understandthe physiological basis for risk aversion.Field experiments have been conducted inrural India in order to help design insurancepolicies for agriculture crops. And laboratoryexperiments have been developed toassess the impact on vote choice of differentrace-based campaign ads. This increasedinterest in experimental research by socialscientists led to the founding of the Centrefor Experimental Social Sciences (CESS) atNuffield College in 2008, with funding providedby Nuffield Governing Body for a five-yearperiod.What has inspired the interest inexperimentation? The overriding factor is theconcern with claims of causality – or causalpriority – made in social science, specificallythe extent to which we can have confidencethat the causal variable of interest in a typicalempirical model is independent of confoundingfactors. If subjects (aka individuals) areassigned in a truly random fashion totreatments of interest then we can be confidentthat any variation in behaviour (typicallychoice in social science experiments) acrossthe treatments can be attributed to treatmenteffects rather than any other confoundingvariables (such as education or social class).A classic example from Political Scienceconcerns the effect of media messages andcampaign contact on political behavior, beit voting turnout, vote choice, or campaigncontributions. Work in this area was traditionallybased on survey data – respondents reportingthe contact they had with campaign workers ortheir exposure to media messages. However,a now classic study of voter turnout by AlanGerber and Donald Green – ‘The Effects ofCanvassing’ in American Political ScienceReview (2000) – pointed out that the regressionmodels using these kinds of survey-basedself-reports were very likely to generatespurious relationships between contact andvoting turnout. The problem here is that eligible8Photo: Keiko Ikeuchi

voters are not randomly assigned to votermobilisation campaign efforts. Clearly inthe ‘observational data’ world, the politicallyengaged, and hence those most likely to turnout and vote, are the voters who are morelikely to be exposed to these campaignspromoting voter turnout. The ‘treatment’here is confounded with the ‘effect’ (that is,voter turnout). The traditional approach todealing with such problems associated withobservational data is to introduce variablesinto the estimation model designed to controlfor these effects. Gerber and Green (andothers) argued that control variables in modelssuch as these were not a convincing way ofaccounting for confounding effects.The Gerber and Green study nicely illustrateshow these problems of confounding variablesand causality might be overcome byemploying experimental techniques. Theyimplemented an innovative field experiment inwhich 30,000 individuals were identified usingvoter registration lists (containing considerableinformation on partisan registration and pastvoting behaviour). These individuals wererandomly assigned to different types ofmobilisation efforts – mailings, telephone, andpersonal contact. This random assignmentof the treatments makes it much more likely,compared with observational data, thatthe type of mobilisation effort is effectivelyexogenous in their regression estimation.A similar concern to boost confidence in thecausal variable of interest, has led politicalscientists to show increasing interest inthe experimental laboratory. One of theareas in which this is relevant involvesunderstanding the effect of different votingrules or mechanisms for aggregatingindividual preferences. (This example isdrawn from Rebecca Morton and KennethWilliams, Experimental Political Science andthe Study of Causality.) A researcher mightbe interested in testing a formal model thatpredicts that in plurality rule elections wherethere are no majority requirements, votersmay be more inclined to vote strategicallyfor their second preferred candidate whenthere are more than two candidates than isthe case in plurality elections with majorityrequirements. The researcher testing thismodel has two major challenges. First, shehas to induce rational behaviour on thepart of the subjects, and this is typicallyaccomplished by financial incentives (at CESSwe require that all experiments include subjectfinancial incentives) that induce preferenceorderings over the candidates. Secondly, thelab setting allows the investigator to createthe appropriate institutions or voting rulesthat correspond to the theoretical model – thetreatments in effect. And it is these institutionaltreatments, over which the investigator has fullcontrol, to which the subjects are randomlyassigned.Lab experiments are one of the principalactivities of the Nuffield CESS. The CESSexperimental lab, located in George StreetMews, consists of 25 experimental stations.Currently the lab has a subject pool of 3,000– about 75 percent are students and theremainder are non-students from the Oxfordarea. In a typical term the CESS lab might host10 experiments amounting to 60 experimentalsessions.One of the principal criticisms of traditional labexperiments is that they may not generalise toa general population (of consumers, voters,business managers, and so on). The CESSinitiative recognises this possible shortcoming,and also promotes experimental research thatis not conducted in the traditional experimentallab setting. These include field experiments,virtual lab experiments, and experimentsembedded in traditional public opinion andinternet panel surveys.Virtual experimental ‘sessions’ take placewherever the subject has access to the“What has inspiredthe interest inexperimentation?The overridingfactor is the concernwith claims ofcausality ... made insocial science.”internet. Hence, subject recruitment is notconfined to a defined narrow subject pool asis the case with most traditional labs but canbe as broad as any individual in the worldwith internet access. Advances in computingand communication have made designingand implementing these experiments simplerand less expensive. Subjects participatingin virtual lab experiments are typically drawnfrom convenience samples (that is, nonrepresentativesamples) although one candesign virtual subject sampling frames thatare representative of a population.At CESS we have conducted these virtualexperiments both with subjects from the CESSsubject pool, and with more representativesamples of the general population.CESS is actively engaged in implementingexperiments that are embedded in large-scaleinternet surveys. Strictly speaking, the latterare not a random probability sample of thepopulation. However, in a growing numberof countries it is now possible to constructinternet samples that, with appropriateweighting strategies, are representative ofthe general population. The extent to whichopt-in internet samples approximate a randomprobability sample of the population dependson the population being sampled (somepopulations have denser internet penetrationthan others), sampling design methods andweighting strategies employed. Hence, byembedding experiments in internet surveyswe can generalise to a broader population;something one cannot do with a conventionallab experiment.As part of the 2009 British Election campaign,CESS implemented a number of experimentsembedded in a six-wave internet panel surveywith over 10,000 respondents. Leadinguniversities around the world participatedin this CESS initiative. In one of the studies,together with Shanto Iyengar at Stanford, Idesigned an experiment that measures Britishattitudes about immigration. The experiment isunique in that it distinguished abstract policypreferences (Are more open immigrationpolicies generally bad for the country?) fromwillingness to admit individual immigrants,especially those deemed deserving of entryon both economic and cultural grounds.We are able to gauge attitudes towardindividual immigration situations by exposingrespondents to random treatments thatconsisted of images and descriptions ofspecific immigrant applications for entry intoBritain. The British are both more tolerant withrespect to admitting individual immigrants– although this varies by race and region ofemigration – than their general policy positionswould suggest, and less tolerant in this regardthan American respondents to a similarexperiment we conducted in the US.We have also implemented the ImplicitAttitude Test (IAT) as part of British andGerman large scale internet surveys. IATs areexperimental vignettes designed to recoverimplicit attitudes – for example racial attitudes– that respondents are unlikely to volunteer intraditional survey questions. The experimentalprotocol was developed by psychologists atHarvard and is now widely used. Embeddingthis experiment in a large internet surveyallows social scientists to understand betternot only the nature of racial bias in a society,but also how it affects a range of politicalpreferences and choices.The criticism levelledagainst causal inferences from modelsbased on conventional observational datahas resulted in social scientists increasinglyembracing experimental methods. TheNuffield CESS is committed to providingthe Oxford social science community withthe facilities and the advice necessary forexecuting experiments in both lab and non-labcontexts.Raymond DuchUniversity Professor of Quantitative PoliticalScience, Nuffield College9

CrunchingtheNumbersOn the principle that a statistic is (sometimes) worth a thousand words, Inspires presentthe Department of Politics and International Relations in numbers.Alumniwith records on the Development and Alumni Relations (DARS) data base13,7531,486Total undergraduate alumni76% in UK and Europe; 15% in North AmericaTotal graduate alumni48% in UK and Europe; 40% in North America2318 rankingforPoliticsin the UKin 2011*No.1DPIR’s1087 1338 1729 1994 2005 *Sources: The Complete University Guide, The Independentand University Guide, the Guardian578 93 Pre 1940 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s Research 2009 - 10£2,007,000Research income8830+Funding applications processed by the ResearchSupport Team. 69 applications made in 2004-05Conferences, workshops and trainingprogrammes hosted and/or organisedStudent Admissions 2010 - 11239463155Philosophy, Politics and Economics (PPE)Success rate for PPE applicants 16.5%History and Politics (HP)Success rate for HP applicants 15.9%DPhil students32 in 2005-06 and 23 in 2000-01MPhil students44 in 2005-06 and 10 in 2000-0135current MPs studiedPPE at Oxford10

Staff2000 - 2001 2010 - 2011Department Office Holders23 36Administrative Team8 11Research Staff9 19Established Academics44 69800cups coffee/tea per weekdrunk by Department staff inManor Road BuildingPhoto: Sue Srawley2,059m 2Floor space of Manor Road Building240media appearancesby faculty in 2010Head of Department8 7,487Emails in current Head’s inboxover the last 8 monthsQ 40,000Air miles clocked up in his finalyear of office by previous Head(who points out that he doesn’t own a car!)b3,700Bicycle miles clocked up in his finalyear of office by previous HeadWebsite since the new site launch in Oct 2010250,000 individual page views52,000 visitorsFrom183 countrieshits for most popular page8,000 ‘Why study with us?’11

TheoryPracticeandStuart White examines theproper relationship betweenPolitical Theory and the realworld of politicsWhat is the proper relationshipbetween political philosophy andpolitics? Should political philosophyinform political action? Should politicalphilosophy learn from political action? Orare the two best thought of as unconnectedenterprises?These questions have begun to move tothe fore in contemporary political theory.One school of thought, which one can termdeliberative democrats (exemplified byJoshua Cohen, of Stanford University), seesan important role for philosophy in politics.Another, the realist school, is much moresceptical. For the realists (such as RaymondGeuss, of the University of Cambridge), aphilosophical politics is illusory and possiblydangerous.Let’s start with the deliberative democrats.In the background of much deliberativedemocratic thinking stands the work of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in particular The SocialContract (first published in 1762). Accordingto Rousseau, a state has legitimacy (only)when two conditions hold: (1) laws are madeon the basis of an inclusive decision-makingprocess in which all citizens have an equalright to participate; and (2) laws reflect asincere judgment as to what best promotes thecommon good of the citizen body. By commongood, is meant the shared basic interests ofthe citizenry (for example, in life, liberty andeconomic opportunity), taking each citizen’sinterests as having equal standing with thoseof any other. Because, according to this view,the legitimate exercise of state authority mustbe by reference to a judgment about thecommon good, and the common good is anormative concept which needs unpacking,the legitimate exercise of state authority has aphilosophical dimension.12Rousseau seems to presume that there isalways a single right answer to the questionof what best promotes the common good.Today’s deliberative democrats do notpresume this, on the whole, but they insist thatdemocratic citizens seek to justify laws andpolicies to one another in ethical terms. Fromthis standpoint, political philosophers can beunderstood as ‘democratic underlabourers’.Their work in analysing core normativeconcepts such as liberty and equality iswork that can, in principle, assist the demosin its ethical deliberations. The politicalphilosopher is not an expert who seeks to be a‘philosopher-king’, subverting popular self-rule.Rather, the political philosopher generatesresources for citizens to use in their practice ofpopular self-rule.Much of the recent work in academic politicalphilosophy, such as the theories of socialjustice developed by John Rawls (in A Theoryof Justice first published in 1971) and RonaldDworkin (in Sovereign Virtue first publishedin 2000), can be understood as democraticunderlabouring in this sense. The theoriesprovide resources which citizens can useto get a handle on the normative questionswhich lie at the root of policy questions. Forexample, if citizens are trying to address thequestion of how far the community should taxits members to provide welfare benefits andpublic services, they might look to Dworkin’stheory to get some guidance.Joshua Cohen, a prominent deliberativedemocrat, points out how important ‘politicalmorality’ is in democratic politics:Consider the response of Alberto Mora,the US Navy’s general counsel, to hisdiscoveries about the cruel treatment ofprisoners sanctioned by the Bushadministration in conducting its ‘war onterror’. Mora thought – and acted on thethought – that ‘cruelty’ and torture, thoughdifferent, are ‘equally pernicious’. ‘If crueltyis no longer declared unlawful…it altersthe fundamental relationship of man togovernment. It destroys the whole notionof individual rights. The [US] Constitutionrecognizes that man has an inherentright, not bestowed by the state or laws,to personal dignity, including the right tobe free of cruelty. It applies to all humanbeings, not just in America – even thosedesignated as ‘unlawful enemy combatants’.If you make this exception, the wholeConstitution crumbles’. Here we have anargument – concise and clear, whethercorrect or incorrect – about the equivalencein political morality of cruelty and torture,concluding that torture and cruelty are bothto be condemned as violations of a rightto personal dignity. Thoughts such as this,which prompted Mora to concerted action,belong as much to our political life as thepressures that led to the abuses he soughtto halt…(Joshua Cohen, Philosophy, Politics, Democracy(Harvard University Press, 2009), p.2).

Political philosophy, Cohen argues, is a‘reflective engagement’ with the politicalmorality that infuses democratic political life.As such, it is itself an important part of ourdemocratic life.Realists challenge the deliberative democraticconception of politics. Amongst other things,realists point out that the rich and powerfulwon’t give up their power and wealth simplybecause one marshals good argumentsagainst them. Indeed, the injunction toadopt deliberative methods – and avoidnon-deliberative methods – is criticised as ademand that the weak give up the weaponsthey have which might actually work to changethings.In response to these concerns, deliberativedemocrats reiterate that deliberativedemocracy is an ideal and that there are allsorts of social and economic conditions for theideal to be approximated. These conditionsare not necessarily satisfied in present-day‘democratic’ societies such as the UK or theUSA. In these non-ideal circumstances, it isutopian – in a bad sense – simply to urge allcitizens or legislators to behave in a moredeliberative fashion so as better to pursuethe common good. In these circumstances,resort to non-deliberative methods whichlevy costs on one’s political opponents, forexample strikes, boycotts, and so on, willoften be entirely in order. As Cohen putsit: ‘…it is sometimes necessary to resort todestabilization, threats, and open conflictas answers to people who won’t reason ingood faith. A sucker may be born everyminute, but deliberative democracy is nota recommendation that we all join the club’(Cohen, ibid., p.341).However, this does not mean the ideal ofdeliberative democracy ceases to be relevant.For one thing, it can remain relevant as anorganising ideal within social movementsthat challenge existing power structures.For example, environmental campaignssuch as Climate Camp and some of thegroups presently emerging in the UK’s anticutsmovement (such as ‘Oxford Save OurServices’) have internal norms and workingmethods that have something in common withthe ideal of deliberative democracy. Indeed,the wider ‘alterglobalisation’ movement mightbe an example of how political practicecan provide new resources for the politicaltheorist, food for thought both about how toinstitutionalise deliberative democratic normsand about the norms themselves.There is perhaps also an important distinctionto be made between doing deliberation anddoing things to promote deliberation. Theeffective way to promote deeper deliberationamongst citizens on a neglected issue israrely to present an argument according tothe norms of the academic seminar. Forms ofdirect action that are quite confrontational canbe vivid ways of focusing public attention ona neglected normative issue, for example, amass sit-down protest outside the Departmentof Work and Pensions to draw attention to theunfairness of public spending cuts towardsdisabled people.But is political confrontation itself notinimical to philosophy? The philosopher,qua philosopher, is drawn to nuance. But inpolitics nuance can be disempowering. Tobe heard at all, one must sometimes keepit simple – perhaps even oversimplify. Andthis is not necessarily true only for ‘non-ideal’societies like our own. Quite probably, it istrue of politics as such. If so, then the realistshave a point. While political speech mightideally be connected to ethical deliberationwith a philosophical content, and politicalphilosophy can provide rich resources forethical deliberation, political speech itself isunlikely ever to converge with the speech ofthe philosopher.Stuart WhiteDirector of the Public Policy Unit, UniversityLecturer in Politics, Tutorial Fellow in Politics,Jesus College, and an active member of‘Oxford Save Our Services’(www.oxfordsos.org.uk)13

Nation States, Capitalism and theCrisisDavid Soskice asks whether and howcomparative political economy might help usunderstand the present crisisNumerous questions pose themselves forpolitical economists about the crisis – enough(never waste a good crisis) to keep PhDsengaged for a generation. But in my view there aretwo big picture questions which modern comparativepolitical economy needs to answer. One is why theepicentre of the crisis was in Wall Street and the City ofLondon. The other is this: the crisis occurred as a resultof failures in the main regulatory frameworks – thefinancial and the macroeconomic – which govern muchof the workings of advanced economies. Why, in sharpcontrast to the 1930s, have these frameworks changedlittle since the crisis? These questions raise majorissues for our understanding of modern capitalismand its relation to the state, as well as the likelihood ofanother crisis. Marxism offers little guidance – otherthan alerting us to the importance to the state of thosedynamic sectors in which a national economy hascomparative advantage.1. Why Wall Street and the City?The modern ‘varieties of capitalism’ literature seeksto explain differences in the comparative sectoraladvantages across the different advanced economies.In particular it highlights national differences in theinstitutional framework in which companies operate,notably governing labour markets, industrial relationsand career structures, educational, training andinnovation systems, and corporate governancesystems and how companies are organised.Liberal market economies like the US and UK havea ‘comparative institutional advantage’ in economicsectors which require both employees and companiesto engage in high risk radical innovation – a hallmarkof Wall Street and the City in the last two decades.Institutional preconditions are flexible labour markets,an education and training system with a strongemphasis on high level general education, companieswith top down management enabling rapid movementof resources, and a sharp corporate governancesystem to enforce profitability. These institutionscomplement each other in the liberal market world ofthe Anglo-Saxon economies, Ireland and Israel.But the varieties literature doesn’t go the whole way.Why are there no great high-risk financial centresin Canada or New Zealand, or Ireland or Israel? Arapidly growing area bridging political economy andeconomics is the political economy of geography.High-risk activities need agglomerations of companies,so that labour mobility is neither too costly to employeeor to company. Agglomerations are a key concept ineconomic geography. They force us into history andpath-dependency and tipping points: at some momentin history, the network economies of Wall Street or theCity became too attractive to new entrants and existinghigh level financial institutions for them to seek to locateelsewhere. A tipping point had been passed, and theircurrent dominance had become path-dependent.14

2. The key regulatory systems: why so littlechange post-crisis?Turn to the second question. The regulatory system mostimplicated in the crisis is that governing the operation offinancial markets and leveraged financial institutions. Thenext most implicated is the macroeconomic regulatorysystem, governing the management of aggregate demandthrough fiscal and monetary policy to control inflation andunemployment.The financial regulatory system operates de facto ona national basis monitoring major financial institutionsoperating within the national territory, deciding on detailedrules and interpretations governing inter alia the definitionof riskiness of assets, the computation of capital, on andoff balance sheet items and so on; it also in principle takesa view of the systemic risks which may arise within thenational financial system. There is some agreement thatthese systems failed in the UK and the US. The Americanregulatory system, with the British system not far behind,allowed major investment banks to move to very highlevels of leverage; if off balance-sheet items were correctlyassessed and if dubious accounting practices corrected,the leverage levels were higher still. At very high leveragethe possibility of bankruptcy given a major adverseexpectational shift is non-negligible. Moreover, theseleverage levels took the assessment of rating agencies andcredit default swaps (‘insurance’ against loan and otherdefaults) at their face value. This made sense if systemicrisk was discounted; but the relevant UK and US regulatoryagencies (de facto, the SEC, the Fed, the FSA and theBank of England) did not pick this up in a timely way; theBIS in Basel was more sensitive to this possibility but it hadlittle influence.As is well known these high leverage levels were massivelyreinforced by global imbalances. External US/UK deficitsallowed private sector dissaving, generating a highdemand for risky assets (loans to households); and thecorresponding net saving in the exporting countrieswas invested in the US and the UK and enabled thefinancing of the risky assets – the other side of the coin.Global imbalances were permitted by the system ofmacroeconomic regulation. ‘Inflation targeting’ summarisesthe system widely adopted in the last two decades ona nation-by-nation basis, involving independent centralbanks using interest rates to keep inflation at a target levelin the framework of a New Keynesian macroeconomicmodel. International coordination plays no role ininflation targeting; there are no requirements on externalimbalances; indeed, external imbalances and the realexchange rate are technically jointly determined byaggregate demand – for example a tough fiscal policy,reducing aggregate demand, implies ceteris paribus anexternal surplus. It contrasts to Bretton Woods, wherefundamental disequilibria had to be corrected.Thus the key national financial regulatory systems allowedmajor financial institutions extraordinarily high leverageand did not have the means to monitor the possibility ofsystemic collapse in the US and the UK. And the nationalsystems of macroeconomic regulation – in the exportingcountries (Germany and Northern Europe in EMU andJapan, as well of course as China with more dirigistemacroeconomic management) – allowed the developmentof (massive) global imbalances which ratcheted up thispossibility. But since the crisis the inflation targetingsystems have hardly changed. And while there hasbeen tightening of banking rules, this has taken place in“The answer webelieve lies inrethinking therelation of nationalgovernments andcapitalism.”Martin Wolf’s terms ‘within the pre-existing intellectual andinstitutional framework’; in particular, national regulatorsremain responsible for interpretation, monitoring andsanctioning.The answer we believe lies in rethinking the relation ofnational governments and capitalism, in both the advancedworld and in developmental states like China. Nationalgovernments are deeply concerned about promoting highvalue added economic sectors, especially those where thevalue added comes from human capital. These sectors,in a ‘knowledge economy’ world, provide the drivers fornational innovation, for links between universities and theprivate sector and for higher-level education and training,as well as well-paid employment and tax revenue. Thistypically does not reflect partisan considerations. Werethese sectors the same across the different advancedcountries, one might have expected a common publicor private supranational regulatory system. But differentvarieties of capitalism generate comparative advantagesfor different high value added sectors: as we have seen,high risk high innovation financial sectors are located inLiberal Market Economies (as well as many other businessservice sectors, commercial law, and also biotech,blockbuster software, and radical innovation in electronics).It is no surprise that the US and the UK should want toretain control of financial regulatory systems to ensurethat risk-taking and innovation is not stifled; this was asmuch Clinton and Blair’s concern as it was that of Bush orThatcher – who started much of this off with the Big Bang.By contrast, the comparative advantage of German orScandinavian capitalism is in the export of a great rangeof highly specialised goods and services, benefitting fromstrong vocational training and technology transfer as wellas experienced and cooperative workforces, underpinnedby block shareholding. In part because human capitalin these high quality sectors is deep and specific, soneeds to be used to the full in exporting; in part becausethere are typically strong positive externalities to trainingand innovation systems from increased exports; in partbecause a tight fiscal policy constrains wage demandsin the public sector from undermining restraint of exportsector unions: these countries, as well as Japan and Chinafor similar reasons, want no constraints on their exportsthrough macroeconomic regulatory rules pressuring themto expand consumer demand.Analysing the modern world requires understanding thedeep concerns of the governments of advanced nationsfor their high value added sectors, hence their concern toretain control of relevant regulatory systems. Their successin doing so, as in nurturing their high value added sectors,may explain why – despite three decades of globalisation –these governments dominate world politics.This article is based on work with Peter A Hall and TorbenIversen, who both teach Government at Harvard. To readmore see Peter A Hall and David Soskice, Varieties ofCapitalism (OUP 2001). Peter Hall completed the MPhil inPolitics at Balliol in 1974.David SoskiceResearch Professor of Comparative Political Economy,Senior Research Fellow, Nuffield College15

LifeafterPPEThree PPE alumni explain how theirundergraduate studies helped leadthem to their current careers“Morwenna WoodBalliol College, 1980-1983(DPhil 1994-1997)...teachingsome brilliantchildren inless than idealconditions washumbling andinspiring.”I never did have a clear idea ofwhat the future held for me, fromteenage years on. Always betterat maths and science, somewhatperversely I chose to do Mathsand Classics for A levels. This ledon my application for PPE whichI felt would suit me academicallyand keep my options open. Iwas determined to apply to theCollege best known for PPE,Balliol, against all advice, onlylater discovering family links withthe College.I loved PPE, majoring in Politicsand Philosophy, with great peerssuch as Adam Swift, Steve Mulhalland, ahead of us, Geoff Mulgan,Charlie Leadbeater and RobertPeston. I also made time forlacrosse, perhaps an incongruousmix with PPE, gaining a blue in1981.From Balliol PPE, I chose tovolunteer with VSO and I was sentto teach Maths and Economicsin a village secondary school inNigeria. PPE opened my academiceyes, but Nigeria challenged meculturally and practically. However,teaching some brilliant childrenin less than ideal conditions washumbling and inspiring. When thetime came to return, I had decidedto pursue medicine as a career,even though that involved more Alevels.My cohort in UCL included several‘mature’ students as well as myMalawian husband. I returnedbriefly to Oxford, initially as ajunior doctor in the Renal Unit,the start of my specialist career.Later I did a DPhil in Prof PeterRadcliffe’s Laboratory in the JohnRadcliffe Hospital, funded by TheWellcome Trust.For personal reasons I movedto Scotland, taking up a ClinicalLecturer post in the Universityof Edinburgh, which includedsome undergraduate teaching.As a Consultant in NHS Fife, Ihave continued to teach and trainundergraduates from Edinburgh,Dundee and St Andrews. I haveHonorary academic status withEdinburgh (Senior Lecturer) andSt Andrews (Professor) and latterlyhave been the Director of MedicalEducation for NHS Fife.So does it all fit together, PPEto Medicine? There is no director obvious connection, but PPEequips the open mind for mostthings. Reasoning in ‘morals’has been useful in medicine,particularly in complicated ethicaldecision making. Politics is neverfar away from the NHS and theability to analyse the issues andexpound my opinions has beenuseful on a daily basis throughoutmy medical career.16Photo: Sue Srawley

“Paul IngramUniversity College,1987-1990I have for the last four yearsbeen a chat show host on statecontrolled Iranian TV discussingissues affecting strategic MiddleEast politics, taught senior Britishcivil servants on the flagship TopManagement Programme at theNational School of Government,and run a think-tank in Londonand Washington promoting globalnuclear disarmament and nonproliferation.My formal PPE studies atUniv in the late 1980s weresupplemented by a practicalstudent political career as oneof only two ever elected GreenVice-Presidents at OUSU. Thecombination stood me in goodstead for a ‘portfolio’ careerjuggling paid and unpaid politicalwork, informed by a strongsense of my role in politicallife, attempting to balancepolicy ambition with humility.I have beenlucky enough tohave a variedcareer pursuingopportunities thatfit neatly with myevolving politicalambition.”I left College familiar withand committed to the theoryof politics, having studiedchange and motivation, andexperienced the dark art ofpersuasion in mass relationshipsin student politics.From College I stepped straightinto a quiet job as a researcheron nuclear weapons policy forthe Oxford Research Group,and fell into local politicscampaigning for the Greens incentral Oxford. I was electedto the Council in 1996, andbecame co-Leader of the newGreen-LibDem coalition in 2000.I also served a stint as Wardenof the Oxford Quaker MeetingHouse.Leaving Oxford for love to joinmy wife in London in late 2002(she was in Downing Street atthe time), I joined the BritishAmerican Security InformationCouncil (www.basicint.org) asa Senior Analyst working onthe politics and economics ofarms exports and transatlanticsecurity issues generally. Mywork at BASIC involved a greatdeal of broadcast interviews,particularly in the build up toand after the invasion of Iraqin 2003 (I was on BBC WorldService for three hours on themorning of the land invasion). Atthe same time, I took on severalroles for London Green Party,and ran the election campaignfor Europe, the Mayor and theAssembly in 2004, whilst secondon the list for Europe, at thesame time as becoming a father(yes, I was mad). My careertook a dramatic change in early2007 when I was appointedDirector of BASIC, a friendapproached me to join him inhis management teaching work,and when Iranian TV offered methe weekly peak-time talk show,all in the space of three months.I have been lucky enough tohave a varied career pursuingopportunities that fit neatly withmy evolving political ambition.Stefan BaskervilleUniversity College, 2006-2009I am a professional communityorganiser with LondonCitizens, which means I workwith members of civil societyinstitutions from acrossLondon such as churches,mosques, synagogues, schools,student unions, and universitydepartments, to train leadersand help them participate inthe public life of the city. Theprinciple behind what we dois that a healthy democracyrequires organised people toparticipate in politics to hold themarket and the state to account.The work that we do valuesrelationships as a means ofmaking change, so we focus ondeveloping relationships betweenthe different organisations inour membership to take actionon the issues they have incommon. For example, it wasLondon Citizens who began theLiving Wage campaign in 2001when mosques and churchesin East London identified similarconcerns about the hours theirmembers had to work to supporttheir families. Over the ten yearsof the Living Wage campaign,London Citizens members havebrought their power to bear onbanks and employers across thecity, winning £70m in additionalwages. This means that 10,000families have been lifted fromworking poverty. The Living Wagecampaign continues and I haveresponsibility for the campaign inthe higher education sector.I studied PPE at UniversityCollege and focused particularlyon contemporary and historicalpolitical thought. Studying Politicsat Oxford meant I was broughtinto contact with extraordinaryacademics and political actors:a seminar by Sir Gus O’Donnell,Cabinet Secretary, on publicservice reform; debating the‘value of conservatism’ withthe great Jerry Cohen; hearingGeorge Soros on his theory ofreflexivity; and many more. Thebreadth of opportunity was hugeand made for an exciting time.“The breadthof opportunitywas huge andmade for anexciting time.”Political Theory gave me thetools to analyse and understandthe predicament of our politics.I began work with LondonCitizens during my first year atOxford, so my academic studywas heavily influenced by myexperience of practical politicson the ground and it becameincreasingly important to meto relate academic study topractice.I researched and wrote athesis on the political theory ofcommunity organising, focusingon how self-interest relates tothe common good, and thetension between realist andidealist schools in democratictheory. Marc Stears, who isa mentor and has become afriend, and whose work is abrilliant example of groundingPolitical Theory in contemporaryand historical practice,supervised my thesis work. Ifound it hugely rewarding, andhave continued academic workafter my degree.Having been JCR Presidentat Univ, in my final year I waselected OUSU President andso spent a further year inOxford representing studentsto the University. PPE helped toprepare me for both the tacticsof electoral student politics butalso the strategy necessary for asuccessful year in ‘power’!Photo: Sue Srawley17

International RelationsinOxfordAndrew Hurrell reflects on the changingworld of International Relations in OxfordWhether it is running the foreignpolicy of major countries (not leastthe United States!), or headingup leading think-tanks, or teaching in majoruniversities across the world, Oxford’s IRalumni have gone on to do great things. Whilstwe are very proud of our alumni, we havedone a really terrible job at keeping in touch.Of course there are many on-going contacts atthe individual level, but much more needs tobe done. Inspires is one part of that process.How has IR in Oxford been changing? Peoplefirst. Adam Roberts, Henry Shue, JonathanWright and John Dunbabin have all retired inrecent years, with Adam going on to becomePresident of the British Academy. Avi Shlaimwill be retiring at the end of this academicyear. His post will remain at St Antony’sCollege, but has been re-fashioned into thethird named IR chair – the Alastair BuchanChair in International Relations which will beadvertised shortly. Marga Lyall has just retiredafter exactly twenty years as the IR Secretary.Generations of IR graduate students willremember her kindness, her openness and herextraordinary willingness to go the extra mileto help students, faculty and visitors. In termsof recent appointments Duncan Snidal joinedus from Chicago at the start of this academicyear and Eddie Keene replaced JonathanWright in 2009.IR remains a large and intellectually vibrantcommunity. There are now around 27 core IRfaculty, 11 of whom are women, who teachand supervise graduate students. We have105 IR doctoral students, and between 40to 50 taking the two-year MPhil. Studentnumbers have not expanded greatly over thepast twenty years and, unlike many other UKdepartments, we have stayed out of the massmasters market. Demand for places to studyIR in Oxford remains very strong. Last yearthere were over 350 applications for the MPhiland almost 200 for the doctoral programme.Being able to engage with absolutelyoutstanding graduate students remains one ofthe greatest attractions of working in Oxford –but we face on-going challenges generatingincreased funding for graduate work,especially for candidates from the developingworld; and the UK national funding of graduateteaching and research is likely to remainchallenging. The two-year MPhil remains ourpreferred entry route into doctoral work, witharound 40% of our MPhil students going on tothe doctorate. But we have been consistentlykeen to maintain the MPhil as a qualificationin its own right and as a way of providinghigh-quality advanced training in InternationalRelations. Oxford IR doctorates continue towin many prizes and to get published by majorpresses.In terms of positioning, Oxford has seen itselfat the academic end of the graduate schoolspectrum, with a relatively small mastersprogramme closely integrated into a largedoctoral programme. Structured researchtraining has expanded very significantly andour graduates have had consistent successin the academic job market. We continue tobelieve that our approach to InternationalRelations, which embraces both a plurality ofresearch methods and an inter-disciplinaryperspective (including politics, law, history,political economy) puts us in the forefront of“18

graduate teaching in the subject worldwide.Institutionally, we are now fully integratedinto a shared Department with Politics. Whilstbureaucratic demands have increaseddramatically (especially within the UK nationalcontext), the existence of a large Departmentin a large modern building with a professionaladministration has been a major positivechange. In addition, Neil MacFarlane took fiveyears out from his work as the Lester PearsonProfessor of International Relations to serve asa highly successful Head of Department. He isnow enjoying his hard-earned leave, spendingmuch of the time in Georgia.We like to think that we have a tremendouscomparative advantage in being an Englishspeakinguniversity but one located outsidethe United States. Our aim has been todevelop a graduate programme that isengaged with US debates and networks, butthat is also genuinely global in perspective,and with a degree of critical distance from USpolicy and politics. Work on global order andglobal governance remains a central theme,and, building on the work of Henry Shue,Oxford is now one of the leading centres forteaching and research on global normativeissues, including the work of Andrew Hurrelland Jennifer Welsh on the IR side and SimonCaney, Cécile Fabre and, most recently,Jeremy Waldron within Political Theory. Wecontinue to place heavy emphasis on thediversity of national traditions of thoughton international relations and on the needto combine disciplinary excellence withexpertise on particular regions of the world.The challenge of studying IR in a much moretruly global world is only beginning to becomeapparent.Perhaps the greatest change within IR atOxford over the past twenty years has beenthe increase of externally-funded researchprojects and programmes, some within theCentre for International Studies (directed byRichard Caplan), some free-standing. Let megive two examples here. (ELAC discussed onpp. 6-7 is a third example.) First, the GlobalEconomic Governance Programme whichis led by Ngaire Woods and has developeda major niche in global scholarship andpolicy by critically examining institutions ofglobal governance from the perspective ofdeveloping countries’ needs and interests.Second, the Oxford/Princeton GlobalFellows Programme. Now in its third year, theprogramme enables post-doctoral fellowswho are nationals of developing countries tospend one year in Oxford and one year inPrinceton and seeks to build an active networkof scholars and practitioners with expertise onkey issues surrounding globalisation.Other current and recent research projects,all generating high quality publications,include: Civil Resistance and Power Politics(Adam Roberts and Timothy Garton Ash);International Politics: the Rules of the Game(Yuen Khong); Emerging Powers and GlobalOrder (Andrew Hurrell); Exit Strategies andthe Consolidation of Peace (Richard Caplan);Teaching Contemporary Palestinian History(Karma Nabulsi); Europe in a Non-EuropeanWorld (Kalypso Nicolaïdis).This is just a flavour of what has beenhappening in IR in Oxford. We have a veryrich heritage and, in personal, institutional andintellectual terms, I owe a huge debt to mypredecessors, in particular to Adam Robertswho did so much to develop the subject atOxford and to Hedley Bull, whose questionscontinue to resonate so powerfully in so muchof what we study. Although there are certainlymany challenges, we are looking forward tocontinued success and to further development– which includes, amongst many other things,the launching of a new campaign to raisemoney for a Fulbright distinguished fellowshipand eventually a chair in InternationalRelations. And we would very much hopeto involve you in this future. Many of you areworking, either in academic research or in thepolicy worlds, on many of the same pressingglobal challenges. So do let us know whenyou are in the UK; do think of Oxford, includingOxford IR graduates, when you are planningnew programmes and initiatives; do tell usabout the things that you appreciated mostabout your graduate work – and about thegaps and omissions; and do let us know whatwe can do to foster stronger connectionsbetween the IR community here and Oxford’sIR alumni around the world.Andrew HurrellMontague Burton Professor of InternationalRelations, Balliol CollegeOur approach toInternational Relations,which embracesboth a plurality ofresearch methods andan inter-disciplinaryperspective... putsus in the forefront ofgraduate teaching in”the subject worldwide.Richard Caplan meeting with Sarah von Billerbeck, DPhil candidate in IR.Photo: Sue Srawley19

Recent BooksMembers of the DPIR produce a hugevariety of high quality publications. Hereis a selection of recent (and one not sorecent) books to whet your appetites.flicts of 1971 using factshis search for the truthurd exaggerations andn the sacrifices of 1971.factions in contemporaryhat prevent reconciliationwith Bose’s links withlitical values cannot bef recognizing historical, Professor of Economics,by participants at thebeen fed by faulty memoadesh.Dead Reckoningthe facts of that tragic andfor the war that stainedwaz, author of Crossedte interest in settingstudy yet of the social,akistan/Bangladesh war.e are in her debt.’nand massacre cut acrosshan Pakistani and Bengalince a correction of thescholarship. Written withterms of debate aboutrk Moses, Professor at theof the Bangladesh war everhe Mujibnagar indepenngebetter than Sarmiland meticulous research.’ — Sunanda K. Datta-Ray,ISBN 978-1-84904-049-5BOSEDEAD RECKONINGHURSTSARMILA BOSEDEADRECKONINGmemories of THE1971 bangladesh war‘History emerges only slowly from thepassion-filled context of contemporaryevents. Sarmila Bose’s book sets Bangladesh’sliberation struggle at the start ofthis long passage.’ — David Washbrook,Senior Research Fellow, Trinity College,CambridgeThis ground-breaking book chroniclesthe 1971 war in South Asia by reconstitutingthe memories of those onopposing sides of the conflict.The year 1971 was marked by a bittercivil war within Pakistan and warbetween India and Pakistan, backedrespectively by the Soviet Union andthe United States. It was fought overthe territory of East Pakistan, whichseceded to become Bangladesh.Through a detailed investigation ofevents on the ground, Sarmila Bosecontextualises and humanises the warwhile analysing what the events revealabout the nature of the conflict itself.The story of 1971 has so far beendominated by the narrative of thevictorious side. All parties to the warare still largely imprisoned by wartimepartisan mythologies. Bose reconstructsevents via interviews conductedin Bangladesh and Pakistan, publishedand unpublished reminiscencesin Bengali and English of participantson all sides, official documents, foreignmedia reports and other sources.Her book challenges assumptionsabout the nature of the conflict, andexposes the ways in which the 1971conflict is still playing out in the region.9 781849 040495Sarmila BoseDead Reckoning. Memories ofthe 1971 Bangladesh War(Hurst & Co)Sarmila Bose’s innovative bookchronicles the 1971 war in SouthAsia drawing on the memories ofthose on opposing sides of theconflict. The bitter civil war withinPakistan and the war betweenIndia and Pakistan, backedrespectively by the Soviet Unionand the United States, werefought over the disputed territoryof East Pakistan which secededto become Bangladesh. Througha detailed investigation of eventson the ground, Sarmila Bosecontextualises and humanisesthe war while analysing what theevents reveal about the nature ofthe conflict itself.Sudhir HazareesinghLe Mythe Gaullien(Editions Gallimard)Sudhir Hazareesingh examinestwo related phenomena: howde Gaulle created a heroicmyth about himself as France’sprovidential saviour, and howthis myth was disseminated inFrench popular culture from the1940s to the present. The authorfinds compelling evidence ofthe Gaullian cult in a varietyof phenomena, including: theproliferation of statues and streetnames, the tidal wave of memoirsby members of his entourage, themass pilgrimages to Colombeyles-Deux-Églisesafter his death,and the collective idealisation ofhis memory by politicians andintellectuals.Walter Mattli & Ngaire Woods(edited)The Politics of GlobalRegulation(Princeton University Press)The editors have assembled agroup of leading experts in orderto examine how regulation bypublic and private organisations,especially at the global level, canbe hijacked by special interestsor small groups of powerfulfirms. They seek to examinesystematically how and why suchhijacking or ‘regulatory capture’happens, and explain how it mightbe averted. This book is a wakeupcall to proponents of networkgovernance, self-regulation, andthe view that technocrats shouldbe left to regulate with as littleoversight as possible.Marc StearsDemanding DemocracyAmerican Radicals in Search ofa New Politics(Princeton University Press)This major work of history andpolitical theory traces radicaldemocratic thought in Americaacross the twentieth century,seeking to recover ideas thatcould reenergise democraticactivism today. In the struggleto create a more democraticsociety, should citizens restrictthemselves to patient persuasionor take to the streets and seekto impose change? Marc Stearsargues that anyone interested inthese questions could learn fromthe radical democratic traditionthat was forged in the twentiethcentury by political activistsincluding progressives, tradeunionists, civil rights campaigners,and members of the studentNew Left.20

Rosemary Foot andAndrew WalterChina, the United States, andGlobal Order(Cambridge University Press).The United States and China arethe two most important statesin the international system andare crucial to the evolution ofglobal order. Both recogniseeach other as vital players ina range of issues of globalsignificance, including the useof force, macroeconomic policy,nonproliferation of nuclearweapons, climate change andfinancial regulation. In this book,Rosemary Foot and AndrewWalter explore the relationship ofthe two countries to these globalorder issues since 1945, in asophisticated analysis that adroitlyengages the historical, theoreticaland policy literature.Sara HoboltEurope in QuestionReferendums on EuropeanIntegration(Oxford University Press)Winner of the European UnionStudies Association’s EUSAAward for the best book publishedin 2009/10.Sara Hobolt develops acomprehensive theoreticalframework for understandingvoting behaviour in referendums.Her comparative analysis ofEU referendums from 1972 to2008 examines why peoplevote the way they do, the role ofpolitical elites, and the impact ofcampaign dynamics. Importantlythis book shows that voters aresmarter than they are often givencredit for; they may not be fullyinformed about European politics,but they do consider the issuesat stake before voting and makeuse of the information providedby parties and the campaignenvironment.Archie BrownThe Rise and Fall ofCommunism(Random House)Winner of the 2010 W.J.M.Mackenzie Prize of the PoliticalStudies Association of the UK forthe best Political Science Book ofthe year.In this illuminating book, basedon forty years of study and awealth of new sources, ArchieBrown provides a comprehensivehistory as well as an originaland compelling analysis of anideology that has shaped theworld. He explores the appeal ofCommunism to its adherents, andprovides a balanced account ofboth its successes and failuresthroughout the world. The bookconsiders why so many of theseapparently invincible regimescollapsed when they did, soquickly and with such disruptiveeffect.Christopher HoodThe Blame Game: Spin,Bureaucracy, and Self-Preservation in Government(Princeton University Press)The blame game, with its fingerpointingand mutual buckpassing,is a familiar featureof political and organisationallife, and blame avoidancepervades government andpublic organisations at everylevel. Christopher Hood analysesthis pervasive phenomena,showing how blame avoidanceshapes these institutions, takesa variety of forms, and can havepositive effects (for example,helping to identify responsibility).Delving into the inner workingsof complex institutions, thebook demonstrates how abetter understanding of blameavoidance can help improve thequality of modern governance,management, and organisationaldesign.Best Book in British Political Studies, 1950-2010David Butler and Donald StokesPolitical Change in Britain:Forces Shaping Electoral Choice(first published by Macmillan in 1969)This important text deserves a special mention as the recipient of the PoliticalStudies Association’s ‘Best Book in British Political Studies, 1950-2010’ award.As part of the 60th anniversary celebrations of the Political Studies Association,it was decided to make a special award for the best book on British politicalstudies published during the lifetime of the Association. The winner wasdetermined by a poll of PSA members. Despite the plethora of important booksin the numerous sub-fields of the discipline, Butler and Stokes’ ground-breakingsurvey of electoral behaviour in Britain emerged as the clear winner.21

Mediaand PoliticsREUTERS/ Russell BoyceSara Kalim introduces theReuters Institute for the Studyof Journalism22RISJ is to be found in Norham Gardens, North Oxford.Journalism matters in holding powerto account across the world andthe relationship between media andpolitics has never been in sharper focus.With this in mind, the Reuters Institutefor the Study of Journalism was foundedin 2006, born out of a long- runninginternational Fellowship Programme whichbrings mid-career journalists to Oxfordfor research, reflection and exchange.Our alumni now number nearly 500journalists from 87 countries, many fromthe developing world and emergingeconomies.The Fellowship Programme is one partof our overall mission to improve thestandards of journalism by connectingand influencing the worlds of practice,policy and academic research.Our research, seminars and publicationsare organised around three key areas thatwe see as important to a world in whichjournalism faces serious, and in someplaces, critical changes. These are: TheBusiness of Journalism, The EvolvingPractice of Journalism, and Relationshipsbetween Journalism and Accountability.Examples of recent publications include:a major book on the impact of theinternet on news organisations in sevencountries; a study of the coverage of theCopenhagen Climate Change summit;and an analysis of whether the foreigncorrespondent has become redundant inthe face of turbulent changes to how welearn about the world.Our analysis of the UK’s first televisedPrime Ministerial Debates was launched ina lecture by Professor Stephen Colemanto inaugurate the new series of DavidButler Lectures on Media and Elections.It was sponsored by the BBC and theReuters Institute and televised on BBCParliament in February 2011.We believe we are unique in probing andanalysing how journalism is practicedround the world – comparing andcontrasting the differing cultures of thenews media in a globalising world – andwe are proud to be Oxford University’sleading research centre in news mediaand to sit within the Department of Politicsand International Relations. Several of ouralumni have expressed how they havebenefitted personally and professionallyfrom their time spent in Oxford.The Reuters Institute for the Studyof Journalism exists because of thegenerosity of the Thomson ReutersFoundation and several other externalsponsors of journalist fellowships. Ourresearch is funded by charitable trustsand foundations and by the support ofprivate benefactors. For more informationabout our work, please visithttp://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.ukSara KalimAdministrator,Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism

SpotlightAbdalla HassanEgypt, RISJ Alumnus, sponsoredby the Gerda Henkel FoundationI never imagined that six months at Oxfordcould be so transformative. A fellowship atthe Reuters Institute gave me an open spacenot only to think and write about my researchtopic – the evolution of press censorship inEgypt – but to have a wonderful exchangewith other journalists from around the world,and the freedom to consider what matteredto me and where I belonged in the changingfield of journalism.In my final presentation I listed ten lessonsI’ve learned, the last one being: ‘Freerexpression enables action’. I believed thateventually it was not going to be enoughto allow a wider space for speech but itwould inevitably lead to political action. Andit was taking form online – Facebook wasnot only the freest press in Egypt, it was amobilisation tool.My fellowship at the Reuters Institute offeredme that chance to reflect on my career injournalism and convinced me that I could notgive in to cynicism. I still had something tocontribute, I thought, even as the journalismprofession faces an uncertain future.I returned to Cairo on 31 July 2010.Presidential elections were scheduled forSeptember 2011, which I expected to bea crucial period in Egypt’s history. Pressrestrictions were tightened ahead of forgedparliamentary elections in late 2010, aharbinger of elections to maintain a presentdaypharaoh in power.It was easy to lose hope that things couldbe different in Egypt. Calls for change andreform were kept at bay by the massiveapparatuses of the security state, whichharassed, detained, and tortured citizenswith impunity. Corruption was rife in agoverning system that was not beholden tothe people but to the self-interest of those inpower.Still, I never thought I would live through apopular revolution. On 28 January, dubbedthe ‘Friday of Rage’, millions of Egyptianstook to the streets shouting a slogan that hasrung out across the Arab world: ‘The peoplewant the downfall of the regime!’ It wasincredible to be living those moments wherecitizens were taking action and making theultimate sacrifices for freedom.I am grateful to my colleagues at the ReutersInstitute and the friends I’ve made at Oxfordfor their wonderful network of support. Insteadof always being the one to ask the questions,I found myself being interviewed by mediaoutlets in Finland, Brazil, Chile and the UK.Another unexpected benefit of my fellowshipwas that as internet communications wereblocked for five days and text messaging evenlonger, I was able to send messages to friendsthrough my UK mobile number.It sounds clichéd to say that two terms inOxford changed my life, but they have. I hadnever realised how much I had internalisedfear while working as a journalist and editor inEgypt for 12 years. I did not want to be afraidany more. The true transformation happenedwhen Egyptians were willing to shed theirfears, knowing they are not alone.“It soundsclichéd tosay thattwo termsin Oxfordchanged mylife, but theyhave.”23

PUndergraduate Teachingersonal ReflectionsElizabeth Frazer offers some thoughtson life from both sides of the tutorialSome aspects of tutorial teaching in PPEhave not changed much in the lastthirty years. When I went by myself totutorials with Zbigniew Pelczynski on PoliticalTheory, in 1983, the reading and philosophicalpuzzles he set me were strikingly similar tothose tackled by our students now: is authorityjust legitimate power or is there more to theconcept than that? Are the ‘rights of woman’distinct in any way from the ‘rights of man’?I read my essay out loud, and then had todefend the analysis and the argument in theface of sceptical criticism. That is still thepattern of the tutorials I am teaching this year.But the administration and the paperworkconnected with this teaching isunrecognisable. Dr Pelczynski had little slipsof paper with essay titles and some booksand articles listed on them. He kept them ina filing cabinet drawer which he rummagedin at the end of the tutorial. (Other tutors saidsomething like ‘well, do you want to coverconsequentialism next?’ and wandered alongtheir shelves giving some titles of books thatmight help.)Now, the Department supplies onlinereading lists and course outlines for everyundergraduate paper which set out the aimsand objectives of the course, the teachingarrangements in the given year, the formalrubric from the Examination Decrees, topicsand sub-topics.Exactly what difference these lists andspecifications have made is hard to say.Certainly, students seem to use librariesdifferently – for photocopying rather thanbrowsing, for finding set books rather thanresearching topics.We used to leave hand written essays with ourtutors at the end of the tutorial, which werereturned some time later – sometimes at thenext tutorial – with or without some marginalcomments. Students now often submit theiressays through Weblearn, and get them backthe same way with marginal comments typed,some interjections using ‘track changes’, asummary comment and a percentage gradewhich goes in to the Weblearn markbook, andwhich is invaluable when it comes to end ofterm reports. We don’t use the kind of formalmarking schemes that are common in otheruniversities but there is some pressure on usto do so.As a struggling mature student with a patchyschool education behind me I benefittedtremendously from tutors’ willingness to seeme on my own to try to explain why my essaysweren’t good enough or my exam answersweren’t First Class. Now teaching the particulartechniques necessary for weekly essays,written exam answers, or research designsfor theses, is an integral part of the formalteaching of undergraduates.Both the demand for these striking innovationsin pedagogy, and the supply of them,are connected with a range of social andgovernmental changes. The University’steaching quality is regularly assessed, and anecessary condition of Oxford Departments’earning the highest score is producingthe full range of lecture handouts, coursespecifications, and so on, for inspection.Pupils in the British school system areused to constant summative assessmentand to a teaching system that is orientedoverwhelmingly to that. The monetary valueof a degree is now common knowledge, andrational parents and students, as well ascommentators both critical and non-critical,calculate, explicitly or implicitly, accordingly.One result is that the Lower Second Classdegree in PPE Finals has more or lessdisappeared. There is a standard for an UpperSecond, a standard of knowledge, literacy,presentation, analysis and argument, andwithout doubt the vast majority of our studentscomfortably meet or exceed it.In every generation golden-ageism can takehold. I remember fellow undergraduates whowere concerned to do the minimum (or, moregenerously, optimum) amount of work andno more for their First or their Second Classdegree. So instrumentality, and in particularthe cry of ‘is this relevant for the exam?’ is nota wholly new thing.I don’t remember any lectures on politicaltheory as such in the early 1980s. I went toa series by David Robertson who lecturedon Rawls, Nozick and Dworkin – the affinitiesand the differences between them, and thesignificance of ‘Kantianism’ in their work. I alsowent to lectures by April Carter on anarchism.Tutors with University contracts had to delivera set number of hours of lectures per year.Professors mainly took care of the seminars forMasters students; the others lectured, moreor less, on topics of their choice. Now everypaper is accompanied by a course of at leasteight lectures, for core courses sixteen, andit is made clear to students that attendanceat and attention to the lectures is a necessarycondition of success in the paper. Most lecturecourses have course outlines and readinglists, and individual lectures are usuallyaccompanied by slides or handouts that arepublished on the web. There is also an onlineProgramme Specification, a PPE Handbookand a Guide to Politics Further Subjects.Elizabeth FrazerUniversity Lecturer in Politics,Official Fellow, New CollegeMore personal reflectionsA conversation between Elizabeth Frazer (PPE, 1984; DPhil 1987),Matthew Powell (PPE, 2010) and Nick Alexander (PPE, 1976).Matthew and Nick discuss their learning experiences at Oxford across the internet divide, and findthat they have much in common. Nick has just started his 30th year in the video game businesswhere he is currently Executive Chairman of Connect2Media and Non-executive Chairman ofTeePee Games; Matthew is currently studying for the MPhil in Comparative Government.Please listen to thepodcast on our alumniprofile page: follow thealumni tab from thehome page atwww.politics.ox.ac.uk24Photo: Sue Srawley

“canIn everygenerationgolden-ageismtake hold.”Photo: Keiko Ikeuchi25

The DPIR and theInternetThe Department has a large and varied presenceon the internet. Here are just a few virtual locationswhere you can discover more about our work.Photo: Sue Srawleywww.politics.ox.ac.ukThe main web pages of the DPIR. This is the best place to find out more about theDepartment, discover our latest news and learn about the teaching and research ofour diverse faculty and community of researchers.http://politicsinspires.orgPolitics in Spires is a collaborative blog. It contains news and reflections onPolitics and International Relations from scholars at the DPIR in Oxford and theDepartment of Politics and International Studies at the University of Cambridge.http://podcasts.ox.ac.ukPodcasting provides an opportunity for members of the Department to deliver lecturesand other content to an audience beyond the conventional classroom environment. ThisUniversity website allows access to this material to members of the public, and the DPIR iswell represented on their site. If you have iTunes on your computer or digital media playeryou can access this material and more through the ‘Oxford University’ portal at ‘iTunes U’.http://godwindiary.politics.ox.ac.ukThe Godwin Diary project, directed by Mark Philp, provides a searchable onlinetranscription of the diary of William Godwin (1756-1836), together with scannedversions of the manuscript, and a wealth of scholarly apparatus. It provides afascinating perspective on the social and political culture of the period 1788-1836.http://www.politics.ox.ac.uk/index.php/alumni/alumni.htmlPlease visit our alumni web pages! You will find alumni news, forthcomingevents and alumni profiles; we are currently setting up an alumni networkingpage along with a list of useful links to other University alumni networks. Therewill also be an electronic version of Inspires available for download.FacebookThe Department is now on facebook:please follow the icon on the home page.26

Photo: Keiko Ikeuchie27

Department of Politics andInternational RelationsAlumni Weekend ProgrammeSaturday 17 SeptemberThe 2011 Oxford Alumni Weekend looksset to be a fantastic occasion, with morethan 120 talks, tours and activities in thecentral programme, complemented bycollege-specific events under the theme of21st century challenges.Further details at the Almuni Page onwww.politics.ox.ac.ukBooking is open until 22 Augustvia www.alumniweekend.ox.ac.ukTo request a copy of the paper brochure, pleasecontact the Alumni Weekend Booking TeamEmail: alumniweekend@alumni.ox.ac.ukPhone: +44 (0)1865 6116229.30am – 10.45amRhodes Trust Lecture Theatre, Saïd Business SchoolProfessor Jennifer Welsh and colleagues from the Oxford Centre forEthics Law and Armed Conflict discuss the Responsibility to Protect incontemporary international relations, and its role in key cases such asLibya and the post-election violence in Kenya.11.30am – 12.45pmNelson Mandela Lecture Theatre, Saïd Business SchoolSir David Butler asks why so many politicians are Oxonians. Thissession includes the following panellists: Lord Wood of Anfield, LordBoswell of Aynho and Richard Jarman (Chair, Head of Governmentand Community Relations at Oxford).2pm – 3.15pmSheldonian Theatre, Broad StreetDavid Willetts MP debates Intergenerational Justice withDr Mark Philp, Professor Simon Caney and Dr Adam Swift.The Inaugural Fulbright Lecture on International RelationsThe Turn: American Foreign Policy 2009 to 2011Professor Anne-Marie Slaughter, Princeton UniversityThis was the first of a series of Oxford lectures, held on 18 May 2011.A podcast of this lecture is available athttp://www.politics.ox.ac.uk/index.php/alumni/alumni.html