September 2018 – Sigur Center for Asian Studies

book cover with blue skies and a mountain; text: living in a sacred cosmos: Indonesia and the Future of Islam by Bernard Adeney-Risakotta

10/3/18: Living in a Sacred Cosmos: Indonesia and the Future of Islam

September 26, 2018May 14, 2021Archives & Recordings, New Books in Asian StudiesLeave a Comment

The Sigur Center for Asian Studies and the GW Department of Anthropology cordially invite you to a book launch discussion with Professor Bernard Adeney-Risakotta about his latest publication, “Living in a Sacred Cosmos: Indonesia and the Future of Islam.”

Wednesday, October 3, 2018 12:30 PM – 1:45 PM

Chung-wen Shih Conference Room Suite 503
The Elliott School of International Affairs
1957 E Street, NW Washington, DC 20052

book cover of living in a sacred cosmos

Listen to Part 1

Listen to Part 2

Listen to Part 3

About the Book:
The future of Islam lies in Asia. Is there hope for peace and justice between Islam and the West? An answer may lie in the ancient, unique civilization of Indonesia, where modern, religious people still live in a sacred cosmos. Indonesia is experiencing an Islamic renaissance: a flowering of religious ideas, art, literature, architecture, institutions, and intellectual creativity, stimulated by civil freedoms, democracy, education, and prosperity. This community is more religiously diverse than it has ever been, even though it is threatened by growing Islamic radicalism. What do Muslims think about democracy, scientific rationality, and equal human rights for all, especially for women and non-Muslims? How do Muslims respond to the global environmental crisis? This book addresses these questions through the lens of empirical research on the views of people in Indonesia, the largest Muslim country in the world.

About the Speaker: picture of Bernard Adeney-Risakotta at a conference Bernard Adeney-Risakotta was born in China of British and American parents. He was founding director of the Indonesian Consortium for Religious Studies (ICRS) at Universitas Gadjah Mada in Yogyakarta. He studied in Wisconsin, London, and Berkeley, where he taught for nine years before moving to Indonesia in 1991. Among his many publications is Strange Virtues: Ethics in a Multicultural World.

old rickshaw pull cart in a shed/storage room

Summer 2018 Research Fellow – Spotting the potential of technology in filling critical gaps in migrant health

September 26, 2018April 27, 2021Sigur Center 2018 Summer FellowsLeave a Comment

old bike-drawn cart

Anytime I found myself venturing through Kathmandu valley this summer in Nepal, I developed a habit of scanning my eyes through the vibrant streets often riddled with endless traffic in sight. Each instance would paint a similar picture. The elderly and aging are visible and cannot be missed even if one tried in Kathmandu. Most head to their local temples to attend aarti and make ritual offerings to deities. Others are seen running errands like picking up a sachet of milk to make chia or catching-up with neighbors on the latest political happenings. And then there are those who simply peer through their windows or stand on their balconies to witness the world unfolding before them with keen eyes. Contrasting this population are those dressed in their uniforms and weaving skillfully through the maddening traffic. Young schoolchildren and college students are vibrant and conspicuous throughout the city as well. What one notices over time is the consistent symbolic absence of individuals between the school and college going age and the aging and elderly. If by any chance you miss the significant absence of the working age population visually, you are bound to hear about it during your engagement with the locals. Every household has someone abroad to study, work or do both. A steady stream of young working-age Nepalis arriving and leaving at the airport is another public space demonstrating this on-going trend of migration in Nepal.

In 2014, more than 520,000 labor permits were issued to Nepalis planning to work abroad as migrant laborers.[1] According to captured data, the number of labor permits issued increases every year. What this data doesn’t capture however are individuals headed to countries where labor permits aren’t needed, or working is facilitated via other formal, informal or undocumented channels (e.g. females working in India or recipients of visas or permanent residence in countries like Canada, United States of America or Australia). Making up for their physical absence is the growing reliance on remittance from migrant workers contributing to increasing household incomes as well as the national GDP of Nepal. As much as 25% of the national GDP consists of remittance from migrant workers with inflows topping as much as USD 5 billion according to estimates by the International Labor Organization in 2013. As such, Nepal is ranked third in the world among countries sourcing the highest proportion of remittance in terms of GDP. The economic benefits of Nepali migrant workers filling niche labor markets in countries such as Malaysia, Korea, Qatar, Saudi Arabia among other such countries are manifold. However, studies exploring the recruitment processes and working conditions of migrant workers have revealed indicators of abuse and exploitation involving forced labor and trafficking.[2] Organizations such as Amnesty International have made repeated calls to prevent and protect migrant workers from adverse outcomes while they sacrifice their time with loved ones to labor in foreign countries in the hopes of a better future.

Being aware of the Nepali migrant labor backdrop and conscious of the policies and politics it entails, I was still taken aback when the subject arose in the context of my summer field research activities in Kathmandu, Nepal. A highly esteemed and experienced health care provider at a well-known public hospital in Nepal was the source of a thought-provoking insight. In the context of our interview on the role of technology in providing health solutions for a country like Nepal, they revealed their on-going voluntary efforts to provide medical counsel for Nepali migrant workers abroad via video platforms such as Skype or directly via phone or text messages. They further explained that there were many contextual factors involved in leading to such interactions from cost, lack of access to medical professionals, language barriers, lack of resources such as time and transportation etc. My key informant further noted that their medical oath prohibited them from denying care to anyone especially individuals like migrant Nepali laborers who are underserved and hard-to-reach when adopting the lens of community and population health. Still, they worried that the counsel they provided may not be up-to-par relative to if the person would have been in front of them or if the interaction was aided by another medical professional on the other end even if they were trained front-line workers or nurse aids with minimal medical education and training. This medical professional noted that they include a verbal and written disclaimer anytime they provide medical counsel for migrant Nepali workers. They felt this is the best they can do under the current regulatory framework for telehealth and mobile health in Nepal or rather lack thereof. They were hopeful that guidelines and frameworks to facilitate such interactions would be prioritized and developed by the Nepali government soon, so they wouldn’t have to operate within a gray area.

Processing what this key informant shared, I began to again marvel at the role of technology in connecting individuals in-need and filling systematic gaps before it even becomes evident with data and trends over time. The survey administered by Amnesty International to assess Nepali migrant needs was indeed also conducted via mobile phones. Making the not-so-easily reachable accessible is a boon for researchers looking to cover ground where once it might have been incredibly resource intensive to be able to do so. In the context of migration and immigration, the solutions and needs appear to operate at multiple ecological levels. Policies and regulatory frameworks are necessary to monitor and govern the pathways where such interactions are happening. Awareness and education might be required for governing bodies and medical professionals to understand this phenomenon. Data is critical to understand how these interactions are unfolding and what health and livelihood needs exist among migrant Nepali workers. While the focus of my research wasn’t on migrant Nepali workers as a population, the use of information and communications technologies (ICTs) has been identified as a potential tool utilized by this population to manage their health concerns as one of my research findings.[3]

As Nepal moves towards its mandate of universal health coverage and aspires to establish digital governance measures, addressing the health needs of migrant Nepali workers facilitated by telemedicine programs offered by Nepalese medical providers is a topic that requires further deliberation and action. Similarly, researchers and technologists must come together to understand this phenomenon and provide recommendations to policy-makers and practitioners to enable and diffuse any resulting innovations that are likely to make the necessary impact on improving health outcomes for migrant Nepali workers. The potential for replicating or adapting these solutions towards other migrant populations globally is another impetus for funding and conducting research in this area. Therefore, there are roles to be played by individuals and organizations alike in understanding and addressing migrant health needs by leveraging the potential of ICTs.

[1] http://www.ilo.org/kathmandu/areasofwork/labour-migration/lang–en/index.htm

[2] https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/12/nepal-migrant-workers-failed-by-government-exploited-by-businesses/

[3] https://www.futurehealthindex.com/2018/03/05/care-at-the-margins/

Ichhya Pant works at the intersection health, evaluation, data and information and communication technologies (ICTs) with a focus on vulnerable population such as immigrants, refugees, women and children. Currently, she serves as a Research Scientist focusing on monitoring and evaluation on the RANI Project which aims to test whether a multi-level social norms based intervention will reduce anemia in women of reproductive age in Odisha, India. To learn more about her project work to date or thought leadership in her areas of interest, please connect with her on LinkedIn or Research Gate.

black and white image of a young woman sitting by the side of a road

Summer 2018 Research Fellow – Young, female, climbing the doctoral ladder while conducting global health field work

September 26, 2018March 3, 2021Sigur Center 2018 Summer FellowsLeave a Comment

black and white photo of a young woman sitting on the sidewalk

If you’re anything like me, you’re passionate about improving public health to a fault. Whether it’s reducing smoking among adolescents in the United States, preventing anemia among women of reproductive age in India or understanding the scope of technology-enabled projects in Nepal, you’re all in. All in your textbooks that is… until this summer. In my years of professional public health work, I had not yet had the opportunity to go out in the field and get my hands public health field work dirty! Talking to my friends who had done so was contagious so to speak. All puns intended, of course.

When I found a grant opportunity to conduct field work in Asia this summer, I was beyond ecstatic. I quickly put together a proposal and submitted it hoping for the best and I got it! As a female public health researcher semi-successfully adulting her way through life and graduate school, my self-confidence was at a peak when embarking on this journey. I had completed a desk review working with my collaborators for over a year. I knew the technical and non-technical factors associated with my field work. I had a good sense of the landscape and who I would be requesting key informant interviews from once we hit the ground running. I could read and write the local language, had friends and family in the area, and knew the city well. What could really go wrong I thought? Well plenty, it turns out so listen up and read closely so you can learn from my moments of “could have done things better”:

Lesson # 1: Your work begins long before you get to the field

Every country has a local ethical board who will want to know what type of research you’re conducting in their country, how, and what your plans are in collecting and analyzing the data you collect from their citizens at a bare minimum. Often, these ethical review applications are extensive in nature as they should be to protect citizens from harmful and unethical research practices. Bottom line is, you must build these applications into your overall timeline and get them in motion well before you plan to be on the ground. In my case, it took a full six months between pulling the application together, getting it reviewed, revised then finally approved. I did my homework by talking to others who had applied for local ethical approval to conduct field research in Nepal. They shared their knowledge which helped me understand the process a little bit better before getting started. I had individuals review my application before I submitted to catch any errors I might not as a total newbie in this aspect. Once I finally got the application submitted, I began building a relationship with the appointed point of contact. She was super helpful and open to me calling her directly for questions or a conversation. I wasn’t shy about reaching out to her for help and to keep reminding her every so often that my application was still pending approval. Thanks to her help and to all those who helped me along the way I was able to get approval in time for my summer field research grant!

If you walk away with anything from my observations here, remember this:

Apply for local ethical approval well in advance. Give yourself say 6 months or longer to be on the safe side.
Talk to others who’ve applied for ethical approval before and learn from them.
Have others review your application to catch any errors before you submit.
Build a relationship with your point of contact overseeing your application and maintain it after you gain approval.

Lesson # 2: You must be culturally responsive but darn it sometimes it’s really oh so hard I tell ya

When the experienced and the wise tell you being culturally responsive is a must in your classrooms, they weren’t kidding, ya’ll! Working in Nepal was no different. I had a list of people I had reached out and the rate of response was fantastic thankfully. However, I quickly realized that most individuals preferred a follow-up phone call to chit-chat and get to know you better prior to committing a day and time for an interview. Getting them on the phone wasn’t easy either. Often, you’d have to try more than once, exercise those patience muscles and keep yourself busy. When you finally nail down a day and time, then be prepared to wait because 9AM might mean 10AM really for some individuals and that’s just how it works in Nepal. Some of your key informants maybe so busy they have three individuals down for the same time. What this means is you find yourself asking them for a time where only you can meet with them and have their attention for say 30 minutes to an hour. I realize I come off somewhat sarcastic. I promise that isn’t my only goal here. It can get frustrating especially on days when you have multiple interviews with a small margin of time to travel across town for the other interviews. In the same breath though sometimes, this worked to my favor. The flexibility in time and scheduling meant I was able to reschedule with some individuals when it just was not possible to make it to my appointment. I was amazed by how easy it was to do this and thankful for their generosity in fitting me in another day and time. There was reciprocity involved in this laidback approach! I realized that although people weren’t bound to agreed upon timetables and sure that pushed me out of my comfort zone, it also made me appreciate the lack of “time consciousness” rigidity. Is it fun to have to wait an hour to hour and a half for an interview you scheduled? NO, not at all, never. However, there is still a beauty in going with the flow and realizing that this is how things work in Nepal and that’s okay! Accepting that I can’t change the working culture in Nepal, I decide to roll with it and mentally prepared to accept scheduling fluidity. C’est la vie!

Tips and tricks for responding to the working culture in Nepal:

Phone calls and in-person meetings are preferred over emails and video calls for work-related conversations.
Schedules are fluid so learn to go with the flow.
Have a good book to read or an electrifying Spotify playlist to carry you through time spent waiting.

Lesson # 3: Young and female ≠ professional, leader or an expert. What gives?!

Where I really could not find myself going with the flow is when I it dawned on that gender bias still exists and you just must deal with it. Here are some of my interactions while interviewing key informants or discussing my field work with others:

Ichhya, you’re so young (and female). No one will take you seriously in Nepal. Ask falano… they’ll tell you how it is…

So, you’re a master’s student huh?

Are you married? Do you have family in America?

What is your father’s name? Where is your home again?

I noticed your last name is Pant. Which part of the country did your ancestors come from?

Do you have a greencard or US citizenship? (aka what is your immigration status?)

Are you related to falano (Nepali slang for saying “so and so”? You know falano families and Pant families tend to marry each other… Since they are involved in this project too, I wondered if ya’ll were related, you know how it goes…

Notice any trends here? I was shocked I tell you (not really) that I was on the receiving end of such gendered mindsets. Okay, so I can accept that I may look young and I’m female. I get it. It’s a man’s world they say. Especially in Nepal. Still, the assumption that I am master’s student was an intriguing gender bias that was persistent across many interviews. What I’m unsure of is whether it is because I look young or if I’m a female. Probably an interaction of the two factors. What’s important is that someone like me isn’t associated with leadership, expertise or doctoral work. Of course, the sample size here is a meager one but I hope other women working in public health in Nepal speak up with their experiences in the field to balance out this conversation.

In America, we note how public health is a woman’s profession. It doesn’t feel that way in Nepal. Where are the women working in the field there I thought to myself? My sample consisted of 80% males. Do women make it to leadership positions in the field of public health in Nepal? Am I just not meeting them? In talking about this with a highly qualified public health female professional working in Nepal, she confirmed that it’s just the norm. People seem to somehow miss the “PhD” behind your name and refer to you as baini (little sister) instead of “Dr. falano”. They openly take pity on you if you aren’t married by X age or have children. You are defined by who your parents are, what caste you belong to, who your ancestors were, and whether you have a husband or children. It’s just how it goes for the most part. Imagine having to navigate a working environment where you’re baini and your male counterparts are “Dr. falano” after years of hard work and earning a PhD behind your name from a globally recognized public health institution. Unpleasant and frustrating, to say the least…

Not everyone adopts and subscribes to such a viewpoint of course and there are teams and environments where such experiences aren’t the norm. My intention here isn’t to generalize but to start a conversation. Can young and female become normatively accepted as the face of public health leadership in Nepal? If so, what will it take and when will it happen exactly? Yes, I know what you’re thinking. It is 2018 and we’re three months away from 2019. What gives?!

If you’re curious and still with me, here’s how I responded to the questions I noted above:

Ichhya, you’re so young (and female). No one will take you seriously in Nepal. Ask falano… they’ll tell you…

(Seriously taken aback)… really? I guess I will have to rely on my intellect and present myself accordingly, so I am taken seriously… (still taken aback….)

So, you’re a master’s student huh?

Oh no, I’m a third-year doctoral student. I mentioned that in our previous conversations but perhaps you missed it. I got my master’s six years ago in fact.

Are you married? Do you have family in America?

Yes, I do have family in America but here in Nepal as well.

What is your father’s name? Where is your home again?

My home is in Kamalpokhari. Do you know Kumari Hall? Within walking distance to it, in fact…

I noticed your last name is Pant. Which part of the country did your ancestors come from?

(extremely uncomfortable) I consider myself “duniya ko Pant” (Pant of the earth)… followed by awkward laughter…

Do you have a greencard or US citizenship? (aka what is your immigration status?)

(extremely uncomfortable) Umm… I am a Nepali citizen… (still extremely uncomfortable)

Are you related to falano (Nepali slang for saying “so and so”? You know falano families and Pant families tend to marry each other…

No, I had no idea that these families marry into each other. We aren’t related though. (awkward silence)

I don’t know if my response does justice to balancing tilted gender perspectives or if a key informant interview is where I should even attempt to doing so. I frankly was ill-prepared to address them. I did the best I could in the moment where these questions or comments came my way. I realize there are larger gender norms at play and my experiences aren’t simply an artifact of viewpoints in the public health corner of Nepal. We can’t change them overnight of course but I feel, strongly might I add, that it’s time we begin to talk about them, address them and intervene wherever and whenever we can. So, at the risk of appearing naïve and controversial, where do we begin? I want to especially hear from my female and young or (not) public health and development professionals in the field. Please speak up about your thoughts and experiences on this matter because #Timesup.

Elliott School of International Affairs building sign

9/21/2018: Sigur Center & GWIKS Receive Prestigious Title VI Grant

September 25, 2018March 24, 2020In the NewsLeave a Comment

The Sigur Center and Institute of Korean Studies together received the highly regarded designation of National Resource Center (NRC) for Asian Studies. The designation – the first time these two centers have received NRC status – enhances the institutes’ ability to engage the broader public community, including students, K-12 educators, HBCUs, policymakers, military veterans, journalists and the general public on regional and global issues of importance. With this award, GW joins a handful of other world-leading universities, including Stanford, Columbia and the University of Chicago, which have likewise been recognized with this honor.

“The recognition of our programmatic excellence significantly enhances our reputation and funding resources. It demonstrates the scholarly excellence and will increase public outreach which have long been hallmarks of the Center’s collective intellectual life,” Sigur Center Director Ben Hopkins said.

Additionally, the Sigur Center and GWIKS have been awarded funding for Foreign Language and Area Studies (FLAS) Fellowships which support undergraduate and graduate students studying modern foreign languages and related area or international studies.

Please click here to read the full press release!

About the Title VI:

Title VI is a provision of the 1965 Higher Education Act, funding centers for area studies that serve as vital national resources for world regional knowledge and foreign language training. National Resource Centers teach at the undergraduate and graduate levels and conduct research focused on specific world regions, international studies, and the teaching of less commonly taught languages. The FLAS fellowship program complements the NRC program, providing opportunities for outstanding undergraduate and graduate students to engage in area studies and world language training.

black silhouettes of Asian cities' skylines

10/2/2018: Sigur Center Summer Research Fellow Roundtable

September 24, 2018July 14, 2021Archives & RecordingsLeave a Comment

The Sigur Center for Asian Studies would like to invite you to a roundtable discussion with the Sigur Center summer research fellows to talk about their research experiences in Asia!

Tuesday, October 2, 2018
12:30 PM – 1:45 PM
Chung-wen Shih Conference Room
Suite 503
The Elliott School of International Affairs
1957 E Street, NW
Washington, DC 20052

Roundtable Audio (1)

Roundtable Audio (2)

Roundtable Audio (3)

Topics for Discussion:

“Chinese Communist Party Military Strategy During the War of Resistance against Japan”

“Bringing Power-sharing Down to the Streets: Micro-level Interaction with the State in Myanmar”

“Religious Revival amid Riverine Erosion in the Island of Majuli, Assam”

Speakers:

Zhongtian Han, is a history Ph.D. student interested in modern East Asia and strategic studies. His research focuses on the strategic history of modern China and Japan.

black and white photo of Jangai Jap

Jangai Jap, is a Ph.D. Candidate in George Washington University’s Political Science Department. Her research interest includes ethnic politics, national identity, local government and Myanmar politics. Her dissertation aims to explain factors that shape ethnic minorities’ attachment to the state and why has the state been more successful in winning over a sense of attachment from members of some ethnic minority groups than other ethnic minority groups. She has won the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship, and her dissertation research has received support from the Cosmos Club Foundation and GW’s Sigur Center for Asian Studies.

Shweta Krishnan, is a PhD Candidate in the department of Anthropology at George Washington University. Her research interests include the anthropology of religion, science and the environment. Her current project explores religious revival amid riverine erosion in the island of Majuli, Assam.

thumbnail image of Ichhya Pant in red top Ichhya Pant, works at the intersection health, evaluation, data and information and communication technologies (ICTs) with a focus on vulnerable population such as immigrants, refugees, women and children. Currently, she serves as a Research Scientist focusing on monitoring and evaluation on the RANI Project which aims to test whether a multi-level social norms based intervention will reduce anemia in women of reproductive age in Odisha, India.

10/4/18: U.S. Politics and Government: The View From Asia

September 21, 2018July 14, 2021Archives & RecordingsLeave a Comment

Thursday, October 4, 2018
12:30 PM – 2:00 PM
Lindner Family Commons – Room 602 (6th Floor)
The Elliott School of International Affairs
1957 E Street, NW
Washington, DC 20052

The Sigur Center for Asian Studies will host a panel of news journalists based in Washington, DC reporting from a variety of Asia-based news outlets to discuss how audiences in Asia view contemporary U.S. politics and government.

Light refreshments will be available. This event is free to the public, but is off the record and not for attribution.

Speakers:

Ms. Seema Sirohi is a graduate of Delhi University in India. She has a Master’s degree in journalism from Jawarahal Nehru University in Delhi and an M.A. In sociology from the University of Kansas in the USA. She has worked as a reporter for the Associated Press and as a correspondent and feature writer for the Telegraph. She has also served as a writer and editor for a number of internationally prominent newspapers and magazines. Since 2011, she has been a correspondent and columnist for the Economic Times , India’s largest daily business newspaper.

Mr. Prashanth Parameswaran has lived in Malaysia, Singapore and the Phillipines. He is currently a Ph.D candidate at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University. He has previously worked on Asian affairs at several think tanks in the U.S., including the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. And he is currently senior editor of The Diplomat Magazine which covers Asian affairs and has its headquarters in D.C.

Mr. Takeshi Kurihara is a graduate of the University of Tokyo where he earned a B.A. in journalism. He began his career as a reporter for NHK (Japan public television), working in western Japan and then eventually was transferred to Tokyo where he worked as a political reporter. Takeshi first came to the United States as a visiting scholar at Stanford University in 2015. In June 2018, he was transferred to the Washington bureau of NHK where he specializes in covering news related to U.S. government policies.

Moderator: Professor Andrew Krieger, senior adjunct professor at Montgomery College in Rockville, MD; teaches courses in international relations, sociology, and American government.

Kano film promotional picture with group of baseball players and their coach

9/24/18: GTI Taiwan Cinema Night: “Kano”

September 18, 2018July 14, 2021Archives & RecordingsLeave a Comment

Logos of the Global Taiwan Institute, Sigur Center, and the Organization of Asian Studies

The Global Taiwan Institute, the Organization of Asian Studies, and the Sigur Center for Asian Studies at George Washington University are pleased to present the film “Kano” in GTI’s ongoing series of social and cultural programs in Washington, DC.

Monday, September 24, 2018

Doors Open at 5pm; Film Starts at 5:30pm
Lindner Family Commons – Room 602
Elliott School of International Affairs
1957 E Street, NW, Washington, DC 20052

promotional photo of movie called Kano

THE FILM

We will be showing the film “Kano”, directed by Taiwanese director Umin Boya (馬志翔). “Kano” tells the true story of a multicultural high school baseball team from southern Taiwan as it competed for the prestigious Japanese High School Baseball Championship in 1931. This ragtag band of Taiwanese indigenous, Han Chinese, and Japanese teammates must overcome language and cultural barriers to not only survive, but to succeed. The film examines Taiwan’s long colonial past, as well as explores themes of personal and national identity through the lens of baseball, Taiwan’s national sport.

GUEST SPEAKER

Photo of Wei Te-Sheng with green background We will be joined by guest speaker director Wei Te-Sheng (魏德聖), who is also the producer of “Kano.” Born in Tainan, director Wei graduated with a degree in electrical engineering, and only started his entertainment career after he completed the mandatory military service in Taiwan. His first directed movie “Cape No. 7” not only was a hit, but successfully brought life back to the Taiwan film industry. Director Wei will join us at the event and answer questions in the Q&A session after the film.

9/26/18: Rampage: MacArthur, Yamashita, and the Battle of Manila (1945)

September 18, 2018May 14, 2021Archives & Recordings, New Books in Asian Studies1 Comment

The Sigur Center for Asian Studies and Asia Policy Point cordially invite to a book launch discussion with author James M. Scott (Target Tokyo; The War Below; and The Attack on the Liberty) to talk about his most recent publication, Rampage: MacArthur, Yamashita, and the Battle of Manila (1945).

Wednesday, September 26, 2018
12:00 PM – 2:00 PM
Chung-wen Shih Conference Room
Suite 503
The Elliott School of International Affairs
1957 E Street, NW
Washington, DC 20052

Book cover of Rampage by James M Scott

Before World War II, Manila was a slice of America in Asia, populated with elegant neoclassical buildings, spacious parks, and home to thousands of U.S. servicemen and business executives who enjoyed the relaxed pace of the tropics. The outbreak of the war, however, brought an end to the good life. General Douglas MacArthur, hoping to protect the Pearl of the Orient, declared the Philippine capital an open city and evacuated his forces. The Japanese seized Manila on January 2, 1942, rounding up and interning thousands of Americans.

MacArthur, who escaped soon after to Australia, famously vowed to return. For nearly three years, he clawed his way north, obsessed with redeeming his promise and turning his earlier defeat into victory. By early 1945, he prepared to liberate Manila, a city whose residents by then faced widespread starvation. Convinced the Japanese would abandon the city as he did, MacArthur planned a victory parade down Dewey Boulevard. But the enemy had other plans. Determined to fight to the death, Japanese marines barricaded intersections, converted buildings into fortresses, and booby-trapped stores, graveyards, and even dead bodies.

The twenty-nine-day battle to liberate Manila resulted in the catastrophic destruction of the city and a rampage by Japanese forces that brutalized the civilian population. Landmarks were demolished, houses were torched, suspected resistance fighters were tortured and killed, countless women were raped, and their husbands and children were murdered. American troops had no choice but to battle the enemy, floor by floor and even room by room, through schools, hospitals, and even sports stadiums. In the end, an estimated 100,000 civilians lost their lives in a massacre as heinous as the Rape of Nanking.

Based on extensive research in the United States and the Philippines, including war-crimes testimony, after-action reports, and survivor interviews, Rampage recounts one of the most heartbreaking chapters of Pacific war history.

About the Speaker:

headshot of James Scott in professional attire A former Nieman Fellow at Harvard, James M. Scott is the author of Target Tokyo, which was a 2016 Pulitzer Prize finalist and was named one of the best books of the year by Kirkus, The Christian Science Monitor and The Fort Worth Star-Telegram. His other works include The War Below and The Attack on the Liberty, which won the Rear Admiral Samuel Eliot Morison Award. His fourth book, Rampage, will be released on October 2, 2018. Scott lives with his wife and two children in Mt. Pleasant, SC.

Commentator: Dr. Richard Frank, Pacific War History, Inc., author of Downfall: The End of the Imperial Japanese Empire

Deepa Ollapally, in professional attire against white background

9/14/2018: Deepa Ollapally Interviewed by India Abroad on U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue

September 17, 2018July 14, 2021In the NewsLeave a Comment

Portrait of the moderator, Deepa Ollapally

Deepa Ollapally, Research Professor of International Affairs and Associate Director of the Sigur Center, was interviewed by the newspaper India Abroad about the first US-India strategic dialogue under the Trump administration held on September 5. Her comments were included in an article written by Aziz Haniffa titled “Experts say two-plus-two adds up to more secure India-U.S. relationship.”

9/13/2018: Robert Sutter Publishes NBR Report on China-Russia Relations

September 17, 2018March 24, 2020In the NewsLeave a Comment

Professor Robert Sutter, Elliott School of International Affairs professor, published a report titled “China-Russia Relations: Strategic Implications and U.S. Policy Options” with the National Bureau of Asian Research (NBR) in their September 2018 edition of NBR Reports. Additional details below.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report provides an overview of the scope and implications of China-Russia relations, explains why Sino-Russian cooperation against U.S. interests has increased during the past decade, assesses key determinants, and examines U.S. policy options.

Main Argument
The China-Russia relationship continues to deepen and broaden with ever more negative implications for the U.S. The drivers of Sino-Russian cooperation overshadow the brakes on forward movement at the U.S. expense. The momentum is based on (1) common objectives and values, (2) perceived Russian and Chinese vulnerabilities in the face of U.S. and Western pressures, and (3) perceived opportunities for the two powers to expand their influence at the expense of U.S. and allied countries that are seen as in decline. The current outlook is bleak, offering no easy fixes for the U.S. Nonetheless, there remain limits on Sino-Russian cooperation. The two governments continue to avoid entering a formal alliance or taking substantial risks in support of one another in areas where their interests do not overlap. Longer-term vulnerabilities include Russia’s dissatisfaction with its increasing junior status relative to China, China’s much stronger interest than Russia in preserving the existing world order, and opposition to Russian and Chinese regional expansion on the part of important lesser powers in Europe and Asia seeking U.S. support.

Policy Implications

The main recommended U.S. policy option involves multiyear and wide-ranging domestic and international strengthening—militarily, economically, and diplomatically—to better position the U.S. to deal with the challenges from China and Russia.
Participants in the NBR project differ on the appropriate amount of strengthening, with some urging sustained U.S. primacy and most others favoring various mixes of strengthening and accommodation requiring compromise of U.S. interests.
In applying this appropriate amount of strengthening and accommodation, some participants view Russia as the leading danger, warranting U.S. accommodation with China to counter Russia; others seek to work cooperatively with Russia against China, which is seen as a more powerful longer-term threat; and others view the above maneuvers as futile in the face of strongly converging Russian and Chinese interests and identity.

Click here to read the report!