During his brief, Prof. Glaser discussed his project for the Minerva Research Institute focused on the liberal international order (LIO) and tools of influence. He first defined the international order as the “institutions and rules that guide the states that belong to the order.” He then defined the LIO as a construct created by the US after World War II that includes NATO, alliances, an open international trading system, key international financial institutions, and the UN. Often times, the LIO is used more broadly to include norms requiring the protection of human rights, norms regarding the protection and (possible) spread of democracy, regional trade agreements, etc. This inconsistent usage often generates confusion. Prof. Glaser then explained what is at stake in LIO discourse—international relations theorists and policy analysts believe that the LIO has produced valuable outcomes, such as peace following the Cold War and US victory, NATO cohesion, and a lack of balancing against the US after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. The key issue, however, is whether these outcomes are products of the joint impact of the LIO’s components as a whole or the individual parts themselves. Prof. Glaser stated that if it is the latter, the LIO framing offers little insight and can both mislead analysis of US policy and exaggerate the threat that China poses to the US. Next, Prof. Glaser defined the LIO concept—a term he created.

His presentation focused on his book, entitled Resisting War: How Communities Protect Themselves. In his book, Dr. Kaplan looks at instances of civilian agency in order to determine how those who do not have power can influence those who do have power (and weapons), as well as how effective and how common these nonviolent movements usually are. Moreover, he stresses the importance of understanding community organization and culture. During the brief, Dr. Kaplan explained that civilians looking to protect themselves either create formally organized peace communities that argue for their own protection or repurpose pre-existing informal and local councils to do so. There are also two types of strategies that civilians implement when advocating for their own security: 1) covert, internal-facing strategies and 2) overt, external-facing strategies. These covert strategies include creating mechanisms for internal dispute resolution and developing early warning systems to avoid instances of violence, while overt strategies include putting public pressure on, and creating opportunities for dialogue with, armed groups. Next, Dr. Kaplan used Cundinamarca, Colombia as an example to explore these dynamics.

During her presentation, Dr. Wu explained why soft power matters and how to measure soft power’s influence on broader considerations of geopolitics.

During this presentation, Dr. Windsor discussed how computational discourse analysis can help the Department of Defense and intelligence community better understand political trends in the world, particularly in areas that currently lack coverage and are difficult to observe.