RC37 - Rethinking Political Development

Acapulco 2026: Extended Deadline and New Support for Participants

TRB Monethi — Fri, 23 Jan 2026 11:30:00 +0200

The organizing committee for the RC37/RC40 Symposium in Acapulco is pleased to announce several developments that expand opportunities for scholarly participation in this cross-regional dialogue.

Extended Submission Deadline

In response to requests from colleagues across multiple time zones and academic calendars, the deadline for paper proposals has been extended to February 5, 2026. This adjustment reflects our commitment to ensuring that scholars working on questions of governance, cooperation, and development have adequate time to contribute their research to this emerging platform for hemispheric exchange.

New Travel and Publication Support

Professor Luz Marina Cabrera Suarez is currently pursuing government grant funding specifically designated for student travel to the symposium. This initiative recognizes that early-career scholars often face the most significant barriers to international conference participation, particularly those based in institutions with limited research budgets.

To add, registration fees will directly support symposium operations, with surplus funds allocated toward publishing the strongest papers presented across both research committees. This creates a clear pathway from conference presentation to scholarly dissemination - a dimension often missing from regional gatherings.

Practical Updates

Professor Jesús Tovar has secured university facilities in Acapulco and is finalizing partnerships that will benefit all participants:

Discount codes for Aero Mexico flights (available today)
Negotiated hotel rates for symposium attendees
Simultaneous interpretation equipment for plenary sessions

The Opportunity

Academic conferences often suffer from oversaturation - too many parallel panels, too little substantive engagement. The current submission numbers for Acapulco 2026 present the opposite scenario: an opportunity for genuine dialogue rather than performative presentation. Papers submitted by February 5th will receive serious engagement from committee members and fellow participants working at the intersection of comparative politics, regional cooperation, and development governance.

For scholars whose work bridges institutional contexts - examining how governance frameworks translate (or fail to translate) across regions, or analyzing cooperation mechanisms in an era of fragmented multilateralism - this symposium offers something increasingly rare: space for depth rather than breadth.

The organizing committee looks forward to robust exchanges in Acapulco. Those with questions about thematic fit or submission formats should contact ipsa.acapulco2026@gmail.com.

IPSA RC37–RC40 International Symposium: Interregional Cooperation as Driver of Political and Socio-Economic Development

TRB Monethi — Thu, 18 Dec 2025 09:42:00 +0200

The International Political Science Association Research Committees 37 and 40 are pleased to announce the formal establishment of an international symposium exploring the critical intersections of interregional cooperation, political transformation, and socio-economic development.

Following months of collaborative planning between the leadership of both research committees, the organizing committee has now been formally constituted, bringing together distinguished scholars from across the Americas. The symposium represents a significant milestone in fostering cross-regional academic dialogue on questions of governance, cooperation, and development in an increasingly interconnected world.

Event Details

Location: Acapulco, Mexico

Dates: Thu, 23 Apr 2026 - Fri, 24 Apr 2026

Participation & Registration

Non-IPSA members: $150 USD
IPSA Members (North America, China, Russia, EU): $120 USD (Professionals) / $60 USD (Students)
IPSA Members (Latin America, Asia except China, Oceania, Africa): $100 USD (Professionals) / $50 USD (Students)
RC37/RC40 Members: $80 USD (Professionals) / $40 USD (Students)
Mexican students and Symposium Coordination Team: Free

Registration Process:

Make payment via the PayPal link on the riight panel of this page
Send receipt to ipsa.acapulco2026@gmail.com with your name, country, and member status

Organizing Committee

The symposium is being coordinated by a distinguished international committee:

Professor Luz Marina Cabrera Suarez (Chair)
Professor Jesus Tovar (Mexico) — Operational Coordination
Professor Anthony Medina (Peru) — Academic Programming
Professor Yan Vaslavskiy (RC37)
Dr. habil. Péter Rada (RC40)

Professor Tovar has undertaken responsibility for several essential operational elements, including coordination with local authorities in Acapulco, securing university facilities, arranging simultaneous interpretation equipment for the opening ceremonies and conference sessions, and establishing the registration payment infrastructure.

The symposium will feature simultaneous interpretation during key sessions, ensuring accessibility for participants from diverse linguistic backgrounds and facilitating the kind of substantive cross-cultural exchange that has become increasingly vital to comparative political research.

Acknowledgments

The RC37 leadership extends particular gratitude to Professor Luz Marina Cabrera Suarez for her exceptional leadership in coordinating this symposium, and to Professors Tovar and Medina for their instrumental contributions to both the intellectual vision and practical execution of the event.

Rethinking Development on International Volunteer Day

TRB Monethi — Sat, 06 Dec 2025 09:34:00 +0200

Every December 5th, we celebrate the contributions of volunteers working toward the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. But there’s a particular kind of volunteerism that often goes unrecognized: the scholars who donate their expertise to rethink how we understand development itself.

Research Committee 37 of the International Political Science Association—“Rethinking Political Development”—represents thousands of hours of unpaid intellectual labor spanning four decades. Dr. Yan Vaslavskiy in Moscow, Dr. Mark Farha, Ms. Tlhokomelo Rethabile Monethi, and board members across Turkey, Canada, India, South Africa, and Brazil all volunteer their time. Like most of IPSA’s operations beyond a small administrative core, RC37 runs entirely on scholarly commitment.

This might seem like a footnote to the committee’s intellectual work. In fact, it’s central to understanding what makes RC37’s approach to development theory revolutionary.

When IPSA was founded in 1949 under UNESCO’s aegis, political science carried an almost missionary confidence. The discipline would provide “disinterested study” of defective institutions, fostering “improved techniques of political organization.” Behind this language lay an assumption: that proper methods, applied by credentialed experts, would yield universal truths applicable everywhere.

RC37’s formation in 1983—granted full research committee status by 1991—marked a crucial shift. By then, the failures of top-down development programs and the insights of postcolonial scholarship had exposed the limits of universal theories. What emerged was something more humble and more democratic: the idea that understanding development requires listening to diverse experiences rather than imposing predetermined frameworks.

The volunteer nature of RC37 reinforces this intellectual commitment. Unlike consultants parachuting in with standardized solutions, or academics pursuing funded research agendas set by Northern institutions, RC37’s scholars participate because they believe in the conversation itself. They’re not accountable to grant deliverables or policy prescriptions. They’re accountable to each other and to the quality of ideas.

This creates space for the kind of patient, pluralistic theorizing that RC37 champions: “incrementally building a body of theoretical knowledge which is sensitive to the actuality and complexity of the development process in different societies.” You can’t rush that work. You can’t force it into predetermined conclusions. It requires exactly what volunteerism enables: sustained engagement driven by intellectual conviction rather than external incentives.

Building Bridges, Not Hierarchies

RC37’s current board—spanning Moscow, Turkey, Canada, India, South Africa, and Brazil—embodies IPSA’s founding mission to “link scholars from North and South as well as East and West.” But the volunteer structure makes this more than tokenistic representation. When scholars donate their expertise equally, regardless of institutional prestige or geographic location, it levels hierarchies that money and institutional power typically reinforce.

Consider what happens in funded research collaborations: Northern universities often hold grants, set agendas, and control publications, while Southern scholars provide “local knowledge” or “fieldwork”. RC37’s volunteer model disrupts this dynamic. Dr. Vaslavskiy chairs the committee not because Moscow State University purchased the role, but because his colleagues recognized his leadership. Board members contribute because their perspectives matter, not because someone’s grant budget allocated them a consultancy fee.

This doesn’t erase all inequalities—scholars still come from different resource contexts, face different institutional pressures, navigate different political environments. But it does create conditions where intellectual merit and collaborative commitment, rather than funding or institutional brand, determine influence.

The result is genuinely collaborative knowledge production. RC37’s emphasis on “cross-cultural perspective” and recognition of “different historical and cultural experiences” isn’t just methodological rhetoric. It’s enacted through the very structure of participation.

The Gift Economy of Ideas

Anthropologists talk about gift economies—systems where exchange creates relationships rather than settling debts. There’s something of that spirit in RC37’s volunteer model. When scholars donate their time to the committee, they’re not purchasing specific returns. They’re investing in an ongoing conversation, building intellectual relationships that generate insights no individual could produce alone.

This matters especially for a committee dedicated to “developmental pluralism”—the idea that societies may legitimately pursue fundamentally different trajectories. Recognizing pluralism requires genuine dialogue, not just multicultural box-checking. It demands sustained engagement with perspectives that might challenge your assumptions, openness to frameworks that don’t originate in your context, willingness to revise theories in light of others’ experiences.

That kind of intellectual generosity is hard to mandate through contracts or incentivize through funding. But it emerges naturally in volunteer communities where scholars participate because they value the exchange itself. RC37’s decades of operation suggest that volunteerism, far from being a resource constraint, may actually enable the intellectual openness the committee’s mission requires.

Sustainable Development for Ideas

The UN frames International Volunteer Day around the Sustainable Development Goals—targets for poverty reduction, education, health, environmental protection. But what makes development sustainable? RC37’s work suggests that sustainable development requires sustainable knowledge production: frameworks that emerge from affected communities, theories tested against diverse realities, institutions that persist through shared commitment rather than external funding.

RC37’s volunteer model embodies this sustainability. The committee has operated for over forty years, surviving shifts in academic fashion, changes in funding priorities, and the rise and fall of development paradigms. It persists because scholars continue to find value in the conversation, because the intellectual work matters beyond career advancement or CV lines.

This is especially significant given the precarity of contemporary academic labor. As universities corporatize and research becomes increasingly grant-dependent, spaces for sustained intellectual collaboration driven by curiosity rather than deliverables become rare. RC37 represents a form of resistance—not militant opposition, but quiet insistence that some knowledge work proceeds according to different logic.

The committee’s focus on “refining theoretical tools” and “acquiring empirical understanding” rather than prescribing policy solutions reflects this independence. RC37 scholars aren’t beholden to funders expecting actionable recommendations or consultancy clients demanding clear prescriptions. They’re free to acknowledge uncertainty, to build theory incrementally, to prioritize understanding over application.

Networks of Commitment

IPSA’s structure—biennial world congresses, research committees spanning continents, emphasis on geographic diversity—creates infrastructure for exchange. But infrastructure alone doesn’t generate intellectual community. That requires the sustained commitment that volunteerism represents.

When board members coordinate across time zones, when scholars present work-in-progress knowing they’ll receive genuine engagement rather than pro forma comments, when senior researchers mentor emerging scholars without quid pro quo—these acts of intellectual generosity create networks that transcend formal organizational structures.

RC37’s requirement that research committees include scholars from at least seven countries and two continents ensures breadth. But depth comes from relationships built through repeated interaction, from trust developed through collaborative work, from shared commitment to intellectual projects larger than individual careers. That’s what volunteer participation enables.

The committee’s tools—conferences, working papers, collaborative projects—matter less than the relationships they facilitate. RC37 isn’t just producing theoretical insights about development; it’s modeling a form of international scholarly collaboration that respects diversity while building genuine community.

The Freedom of Unpaid Work

There’s a paradox here worth examining: in contemporary academia, unpaid labor often signals exploitation. Yet RC37’s volunteer structure may actually enable greater intellectual freedom than funded research typically allows.

Funded projects come with expectations: deliverables, timelines, policy relevance, stakeholder engagement. These aren’t inherently problematic, but they shape what can be studied and how. Questions that don’t fit funding priorities go unexplored. Findings that don’t support policy agendas get downplayed. Theoretical work that doesn’t promise immediate application struggles to find support.

RC37’s volunteer model liberates the committee from these constraints. Scholars can pursue questions because they matter intellectually, not because they align with funder priorities. They can challenge conventional wisdom without worrying about jeopardizing grant renewals. They can take time to think deeply rather than racing toward deliverables.

This freedom is what makes “rethinking” possible. RC37 isn’t tweaking existing frameworks or refining established theories. It’s questioning fundamental assumptions about development—what it means, who defines it, whether universal models are even possible. That kind of intellectual ambition requires independence from the incentive structures that typically govern academic research.

International Volunteer Day and Scholarly Citizenship

On International Volunteer Day, we celebrate volunteers advancing the Sustainable Development Goals. But we should also recognize volunteers advancing the intellectual work that makes those goals meaningful—scholars questioning whose goals, whose development, whose vision of sustainability.

RC37’s volunteers contribute something less visible than building infrastructure or delivering services, but equally essential: the patient, collaborative work of understanding political development in its complexity. They donate expertise not to implement predetermined solutions but to deepen questions, not to prescribe pathways but to illuminate possibilities.

This is scholarly citizenship at its best—using one’s expertise not for personal advancement but for collective understanding, contributing to conversations that transcend national boundaries and disciplinary silos, building intellectual infrastructure that will support future generations of researchers.

The committee’s emphasis on “developmental pluralism” embodies the democratic spirit that should animate volunteerism: recognition that diverse communities may legitimately pursue different paths, that expertise should enable rather than dictate, that understanding requires listening as much as analyzing.

Looking Forward

As RC37 enters its fifth decade, the volunteer model faces challenges. Contemporary academia increasingly demands quantifiable outputs, immediate impact, measurable returns. Early-career scholars face pressure to prioritize publications over service, to focus on work that advances individual careers rather than collective projects.

Yet RC37’s persistence suggests enduring appetite for intellectual collaboration that transcends these pressures. Scholars continue volunteering because the work matters, because international dialogue enriches their thinking, because some questions can only be explored collectively.

On this International Volunteer Day, RC37 reminds us that volunteerism isn’t just about implementing solutions—it’s about creating spaces where difficult questions can be explored, where diverse perspectives can be genuinely engaged, where intellectual work proceeds according to its own logic rather than external demands.

The thousands of hours RC37 volunteers have donated over four decades represent more than unpaid labor. They represent commitment to a vision of scholarship as conversation rather than competition, of development theory as collaborative inquiry rather than expert prescription, of international academic community as genuine exchange rather than hierarchical knowledge transfer.

That’s worth celebrating—and worth sustaining.

Join the RC37 Community

TRB Monethi — Mon, 27 Oct 2025 18:50:00 +0200

Are you interested in becoming a member of RC37? We welcome scholars, practitioners, and students engaged in the study of political development to join our growing community.

As a member, you’ll gain access to all upcoming RC37 workshops and panels at IPSA events, as well as entry to our active daily discussion forum—where members exchange insights, ideas, and analyses on the evolving political development agenda around the world.

To learn more or to become a member, please contact us at rc37@research.ipsa.org.

We look forward to welcoming you to the conversation!

Introducing: The 2025-27 Board of Directors

TRB Monethi — Sat, 27 Sep 2025 09:44:00 +0200

The International Political Science Association’s Research Committee 37 (RC37) is dedicated to rethinking political development and exploring the diverse paths societies take in shaping their political futures. Since its recognition as a study group in 1983, and its elevation to full research committee status in 1991, RC37 has built a reputation as a hub for critical and cross-cultural inquiry in the field.

Leadership

Chair: Dr. Yan Vaslavskiy (Moscow State University, Russia) – vaslavskiy@gmail.com
Vice-Chair: Dr. Mark Farha – markfarha2@gmail.com
Secretary: Ms. Tlhokomelo R.B. Monethi (Lesotho)

Board Members

Baskan Birol (Turkey)
Cabrera-Suarez Luz Marina (Canada)
Madhi Sudhan Reddy Andem (India)
Nadvi Lubna (South Africa)
Sohn Thais (Brazil)

This international composition reflects RC37’s commitment to bringing diverse experiences and perspectives into dialogue.

Our Mission

RC37 challenges the reliance on universal models of political development. Instead, it highlights the importance of:

Recognising the plurality of development paths shaped by unique historical legacies, cultures, leadership visions, and internal dynamics.
Building a deeper understanding of social and cultural contexts that influence development trajectories.
Incrementally developing theoretical tools that reflect real-world complexities rather than abstract universals.

Research Focus

RC37’s work spans three interconnected goals:

Refining theory: improving the analytical tools used to study political development.
Grounding in reality: engaging with empirical evidence of how development processes actually unfold.
Cross-cultural perspectives: examining how different societies’ histories and cultures shape distinct developmental outcomes.

At its core, RC37 advances the plea for greater recognition of developmental pluralism, arguing that no single path or model can capture the full richness of societies’ political experiences.

Track RC37 at the 28th IPSA World Congress• 12–16 July 2025 • Seoul, South Korea

TRB Monethi — Tue, 24 Jun 2025 13:18:00 +0200

The Research Committee on Rethinking Political Development (RC37) is delighted to invite you to three intellectually rigorous and globally diverse panels at the 28th World Congress of Political Science, hosted by IPSA in Seoul. Under the leadership of Profs Yan Vaslavskiy (MGIMO University, Russia) and Mark Farha (University of Zurich, Switzerland), RC37 will showcase cutting-edge debates on the theory, methodology, and practice of political development, geopolitics, and the intersections of climate resilience with national security.

A Truly Global Conversation

Our presenters hail from various end of the world, bringing a rich tapestry of perspectives that embodies RC37’s commitment to developmental pluralism and cross-cultural sensitivity. We look forward to dynamic exchanges that challenge universal models and foreground the varied realities of political development around the world.

RC37.02 – Political Development: Theory, Methodology, Practice

Closed Panel
13 July 2025 | 15:30–17:15 (UTC+9)
3F-North Auditorium 2A

Chair: Dr Yan Vaslavskiy (MGIMO University, Russia)
Co-Chair: Prof Mark Farha (University of Zurich, Switzerland)
Discussant: Dr Kirill Koktysh (MGIMO University, Russia)

Panel description:
This session explores contemporary understandings of political development, critiques existing theoretical frameworks, and considers how interdisciplinary and empirical approaches can deepen our analyses.

Presentations:

Consumerism vs. Citizenship? Global and Regional Dynamics – Prof Mark Farha (Switzerland)
Overview of the Socioconstructivist Context of International Environmental Relations – Mrs Luz-Marina Cabrera-Suarez (USA) & Dr Yan Vaslavskiy (Russia)
Public-Private Partnership as a Driver of Political, Economic and Social Development: A Political Economy Perspective – Dr Yan Vaslavskiy (Russia)
The Implicit Politicisation of Political Science Language and Ways to Solve the Problem – Dr Kirill Koktysh (Russia)

RC37/41.04 – Geopolitics versus Political and Socio-Economic Development

Open Panel
14 July 2025 | 15:30–17:15 (UTC+9)
3F 301A

Chair: Dr Igor Okunev (MGIMO University, Russia)
Co-Chair: Mrs Luz-Marina Cabrera-Suarez (USA)
Discussant: Dr Yan Vaslavskiy (Russia)

Panel description:
A joint session with RC41 (Geopolitics) investigating how geographical position, historical evolution and global-local tensions shape political and socio-economic trajectories.

RC37.01 – Crossroads between Climate Resilience, National Security, and Conflict Prevention

Open Panel
15 July 2025 | 09:00–10:45 (UTC+9)
3F 324AB

Convenor & Discussant: Mrs Luz-Marina Cabrera-Suarez (USA)
Co-Chair: Dr Yan Vaslavskiy (Russia)

Panel description:
Examining the nexus of climate adaptation, national security and conflict prevention, this panel will consider policy frameworks and best practices for resilience in an era of environmental uncertainty.

New Contact & Invitation: Join IPSA’s RC37 – Rethinking Political Development

TRB Monethi — Sun, 27 Apr 2025 15:01:00 -0400

Hello Political Science Enthusiasts,

We’re excited to announce that the IPSA Research Committee 37 (RC37), dedicated to Rethinking Political Development, has a new direct line of communication: rc37@research.ipsa.org

Whether you're a seasoned scholar or an emerging researcher, RC37 offers a dynamic platform to explore the complexities of political development across diverse contexts. Our focus includes:

Refining theoretical tools in political development
Gaining empirical insights into developmental processes
Embracing cross-cultural perspectives to understand varied historical and cultural experiences

Why Join RC37?

Engage in thought-provoking discussions and collaborative research
Contribute to panels like “Crossroads between Climate Resilience, National Security, and Conflict Prevention”
Connect with a global network of political scientists

Get Involved:

Visit our website: rc37.ipsa.org
Reach out via email: rc37@research.ipsa.org

Join us in reimagining political development for a more inclusive and comprehensive understanding of global political dynamics.

RC37 Seminar “Environment and National Security: Challenges and Opportunities"

TRB Monethi — Wed, 29 Nov 2023 12:40:00 -0500

On November 28, 2023 RC37 held a research seminar titled “Environment and National Security: Challenges and Opportunities". The event took place in hybrid format on the premises of the Lavalle University in Montreal, Canada

The seminar covered topics such as natural resource management, climate change, security, and others. The aim of the event was to explore in-depth the links between the environment, climate change, national security, and international relations. The participants sought to understand how environmental challenges go beyond the territorial security of nation-states and impact global dynamics.

The discussion brought together experts, researchers, and students in the field of environment and national security to discuss the challenges and opportunities ahead. The list of panelists included, among others:

Dr. Yan Vaslavskiy, RC37 Chair, Associate Professor, MSU University and MGIMO University. Dr. Vaslavskiy presented his paper "The role of human centrism and ESG strategies in the evolution of modern socio-economic systems".
Prof. Anessa Kimball, Université Laval. Prof. Kimball presented her paper “NATO/environmental policies in the national security process”.
Mr. Claude Laferrière, Université de Montréal, Mr. Laferrière presented his paper “US/Canada National security law”.
Mrs. Luz-Marina Cabrera-Suarez, Université Laval. Mrs. Cabrera-Suarez presented her paper "The context of codéveloppement (Knowledge Building Theory), essential to climate justice and a lever for improving international relations".

RC37 Business Meeting: New Committee Board Elected

TRB Monethi — Thu, 03 Aug 2023 04:51:00 -0400

On the agenda: WC2023 results, new board election, future plans

On August 2, 2023, RC37 business meeting was held.

Interim Chair Dr. Yan Vaslavskiy reported on results and RC37 activities at the 2023 IPSA World Congress that had taken place in Buenos Aires (Argentina) in July.

Besides, RC37 members elected a new Committee Board for a 4-year term which now includes:

VASLAVSKIY Yan, Russia (Chair)
BASKAN Birol, Turkey
CABRERA-SUAREZ Luz Marina, Canada
FARHA Mark, Switzerland
MADHU Sudhan Reddy Andem, India
MONETHI R.B. Tlhokomelo, Lesotho
NADVI Lubna, South Africa
SOHN Thais, Brazil

Finally, future RC37 plans were discussed on the way to the next IPSA World Congress to take place in Seoul (South Korea) in 2025. A decision to hold a research seminar in late 2023 was supported by the Committee members.

Award Session-Global South Award

Zillur R. Khan — Sun, 01 Feb 2015 13:01:00 -0500

(Dr. Khan Presiding over the Global South Award Session of IPSA World Congress in Montreal, Canada, 2014.)

Proposed IPSA Joint Workshop by RC 37 and RC 2

Zillur R. Khan — Tue, 27 Nov 2012 11:27:00 -0500

International Political Science Association (IPSA): Proposal for Funding a Joint IPSA Workshop by RC 37 and RC 2, IPSA

Workshop Organizers: Zillur R. Khan, Chair, RC 37/IPSA: Rethinking Political Development; Rosebush Professor Emeritus, University of Wisconsin and Adjunct Professor, Rollins College, USA, and Distinguished Fellow, Policy Research Institute, Bangladesh. Co-organizer is RC 2/IPSA: Political Elites represented by its Executive Board Member, Professor Oxana Gaman-Golutvina, Head of Comparative Politics Department, MGIMO-University, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia, President of Russian Political Science Association, and Chairman of RPSA National Committee on Political Elites.

Workshop Title: Rethinking Political Development: Cultures, Civilizations and Identity. Proposed Date: December 12-13, 2013

Rationale for the Workshop: The workshop will bring together international scholars in an effort to explore the different facets of nationalism~~-secular and non-secular, and sovereignty~~-absolute and cooperative, in the context of the evolving perceptions of human identity immersed in different cultures and civilizations in global power relations.

Given the fact that Political Science has varied dimensions the discrepancy between model and local empirical conditions are often within the margin of accommodation where cultural weight rests, impacting the outcome of interactions.

The recent history across the world comprising political upheavals in the Middle East and rising politico-economic-social tensions in Asia has presented many cases in which societies have not displayed a political behavior in conformity with the expectations of either the normative or empirical facets of political theory. This departure may be due to the unaccounted for importance of the cultural elements that the different political models exclude. Is it therefore useful and/or necessary to revise political development models to account for these cultural variables?

Nation-states from the Middle East to South and South East Asia to Far East present a dysfunctional competition for control of resources, both known and yet-to-be found. Could the unresolved legacies of such conflicts and a weak political culture serve as catalysts to transform the state-society relations to a new model of a positive national sovereignty--the sovereignty of the citizen and the service-provider character of state institutions? Could this development create one world and fundamentally change the traditional definition of national sovereignty, outmoding national boundaries and negative aspects of nationalism?

Against the backdrop of geopolitical and ideological rivalries could Muslim majority countries meet their development needs by “progressive openness’? Could Bangladesh, Egypt, Indonesia, Iran, Libya, Malaysia, Pakistan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey, among others, engage in fruitful cooperation with the West in productive co-existence, if not close cooperation, to manage, if not resolve the conflict between western civilization and non-western cultures in the changing global power relations?

Format, Content, and Output: The workshop is expected to be inaugurated by Professor Rehman Sobhan, Founder Chairman of the Center for Policy Dialogue, Bangladesh. Ambassador Farouk Sobhan, Chairman, Bangladesh Enterprise Institute (BEI) will preside over the inaugural sessions of the two-day IPSA workshop. The expected format is a two-day workshop to be hosted jointly by Bangladesh Enterprise Institute (BEI) and the Policy Research Institute (PRI), Bangladesh. The workshop will consist of six panels (6 x 3 paper-givers); with one discussant and one chair per panel, and two inaugural sessions with a moderator for each where three keynote papers will be presented.

Each paper-giver will make a 15-minute presentation. Once the panellists have concluded their presentations, the discussant(s) will provide a brief set of oral comments (10-15 minutes). The panel chair will then open the floor to questions and discussion (35-45 minutes) from the audience. Professor Zillur R. Khan, Chair of RC 37, IPSA will serve as Keynote Speaker at the first inaugural session, presenting his address on the need of rethinking the whole issue of development from the perspective of Culture and Civilization in the context of identity based values affecting power relations in an increasing global competition for resources. Dr. Ahsan Mansur, Executive Director, Policy Research Institute, Bangladesh, will deliver the second Keynote address focusing on cultural dimensions of international support for development plans and their implementation. On the second day’s inaugural session, Dr. Zaidi Sattar, Chairman, Policy Research Institute (PRI), Bangladesh, Adviser to the Financial Express, the leading financial daily of Bangladesh, and Member of Board of Directors of Southeast Bank Ltd., Industrial and Infrastructure Finance Development Co. (IIFDC), Venture Investment Partners (VIPB) Ltd., Chittagong Stock Exchange (CSE), and Asia Insurance Ltd., will deliver the concluding Keynote Address on "The critical Role of Political Institutions in the process of economic development of Bangladesh". In the Q & A session an additional focus will be on how effectively have International Development Institutions provided strategic support to Politico-Economic development of Bangladesh in the context of South Asia. The results of the workshop will be communicated within the International Political Science Association (IPSA) and wider academic communities (as well as outside it to practitioners and policy-makers) via the subsequent publication of an edited volume of selected papers. Following the workshop, a book prospectus will be sent to leading academic publishers that have published books either focusing on a similar topic or employing a compatible theoretical approach, such as Cambridge University Press, Cornell University Press, Duke University Press and McGill-Queen’s University Press. Commercial peer-reviewed presses, such as Oxford, Routledge, Lynne Rienner, and Palgrave Macmillan, will also be considered.

Budgeting and Funding Applications: The amount budgeted for the workshop is US$ 4000.00. Local costs of the meeting will be covered by the local hosts, namely PRI and Bangladesh Enterprise Institute (BEI). I've received communication from a number of participants of XXII World Congress, showing interest in presenting papers at the proposed workshop. They’ve also assured me that their travel would be largely funded by their respective institutions. In addition to local participants there will be paper presenters from Canada, France, India, Lebanon, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, Turkey and USA. As Chair of IPSA RC 37 (and workshop organizer), I am applying for USD 2,000 in funding from the IPSA Committee on Research and Training (CRT) so that we reach the ($4,000.00) budget-target. It is understood that in accordance with established IPSA rules, IPSA funds may only be used for contributing to the travel expenses of paper-givers on a “fair” basis taking into account special needs, not for paying honoraria.

The Concept of Justice and Democracy

Zillur R. Khan — Tue, 29 Mar 2011 01:48:00 -0400

The Concept of Justice and Democracy*

Zillur R. Khan, Professor Emeritus University of Wisconsin and Adjunct Professor Rollins College, USA. Chair, RC 37, IPSA Prepared for Presentation at the AIBS, Dhaka, Bangladesh, March 15, 2011

John Rawls defines Justice as basic fairness in multidimensional interactions between humans and their institutions. The purpose of such varied interactions is to balance democracy with striving for security. (John Rawls, 2003:3-102.). Implicit in it seems to be a form of social contract inspired by the fairness principle contributing to societal stability. It helps to create a common ground on which political communities with the nation states being their highest expression can build an ideology of understanding and cooperation. But without a deep commitment of the leadership to justice as the basic principle of fairness in both policymaking and policy implementing, i.e., governance, the potentials for advancement would remain static. Ensuring human rights and the due process of law—two most important dimensions of justice—could transform a static state, which sometimes becomes regressive, into a dynamic state of just policies and good governance---two sustainable anchors of development. As Amartya Sen argues, “Development requires the removal of major sources of unfreedom: poverty as well as tyranny, poor economic opportunities as well as systematic social deprivation, neglect of public facilities as well as intolerance or overactivity of repressive states” (Amartya Sen, Development as Freedom. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2000).

In that context the legal system, which for developing countries still carries the baggage of colonialism, must be reformed. Justice in and for Democracy needs a basic structure of society where “main political and social institutions of society fit together into one system of social cooperation, and the way they assign basic rights and duties and regulate the division of advantages that arises from social cooperation over time…”(John Rawls, Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Ed. Erin Kelly. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, 3rd Printing, 2003). This, according to Rawls, is “background justice”, which is needed for a well ordered society where advantages of power and resources can be divided and distributed fairly. Upholding this fairness principle would involve limits on power, preventing excessive concentration and resulting misuse by individuals, groups, associations and institutions. An outcome based justice in terms of ensuring justice of different types, such as, substantive, procedural, distributive and compensatory, among others, while correcting injustice complement Rawls’ “transcendental” background justice, as Sen has argued (Sen, The Idea of Justice, Harvard, 2009). Here I submit that most of the factors connected with the Bengali struggle for freedom, mostly involving a growing demand for state rights stemming from their hopes and aspirations for a better life have defined their demand for justice as basic fairness. Thus Bengali movement for freedom in Pakistan culminating in the creation of a new nation played on two conceptual levels: the ideal of justice as basic fairness to strive for and operational reality of justice in addressing specific cases of injustice.

The right of dissent captures the basic freedoms providing the essence of Democracy, without which a democratic state cannot properly function. This core human value has different dimensions encompassing freedom of speech to press to assembly to religion enshrined in most of today’s constitutions. But in the name of security most states have infringed this basic human right, undermining the core principle of justice. Using this framework and a cross-cultural dimension I wish to explore the strategies and options for reforms of political, economic and social systems in Bangladesh. Unfortunately democratization without a deep leadership commitment to justice tends to break down at the altar of narrow political and group interests.

Perhaps the most important values sustaining democratic governance and institutions are universal rule of law and right of dissent manifested through tolerance, integrity, effectiveness and responsiveness in electing and selecting decision makers, which elude most third world nations, most recent case being Arab revolutions sweeping the Middle East, especially brought on by Arab leaders’ political suppression, intimidations, mal-governance and fraudulent elections. Similar incidents happened in a number of African and Asian nations over the last six decades, including Pakistan. The Pakistani military crackdown on the movement of the people of East Pakistan for justice was so bloody that the then American Consul General in East Pakistan, Archer Blood who saved me, termed it as “Selective Genocide” (Blood, 202: 215-117). It was a catalyst for the liberation war creating a new nation of Bangladesh.

Following liberation, like many developing nations with weak institutions---a legacy of colonial rule, the bureaucracy, both civil and military, gained strength due to inexperience of political leaders with the concept of justice, particularly its application for policymaking and governance. Trying to make up for weak governance with strong political power led to corruption of power and mismanagement of scarce resources, to the dismay of a liberated people with great expectations.

Justice: Underlying Democratic Values Here the underlying principle of justice as basic fairness could have at least reduced if not bridged the gap between public expectations and harsh realities. I believe through an institution building and reforming process involving educational, legal-judicial, socio-economic and politico-administrative entities, the values of tolerance of others with different views and beliefs together with the acknowledgement of their capability and contributions will go a long way in reducing that gap. In advancing these values along with the right of dissent a fledgling democracy like Bangladesh must make its HRC a high powered, non-partisan institution with legally guaranteed political non-interference and needed administrative support for its investigating, deliberating and reporting duties. As well implementing the constitutional provision of Ombudsman might help mitigate the alleged inhuman treatment some have allegedly received while in custody of police and military intelligence agencies. Both the caretaker and elected governments must consider whether or not these Commissions will be authorized to hold Hearings on grievances from aggrieved citizenry. The fact is without having Subpoena and Contempt powers, and requisite resources—material and personnel---these Commissions would be toothless.

Interlinked with the right of dissent is the right of opposition to voice its concerns at every level of policymaking process. In order to make a democracy really workable serious efforts must be undertaken by elected leaders to build stakes for opposition parties to meaningfully participate in parliament. It could involve, for example, apportioning time to opposition parties in parliamentary deliberations and committee assignments in proportion to their representation, preferably by combining the percentages of electoral votes and parliamentary seats. Also for a balanced approach to assuring the main opposition party a meaningful role in parliamentary deliberations an important institutional change could be considered whereby the Deputy Speaker of Parliament as well as Associate Chairs of Parliamentary Committees would be selected by the opposition. This strategy might prevent future deadlocks caused by intransigence of the majority party to give the opposition enough time to actively participate in parliamentary deliberations. More often than not the “Winner Takes All” (WTA) mentality has resulted in boycott of parliamentary deliberations by the opposition followed by street agitations and general strikes having adverse effects on national development. A change in the electoral system may be tried on a trial basis replacing WTA with proportional representation (PR) in which percentage of votes by different parties in the general election would reflect the number of parliamentary seats won by respective parties. This could serve the cause of both representational and electoral justice, which I’ll discuss later.

Social Contract, Justice and Power Concerted efforts by public and private sectors are needed to renewing the spirit of Social Contract, which I believe is an important dimension of justice. Such a renewal would contribute to a vital socio-economic-political balance by mixing human rights with accountability at every societal level. It would call upon institutional reformers to become transforming change agents, striving to be leaders and teachers at the same time, raising the consciousness of their followers to a higher level at which spontaneous mobilization of human and material resources could happen. The value of the great leap “from status to contract” must be inculcated through a reformed, progressive education system and a deep political commitment to changing the mindset of leaders at every level in every field from the self-centered transactional relationships to public interest based transforming ones between themselves and their constituents.

In this regard fundamental reforms of religious institutions are in order for reviving the spirit of Islam about an open quest for knowledge and peace. Buttressed by returning Bangladeshi Jihadists from Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan, some radicalized Mullahs and their pupils continue unabated to distort Islam in private or quami Madrassas to justify violence against secular minded Muslims, disadvantaged women and religious minorities in Bangladesh.

There is also an important question about justice and power. Given the political reality that institutionalization of power is an arduous, painful and long-drawn process, what new strategies or rethinking of existing ones must be applied to check human propensity to personalize and perpetuate power positions by any means undermining justice itself? Unrestrained power invariably impedes freedom and justice vital for multifaceted development. I believe transforming leadership and enduring institutionalization of power relationships can make a real difference in the struggle for justice and against poverty and unfreedoms.

Giving everyone his due - rights, authority, accountability and equal opportunity to get education to develop one’s innate ability - has been a core guideline of Justice from Plato to Gandhi to John Rawls to Amartya Sen. Rights with corresponding obligations as a matter of basic justice have been expanding since English and American Bills of Rights culminating in the civil and voting rights legislations of the sixties, which added “compensatory” as an important dimension of justice. This became the legal as well as moral basis of affirmative action programs in America and elsewhere. But it takes deep commitment of leaders - executive, legislative, judicial or any combination - to translate justice from legal acts to operational reality.

Justice and Leadership As always the difficult and complex work of applying justice for human development inevitably falls on the shoulders of leaders and followers at every level. Leadership, therefore, has been a special focus in the literature on political development in its various facets. Without the leaders’ capacity to balance security and freedom through justice in an institutional framework, transformation of their own consciousness along with their followers cannot happen. And without it fundamental changes could never take place and well-intentioned reforms would seldom have their desired results. Regardless of the type---moral, constitutional, legal, bureaucratic, charismatic or any combination, leaders become ineffective without their ability to transform vital goals into tangible programs of action. For that they need knowledge, relevant experience, an iron will to minimize “Groupthink” and control their “cocoon weaving mind guards” and a touch of wisdom to bring about tactical reforms and avoid political disasters. In the new information age of face books and twitters, leaders must not only bypass screening of negative feedbacks but also learn how to leverage the deluge of information classifying and clarifying with the specific purpose to engage and motivate citizens and functionaries for improving governance, and by a feedback loop policymaking itself.

Electoral Justice Indeed, electoral justice is the foundation of any democratic government. However, it needs a firm institutional framework to prevent electoral fraud and violence, which routinely claims lives in elections in most developing countries. The process of choosing leaders by free and fair elections has eluded most third world nations, most recent case being in Iran during June 2009 where questionable elections resulted in mass protests and government crackdown claiming a number of innocent lives, not to mention the troubled and questionable elections held in Afghanistan in July-August, 2009 under the security umbrella of US led ISAF, consisting chiefly of NATO countries.

An enforceable guideline for holding all elections must have a tested method to prepare an above board electoral roll, verify fiscal accountability of candidates, provide impartial monitoring of polling stations, and impose heavy fines and imprisonment for fraudulent voting. A non-partisan Election Commission, headed by a strong willed, politically neutral Chief Election Commissioner, with Subpoena and Contempt powers under the constitution to rule on disputed electoral outcome on a case by case basis, allowing judicial appeal as a last resort, can be more effective. An unquestionable, above-board election gives elected leaders the legitimacy to mobilize public support, even among segments of opposition parties, for a myriad of important policies. As well by upholding electoral justice leaders could then begin a transforming process in which free and fair elections become a routine political phenomenon in more developed and not-so-developed emerging nations.

Among the not-so-developed emerging nations Bangladesh offers a case in point. Representing the third largest nation in South Asia and seventh in the world, lawmakers in Bangladesh sought to ensure free and fair elections by incorporating an Amendment into the young nation’s Constitution mandating that all general elections be administered under a non-partisan Caretaker Government. Given the weakness of institutions in most emerging nations, a constitutionally empowered election commission may not be strong enough to withstand increasing pressure from an incumbent government to tilt the balance in its favor. Much as any ruling party would like to end the Caretaker Government innovation of Bangladesh by repealing its 13th Constitutional Amendment, it might be a prudent political move to continue for a few more general elections. In fact, two highly respected Chief Elections Commissioners of India have suggested replicating the non-partisan Caretaker Government experiment in emerging nations, particularly in state elections in India, if not at the federal level.

Representational Justice Closely connected with electoral justice is Representational Justice. Is it just to have representation in parliament that is grossly disproportionate to votes won by a political party in general elections? For instance, in spite of Bangladesh’s one of the two biggest political parties, Awami League (AL) winning more than 33% votes in 2001 election it received less than 20% seats in the Parliament and the situation was reversed in 2008. In spite of winning more than 30% popular votes, Bangladesh’s other biggest political party - Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP) - got less than 11% of parliamentary seats. The issue of representational justice, namely basic fairness in determining parliamentary seats on the basis of popular votes won by respective political parties has captured the attention of the British voters, who will vote on majority vs. plurality principle of electoral law in a referendum this year (2011). Depending on the outcome of that referendum interested parties in Bangladesh may get the opportunity to take a closer look at WTA and compare with the European PR system with a view to understanding the possible impact of each on representation in parliament.

More often than not the WTA mentality has been responsible for parliamentary dysfunction. A change in the electoral system may be tried on an experimental basis replacing WTA with PR in randomly selected constituencies in which percentage of votes by different parties in the general election would reflect the number of parliamentary seats won by them. Or at least a majority rather plurality voting rule could be tested in randomly chosen constituencies. In this a majority rather than plurality of votes through run-off elections, if needed, may prevent a situation where a candidate winning 15% to 20% of popular votes gets elected as MP, whereas in another constituency a candidate securing 35% to 45% fails to become a MP. Whether by a continuous public debate or by a constitutional convention, it is important to build a national consensus for resolving the issue of appropriate electoral system for a stable Democracy in not only Bangladesh but other emerging countries as well.

Also for representational justice there must be a process by which the elected can be held accountable between general elections. With its two thirds majority in Parliament could the ruling party seriously consider incorporating a constitutional amendment to utilize strategies of “Recall” to vote corrupt elected officials out of office in special elections? Again for representational justice could they consider by the same process to empower voters to propose and ratify important public policies through respectively “Initiative” and “Referendum” in special and/or general elections? This Swiss electoral innovation has been incorporated in a majority of American State Constitutions (37 out of 50) and a number of European countries with positive outcome.

Perhaps a future bicameral legislature in Bangladesh could significantly alleviate the felt problem of representation, particularly for women, in the highest policy making body. Representational justice demands much more than what the 45 nominated women parliamentarians could hope to accomplish. For example, in a future upper house the method of proportional representation could significantly give women, smaller political parties and occupational-professional groups a sure way to increase participation in the national-cum-sub-national policymaking processes, helping to check any excesses of the other house and to build policy consensus on national goals as well. To that end, Japan has effectively combined the two electoral methods, namely 300 single member districts and 180 multimember proportional representation constituencies in the lower house of its legislative body (Diet).

Justice and Development Both Representational Justice and Development as Freedom can be further ensured by devolution of authority to the grassroots. It would make the local government system more self reliant. Despite some expected downside of localization in the shape of increased clannishness and related nepotism-cum-corruption, serious decentralization - both political and economic - would reduce local government’s over - dependence on the higher bureaucracy, thereby helping the people at the grass-roots level to take initiative in defining and solving a myriad of local problems. The self-help and creativity thus engendered could become a major force of development, leading to greater socio-economic development in rural areas setting perhaps a new trend of reverse migration from urban to rural areas, significantly narrowing the urban-rural divide and the resulting socio-economic-political problems facing many of today’s emerging countries, including Bangladesh, China and India.

For sustainable human development strategic tolerance for survival, control and progress has been a positive influence throughout history. Lack of relative tolerance has led to the fall of empires, civilizations and nation states (Chua, 2009: 1-200; Ferguson, 2006: xlii-xlvi; Zakaria, 2008:10-18). Basically among emerging nations with Muslim majority or large minority Bangladesh has been and is a relatively tolerant nation, which some religious extremists have sought to change overtly by terrorism and covertly using certain militant parties as vehicles to spread a distorted interpretation of a great world religion---Islam.

To ensure justice, averting possible incidents of injustice, violent fanatics must be brought under control. An effective, sustainable way to do it will be through the restoration of the tolerant and knowledge based thrust of education, which shapes a nation (Plato, Republic). Particularly religious education in Bangladesh, as in many other emerging countries, cries out for significant curricular reform to strike a balance between theological and scientific focus in most religious schools called Madrassas in South Asia, particularly private or Quami ones chiefly supported by Wahhabi charities whose trainees or Talibs emerged as Pakistani, Afghani, Bangladeshi and other nationality based extremist Talibans. Despite Qudrat-i-Khuda Commission’s recommendations in the early seventies followed by 1996 and 2010 Education Reforms in Bangladesh, and the public commitment of political leaders to bring basic curricular change in Madrassas, no qualitative change has taken place. In fact distortions of some theological concepts have continued unabated spewing hatred against the “others”, often resulting in increased militancy against women, minorities and those perceived by them as secularists. This trend has unfortunately been sustained by double standards of some western democracies.

Conclusion Leaders must make concerted and determined efforts at alleviating endemic poverty having dehumanizing effects on peoples in three fourth of the world, denying them access to life saving and life enriching systems. This would require coordinated actions by industrialized, resource rich and developing countries to invest in human development---socially, economically and politically. Here again Rawls’ “background justice” should be the basis for creation, allocation and distribution of resources, ensuring the basic fairness of the process. In specially convened sessions of the world body followed by regional intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations leaders at different levels could come up with acceptable action plans and needed resources to implement them. In the hands of just a few visionary-cum-transforming leaders the old global framework of survival through Mutual Assured Destruction or MAD could be transformed into a global quality of life through Serve Apparent Needs Effectively or SANE, perhaps creating a fundamentally different world MAP (Mutual Assured Peace). These global confidence and trust building efforts would likely have a positive impact on leadership at regional, national and local levels. Yet the fact remains unless the two nuclear rivals - India and Pakistan - settle their long drawn out territorial disputes, Bangladesh and other SAARC countries would be deprived of peace dividends, if any.

As global leadership for dynamic human development would be an important precondition for global peace, so would the regional and national leadership for regional peace, which would require fundamental changes in the perception of long term mutual benefits over short term apprehensions of mutual threats. For this a new leadership must emerge - knowledgeable, experiential, and intellectually and morally inspiring - enabling different types of leaders to be involved in a continuous individual/group interactive intellectual and operational experience. Reinforcing the spirit of social contract, the dissemination of knowledge and experience on a bilateral and/or multilateral basis would have as its chief purpose to achieve a consensus on certain fundamental values. This could help create a sound framework for concerted, integrated decision making and implementing for societal advancement. Public-private policy forums and projects jointly sponsored by government and civil society groups would help clarify problems and issues being faced and how best to address them in order to achieve consensus for national development by bridging security and freedom with justice and greatly facilitating the process of implementation of just policies.

Injustice advertently or inadvertently done, like ingratitude, paraphrasing Shakespeare, can be stronger than a traitor’s arm vanquishing the spirit of an individual or a group or a society or a nation. Pursuing the principle of basic fairness in inter-personal and inter-group dealings Bangladesh could play a primordial role in facing challenges not only with poverty alleviation but also with other intra-regional issues and concerns. After all, Bangladesh did start the regional movement for cooperation in both fields among South Asian countries.

Sources Tapped: Armstrong, K. 2006. Mohammad: A Prophet For Our Time. HarperCollins. Ahmed, R. (Ed.). 1990. Religion, Nationalism and Politics in Bangladesh. New Delhi: South Asian Publishers. Bhutto, B. 2008. RECONCILIATION: Islam, Democracy, and the West. New York, N.Y.: HarperCollins. Blood, A. 2002. The Cruel Birth of Bangladesh. University Press, Ltd. Chua, Amy. 2009. The Day of Empire. New York: Random House. Ferguson, N. 2007. The War of the World. New York: Penguin Books.

Jalal, A. 2008. Partisans of Allah: Jihad in South Asia, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. Khan, Z. R. and Andaleeb, S. (Eds.). 2011. Democracy in Bangladesh: Political Dimensions of National Development. Dhaka: University Press Ltd. Khan, Z .R. 1983. Leadership in the Least Developed Nation: Bangladesh. Syracuse, New York: Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University. _. 1996. The Third World Charismat : Sheikh Mujib and the Struggle for Freedom. University Press, Ltd. Collier P. and A. Hoeffler. 1998. “On the Economic Causes of Civil War”. Oxford Economic Papers 50:563-73. Elklit, J. & Svensson. “What Makes Elections Free and Fair”, in Diamond, L. & Plattner, M. F. Eds. 2001. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press Esposito, J.L. & Mogahed, D. 2007. Who Speaks for Islam: What a Billion Muslims Really Think. Washington, DC.: Gallup Press. Huntington, S. 1996. The Clash of Civilization. New York, N.Y:Simon and Schuster. Rawls, J. 2003. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Massachusetts, Harvard University Press, 6th Printing. ___. 2003. Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Ed. Erin Kelly. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, 3rd Printing. Sen, A. 2000. Development As Freedom. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. __. 2009. The Idea of Justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Seshan, T.N. 1995. The Regeneration of India. New Delhi, India: Viking Penguin.

Joint IPSA Workshop on Rethinking Political Development: Multifaceted Role of Elites, Nov 7-8, 2011

Zillur R. Khan — Mon, 14 Mar 2011 06:48:00 -0400

Updated Announcement

International Political Science Association (IPSA) Joint Workshop on Rethinking Political Development: Multifaceted Role of Elites and Transforming Leadership to be held on November 7-8, 2011 in Winter Park (near Orlando), Florida, USA

Workshop Organizers: Professor Dr. Zillur R. Khan and Dr. Yan Vaslavskiy, respectively Chair and Member, IPSA/RC 37: Rethinking Political Development. Zillur R. Khan is Professor Emeritus, University of Wisconsin and Adjunct Professor, Rollins College, U.S.A. and Dr.Yan Vaslavskiy is Deputy Head of Events at Global Policy Forum, Russian Federation and Board member, Russian Political Science Association, and from IPSA/RC 2: Political Elites are Professor Dr. Oxana Gaman-Golutvina, Chair of the Department of Comparative Politics, MGIMO-University, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia; Chairman of Scientific Council; President of Russian Political Science Association, and Professor J. Higley, Professor of Political Science, University of Texas, respectively Member and Chair of IPSA/RC 2 Local Host and Organizer is Professor Robert Moore, Chair, International Affairs, Rollins College, Florida, USA

Title: Rethinking Political Development: Multifaceted Role of Elites and Transforming Leadership in Political Development Dates: November 7-8, 2011

Deadline for Submission of Panel/Paper Proposal with Abstracts: May 1, 2011 Rationale for the Workshop: The workshop will bring together international scholars to explore myriad roles of leaders and elites in enhancing the capacity for effective governance by rethinking political development from different perspectives. In constructing or reconstructing theories of leadership, elites and institutions for political development participants will examine, analyze and critique various issues of policy making and implementation facing the rapidly changing and adjusting political communities, particularly in emerging BRIC and Indonesia, Malaysia, South Africa and Turkey, among others. Reorienting the whole concept of development to better the quality of life in an uncertain world should be a challenge- intellectual, political, socio-economic and ideological -for both scholars and practitioners of Political Science and related fields participating in this workshop.

Panels will range from rethinking theories of leadership and elites in political development, to strategies and tactics for providing a common ground for negotiated settlement of controversial public policy goals and methods of their implementation, to resolving issues of identity, diversity and national security in evolving processes of globalization with widening gaps in benefits, particularly for the emerging countries from the Middle East to South-South East Asia to Far East, to dilemmas of freedom and security, to securing justice as basic fairness in inter-ethnic, inter-ideological and inter-state relations, to finally pushing the limits of political development to create a new MAP, i.e., Mutually Assured Peace, replacing MAD, i.e., Mutually Assured Destruction with SANE, i.e., Serve Appropriate Needs Effectively at whatever level. Could the unresolved legacies of local and regional conflicts in the globalizing process redefine sovereignty itself as seemingly happening in politico-economic experimentations in America, Europe, India and Russia, and the political upheaval occurring in the Middle East? Following are some suggested panels:

1. How elites and leaders could strike a balance between localism and nationalism to alleviate poverty.

2. Regional cooperation as a socio-political-economic strategy to transform the state-society relations to a new model of a positive national sovereignty---the sovereignty of the citizen and the service-provider character of state institutions.

3. The extent to which a pragmatic approach to ideological controversies over detached vis-à-vis inclusive secularism with a special emphasis on religious tolerance can shape the relationships between Western and Islamic World.

4. Defining the multifaceted role of elites and leaders in raising the consciousness of stake holders to a level at which coordinated action to resolve burning problems can happen, replacing counteractive rhetoric, against the backdrop of demographic, ecological and energy crises being faced by mostly developing countries.

5. A possible fifth panel may take up terrorism and how elites and leaders in Western and non-Western countries, particularly countries with Muslim majority or large minority like India should define and confront it at different levels.

6. Could elites and leaders of Muslim majority countries meet their development needs by co-operative and progressive openness?

7. Could they engage in fruitful cooperation with the West in developing green energy, including nuclear based ones without posing a threat to the West?

8. Another panel may concentrate on socio-politico-economic Justice in the context of rethinking political development focusing on the emerging world.

Expected Format, Content, and Output: The expected format is a two-day workshop to be held at Rollins College, Winter Park, Florida. The workshop will consist of six to eight panels (6/8 x 3 paper-givers), with one discussant and one chair per panel. Nobel Laureate Dr. Muhammad Yunus has been invited to inaugurate the Workshop as Chief Guest. Dr. Zillur R. Khan, Chair of RC 37 of International Political Science Association and Professor Dr. Oxana Gaman-Golutvina, President of Russian Political Science Association and Member RC 2/IPSA will serve as Keynote Speakers addressing the need of rethinking the role of leadership in transforming development into a continuous search for Justice and freedom for common good. Hosting the Workshop will be Dr. Robert Moore, Chairman of International Affairs of Rollins College, who will preside over the inaugural session The results of the workshop will be communicated within the International Political Science Association (IPSA) and wider academic communities (as well as outside it to practitioners and policy-makers) via the subsequent publication of an edited book. Following the workshop, an edited book prospectus will be sent to leading academic publishers that have published books either focusing on a similar topic or employing a compatible theoretical approach, such as Cambridge University Press, Cornell University Press, Duke University Press and McGill-Queen’s University Press. Commercial peer-reviewed presses, such as Oxford, Routledge, Lynne Rienner, and Palgrave Macmillan, will also be considered.

Logistics and Funding: Local costs of the meeting will be covered by the local host: providing space for the workshop, and food and accommodation for participants. Travel expenses of participants may be partially reimbursed on need basis. It is understood that in accordance with established IPSA rules, IPSA funds may only be used for contributing to the travel expenses of paper-givers on a “fair” basis taking into account special needs, not for paying honoraria.

Scholars from Bangladesh, Brazil, Canada, China, India, Lebanon, Pakistan, Qatar, Russia, and USA are expected to participate in the workshop. Abstract of paper/panel submission deadline is May 1, 2011.

Distinguished Participants:

1. Prof. Sushma Yadav Professor of Public Policy & Governance & Chair Professor, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Chair In Social Justice Indian Institute of Public Administration I.P. Estate, Ring Road, New Delhi - 110 002 (O)011-2346 8337, (Tele-fax)011-23766396 (M) 09810074667

2. John Higley Professor of Government & Sociology Jack S. Blanton Chair in Australian Studies Director, Center for Australian & New Zealand Studies The University of Texas at Austin Chair, IPSA Research Committee on Political Elites

3. Theodore P. Wright, Jr., Professor Emeritus, the State University of New York at Albany, New York, USA

4. Oxana Gaman-Golutvina Chair, Department of Comparative Politics MGIMO-University, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia, Chairman of Scientific Council; President, Russian Political Science Association, Russian Federation

5. Rounaq Jahan, Professor of Political Science and South Asian Studies Columbia University, New York, USA

6. Shelley Feldman, Professor, Development Sociology Director, Feminist, Gender and Sexuality Studies Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853, USA

7. Robert Wirsing, Professor of Political Science, Georgetown University, Washington, D.C., USA

IPSA Workshop Inaugural Session

Zillur R. Khan — Mon, 14 Mar 2011 06:39:00 -0400

(Dr. Zillur R. Khan presiding; on his right is Dr. M. K. Alamgir and on his left is Dr. Hossain Zillur Rahman and Dr. Zaidi Sattar and Mr. Enam Ahmed Chowdhury).

(Finance Minister A.M.A. Muhith inaugurating the IPSA Workshop; on his right is Dr. Zillur R. Khan and on his left is Dr. Ahsan H. Mansur and Dr. Zaidi Sattar).

(Dr. Zillur R. Khan making his address; on his left is Dr. Zaidi Sattar and on his right is Dr. Amirul Islam).

(Dr. Shelly Feldman making comments at the last session presided by Dr. Zillur R. Khan, Chair, RC37, IPSA).