School of Public and International Affairs, 1929-2025

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024 and the ascent of an interim government led by former Hay’At Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) leaders, Syria’s future is marked by uncertainty, factionalism, and external pressures. While Syria must be granted the autonomy to determine its own future, stability and reconstruction will be near impossible without the involvement of foreign actors. In exploring the rapidly evolving dynamics of Syria’s political transition, this thesis asks: how has international engagement evolved in a post-Assad Syria, and how will it impact the success of the new state? Analysis focuses on the strategic objectives of key international actors—the United States, the European Union, Turkey, Israel, Iran, Russia, and the Arab Gulf States—and evaluates how their competing interests will impact Syria’s fragile transition. It is increasingly evident that Western engagement in Syria is decreasing due to domestic turmoil, shifting global dynamics, and competing crises such as the wars in Ukraine and Gaza; meanwhile, Gulf countries see Syria as the linchpin of a shifting geopolitical landscape in the Middle East and have both the interest and resources available to heavily invest in its reconstruction and stabilization. Through a qualitative analysis of policy documents, NGO reports, and interviews with Syrian humanitarian organizations, this thesis argues that while Gulf States and Turkey will fill the vacuum of Western disengagement, caused by waning bandwidth and lack of interest in nation-building diplomacy, the West will maintain the most significant influence, whether positive or negative, in paving the way for a successful Syrian transition to an inclusive, rights-respecting system of democratic governance.

Populist radical right parties (PRRPs) have transformed from marginal to mainstream players in European politics. As PRRPs continue to grow in popularity and secure political representation at the national and European levels, they can exert greater influence over the direction of foreign policy. This thesis explores the foreign policy positions of far-right parties toward the People’s Republic of China (PRC). EU-China relations have become increasingly politically salient and contentious in recent years. Intensifying US-China hostilities and efforts by the PRC to strengthen its political and economic influence in Europe have forced European leaders to formulate coherent policy responses to China.

This paper analyzes far-right party discourse on a range of China-related issues and finds considerable heterogeneity in policy positions both within and across far-right parties. It finds that PRRP positions on Chinese trade are determined by country-specific economic conditions, including the intensity of Chinese import shocks and whether party leaders perceive economic relations with the PRC as beneficial or detrimental to national interests. On non-economic issues, including human rights, Taiwan, and China’s partnership with Russia, PRRP positions appear to be mediated by their attitudes toward America and transatlantic partnership.

The findings problematize the understanding of radical right parties as predictably inward-looking and uniform in their international agendas, instead indicating a more complex and nuanced approach by PRRPs to foreign policy. While these parties are often depicted as inherently isolationist and myopic, the heterogeneity in positions across parties and China-related policy areas demonstrates the different strategic and ideological calculations that PRRPs consider as they formulate their foreign policies.

This study examines the bi-directional relationship between electoral expectations and market behavior, challenging conventional unidirectional frameworks in election forecasting. Traditional electoral prediction models, heavily reliant on economic indicators and polling data, have demonstrated significant limitations in recent U.S. presidential elections. This research introduces two methodological innovations: the integration of comprehensive betting market data with traditional variables, and the development of "Party Portfolios" that track market sectors demonstrating systematic sensitivity to electoral expectations. Using high-frequency data analysis and Granger causality testing, the study reveals complex patterns of information flow across multiple channels. Betting markets demonstrate stronger predictive power for economic indicators than vice versa, while sector-specific market behavior serves as a leading indicator for electoral developments. The mid-cycle period (60-20 days before elections) emerges as a critical window when Party Portfolios exhibit their strongest predictive power. During this phase, sophisticated investors express electoral expectations through sector allocation decisions, creating potential market opportunities. These findings have significant implications for investors, campaign strategists, and policymakers, suggesting that integrated approaches incorporating both political and financial metrics yield more accurate forecasts than isolated methodologies. The research advances our understanding of how democratic processes interact with economic systems, demonstrating that markets not only respond to political developments but also discover and express political information in ways traditional metrics may miss.

This thesis investigates the impact of content moderation changes on X (formerly Twitter) following Elon Musk’s acquisition, focusing on whether the loosening of moderation policies and the introduction of monetization incentives have influenced the prevalence of hate speech and politically charged discourse. Central to this analysis is the question of how shifts in content regulation on a major social media platform intersect with democratic values and the principle of open public discourse. Drawing from theoretical foundations like the “marketplace of ideas” and the implications of algorithmic curation, the study examines the tension between free expression and the potential manipulation of online dialogue. The case of Musk’s acquisition offers a unique lens through which to study the dynamics of digital speech regulation. After taking control of X, Musk implemented sweeping changes, including reinstating previously banned accounts, introducing a monetized verification system, and dismantling long-standing transparency initiatives. These actions, justified under the banner of “free speech,” have significantly altered both the structure and substance of discourse on the platform. This thesis specifically examines the interactions surrounding four previously banned accounts, Donald Trump, Marjorie Taylor Greene, the Babylon Bee, and James Lindsay, analyzing changes in sentiment and toxicity pre- and post-reinstatement. Using sentiment analysis with RoBERTa and toxicity scoring with Google Perspective API, the study assesses whether users engaging with these reinstated accounts exhibit shifts in negativity or toxicity following Musk’s policy changes. The results indicate that while some users displayed increased negativity or toxicity, the findings varied across user characteristics such as verification status, political orientation, and follower count. Ultimately, although some changes in toxicity and sentiment after Musk’s acquisition of Twitter were statistically significant, they were not meaningful in a real-world sense. Beyond the empirical findings, the thesis discusses the broader implications of Musk’s control over X, highlighting the risks posed by the consolidation of algorithmic control within a single individual. As X transitions from a space of open public discourse to one shaped by opaque moderation practices and monetization incentives, the potential for algorithmic favoritism and the erosion of genuine democratic debate becomes apparent. The thesis also includes an analysis of existing transparency initiatives, a review of prominent case law, and considers legal theory put forth by leading legal scholars. After contextualizing the issue within this broader framework, the thesis proposes an amendment to existing legislation aimed at enhancing transparency in platform governance, carefully designed to avoid First Amendment infringements and address compliance challenges observed in previous transparency initiatives. Major themes addressed in this thesis include content moderation, algorithmic curation, free speech, hate speech, monetization incentives, political polarization, and the implications of private control over public discourse

The expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) significantly changed the landscape of health care policy in the United States. We address two central research questions: (1) Does Medicaid expansion help individuals access the care they need? (2) Does increased access to care lead to improved health outcomes? This thesis examines the effect of Medicaid expansion on health outcomes, focusing on three key dimensions: affordability of healthcare, healthcare utilization, and self-reported health. We pay particular attention to the population of individuals who newly qualify for Medicaid after their state adopted and implemented Medicaid expansion, hypothesizing that these individuals will see improved outcomes in their affordability of healthcare, utilization of preventive services (checkups), and their self-reported health. To conduct our analysis, we utilize a difference-in-differences (DiD) framework, where we compare changes in health outcomes between the years 2013, before Medicaid expansion, and 2017, three years after expansion, across individuals residing in states that adopted Medicaid expansion during that period and those in states that did not. Data from our analysis was derived from the nationally conducted Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey, which we utilize to categorize and assess individuals based on their Medicaid eligibility status. Our results find that, for individuals who became newly eligible for Medicaid after their state adopted expansion, for individuals who became newly eligible for Medicaid under expansion, Medicaid expansion significantly reduced the likelihood of reporting financial difficulties concerning healthcare and significantly improved the likelihood of reporting a recent checkup and reporting better self-reported health. These findings suggest that Medicaid expansion has been effective in improving the health outcomes of affected individuals, and that a rollback in expansion may lead to a reversion in these benefits. From a policy perspective, we argue against federal funding cuts to Medicaid, highlighting the economic benefits provided by Medicaid via job creation and GDP growth. We suggest introducing state-level tax increases as a viable alternative method to maintain Medicaid coverage while accommodating for the reductions in federal expenditure.

This thesis explores the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on rhino poaching in Kenya, Zimbabwe, South Africa, and Namibia. Using both regression analysis, along with country-specific case studies, the study examines what lessons can be learned from this pandemic. When the COVID-19 pandemic began, poaching rates plummeted with strict lockdowns severely limiting poachers' abilities to kill and transport rhino horns. However, as the lockdown restrictions loosened, wildlife trafficking networks quickly rebounded and caused poaching rates to increase in multiple countries. The regression analysis showed that economic and governance variables alone do not fully explain changes in poaching, pointing to the importance of enforcement capacity, transparency, and local dynamics. Through case studies and interviews, this thesis identifies the policies that proved most effective during the COVID-19 pandemic and uses those lessons to develop a targeted set of regional and international policy recommendations. These include the creation of a multilateral enforcement body, expanded public-private collaboration, community-based conservation incentives, and increased international pressure on consumer countries. This original research demonstrates that rhino poaching is a multifaceted problem that will require long-term, coordinated, and proactive solutions to reduce poaching, disrupt trafficking networks, and ensure the survival of the endangered African rhino populations.

As a result of the rise of Salafi extremism in the 2000s and 2010s, states in the Muslim world implemented policies to address this rising threat to their government’s stability. To this end, some states sponsored Sufism, an Islamic ideology traditionally stereotyped as apolitical and peaceful, as an ideological opposition to Salafi extremism. However, out of the many states in the Muslim world that held relatively significant Sufi populations and could have sponsored Sufism, only four chose to do so. Dozens of other governments pursued other policies, such as the promotion of an indistinct “moderate” Islam or the reinforcement of nonsectarian values, to oppose growing Salafi extremism. This thesis argues that these governments chose to not sponsor Sufism out of fear that it would undermine the state’s political-religious legitimacy. This legitimacy was usually born out of a governmental commitment to secular or nonsectarian ideals. Thus, sponsoring Sufism would have undermined the state’s dedication to those ideals and therefore their governing legitimacy.

Employing the gravity model of international trade, this thesis explores the effect of BRICS membership on bilateral trade flows between the coalition’s five original members. We first investigate the average impact of BRICS on trade. We find that BRICS increased intra-bloc trade by approximately 27 percent between 2009-2023. Next, we assess the effect of BRICS across time. Although BRICS does not appear to have a statistically significant effect on trade flows during its first decade-plus of existence, our results show that, between 2020-2023, BRICS is associated with a 37 percent increase in internal trade. We then examine trade between Russia and BRICS under different sanctions regimes. After Western countries and their allies imposed a crippling barrage of sanctions against Russia for invading Ukraine in 2022, we find that Russia traded around 57 percent more with their BRICS partners. At the same time, we find that Russian trade with the sanctioning countries decreased by around 37 percent. We interpret this to mean that Russia is using BRICS membership to alleviate the effects of Western trade sanctions. Ultimately, our findings suggest that BRICS should be perceived as a transregional economic alliance, rather than as a global governance organization.

This thesis takes a qualitative approach to investigating contemporary outer space governance and the need to balance innovation with the rise in space militarization. The outer space landscape is constantly changing. From the beginning of the Space Race to present day dynamics, the private sector has grown tremendously in its role as a leading force in space technology and innovation.

The guiding question of this thesis is how can the United States effectively promote innovation while also deterring the onset of space militarization between nations. Through historical context examining early teachings of Galileo, the Space Race, and the first lunar landing, this thesis is framed to dissect the ways in which early space dynamics have impacted contemporary space exploration.

This thesis also examines the different militarizing factors shaping outer space dynamics such as celestial appropriation, space debris, anti-satellite weaponry, and multilateral governance gaps. By dissecting two case studies regarding cybersecurity and their relation to outer space infrastructure, seven policy recommendations were formed to suggest various ways outer space governance can be altered to fit the evolving celestial landscape.

In addition, this thesis also engages with the ethics and legality behind space exploration. As technology continues to evolve, the use of artificial intelligence in outer space rises leading to both exciting innovations and ethical concerns. Space mining and biosecurity risks also tie into the ethics and legality behind outer space exploration and future missions.

As the private sector continues to grow in outer space exploration, there will be a rise in space militarization, but also a boom in technological and infrastructural innovations. As the leading country in space endeavors, the United States is primed to lead international cooperation in perpetuating peaceful exploration of outer space and promoting a unified celestial governance framework.

Politics in the United States has long been characterized by its bipartisan structure wherein voters are often subject to a binary decision between the conservative Republican party and the liberal Democrat party. Though most Americans find themselves in support of a more centrist policy preference, Democrat and Republican elites are diverging ideologically. This divergence has roots dating back several decades and its impact is growing presently. The political landscape of the American government has been the subject of severe scrutiny in the media and become a focal point of online discourse on social media platforms. Consequently, political elites have resorted to Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook to establish their presence online and interact with the public on an unprecedented scale. This study seeks to examine how tweets by United States Senators holding office between 2013 and 2021 impacted polarization levels along this same timeline. Using a psycholinguistic analysis quantifying the underlying tone and subject matter of every tweet from all senators utilizing this platform, a regression analysis was conducted to determine whether or not there is a statistically significant relationship between the language used in tweets and their capacity to incite polarization. Across all explanatory variables and both political parties, it was discovered that tweets with a negative underlying tone, no matter the subject, incite more polarization than positive tweets. In response to these findings, policy recommendations are made to help mitigate the polarizing consequences of tweets from political elites in hopes of fostering a more inclusive environment characterized by meaningful online discourse.

Abstract: This study looks into the algorithmic biases embedded deep in AI moderation systems regarding their impact on the Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) region focusing on Arab and Palestinian digital rights. It analyzes how prominent platforms like Meta, Twitter (X), Google, and YouTube employ systems that excessively moderate Arabic and Palestinian voices which leads to economic and informational inequality. Drawing on research from Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, 7amleh, and Safiya Noble, the study stresses the lack of accountability in the governance frameworks concerning AI. It also analyzes the EU's regulatory approach in the AI Act, as well as the fragmented American version of the approach, and pinpointed many overlaps and contradictions, as well as gaps. In reaction to those gaps, the paper proposes active social responsibility policies on ethics of government investment, biases in governance datasets, transparency, independent audits, international cooperative governance frameworks, diversity policies, and ethical structural biases. The aim is to strengthen the proposition advocating for a responsive and comprehensive global AI governance system that provides fairness, accountability, and equity for those disproportionately affected by policies biased towards digital moderation.

Iran’s long-standing pattern of mass arrests dates back to the formation of the Islamic Republic in 1979, often tied to the enforcement of the moral code and government responses to recurring waves of social unrest. Human rights organizations frequently attribute these arrests to the country’s failure to uphold international human rights standards, calling for broader reforms to freedom of speech, press, and assembly. However, such critiques often overlook the more subtle mechanisms through which the state may justify such arrests — notably, the vague and overbroad terms Iranian criminal laws frequently employ. This paper seeks to address this gap by identifying and analyzing all vague and/or overbroad terms in the Islamic Penal Code’s Book 5, while also examining the historical origins and modern-day consequences of such terms. In doing so, my findings suggest that the Islamic Republic of Iran deliberately preserves vague and overbroad legal terms as a strategic tool to criminalize a broad range of behaviors and enable charge stacking, thereby imposing disproportionately harsh penalties designed to deter future resistance. Ultimately, these terms have served as a power mechanism through which the regime consolidates its control, providing legal cover for mass arrests aimed at suppressing dissent and reinforcing its political and ideological dominance.

Despite progress in gender equality in international political spheres, women remain underrepresented in diplomatic institutions, particularly in societies where traditional gender norms remain influential. This thesis explores the progress made towards gender equality in the Ministries of Foreign Affairs of South Korea and Japan, drawing on interviews with diplomats, public statements, policy reports, data sets, media coverage, and government websites. Through a comparative analysis, it explores the extent of gender disparities in diplomatic leadership, the historical and institutional barriers sustaining these gaps, and the effectiveness of existing policies aimed at fostering gender inclusivity. The findings indicate that South Korea achieved gender parity in diplomatic recruitment nearly two decades earlier than Japan, yet promotion rates have been rising at a similar pace for both countries. As more women enter mid-level positions, it remains uncertain whether a glass ceiling will hinder their advancement to senior leadership. While the Ministries of Foreign Affairs of both countries have made strides toward gender inclusivity, deeply entrenched cultural expectations limit the impact of institutional policy reform. This thesis situates its analysis at a pivotal moment when women are approaching the threshold mid-level leadership, and the coming decade will be critical in determining whether structural barriers persist at the highest levels of diplomacy. This thesis concludes with policy recommendations to promote female representation in South Korea’s and Japan’s diplomatic corps, strengthening diplomatic effectiveness and contributing to more inclusive and sustainable peacebuilding efforts. As one of the few studies examining gender representation in non-Western diplomatic institutions, this research contributes to the growing call for globally representative scholarship in international relations.

Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine has shocked the European security landscape, particularly the European defense industry. This thesis evaluates how this change in the international geopolitical order has shaped national preferences for defense industrial integration within the European Union (EU). Drawing on existing integration and defense industry literature, it considers three possible outcomes of this external shock on preferences for defense industrial integration: increased delegation of competence from the Member States to the European Union, increased preference for intergovernmental coordination but not change of competence, or the continuance of the status quo. To examine the effects of the invasion on Member State preferences, this thesis focuses on the supply (production and exports) and demand (procurement and imports) sides of the European defense industry. Ultimately, it demonstrates that Member States prefer increased intergovernmental coordination on defense industrial issues. In an additional application of the external shock framework, the thesis also finds that the second Trump administration, and resultant turmoil in the trans-Atlantic relations, has further generated a preference for increased intergovernmental coordination but with greater impetus and urgency than previously observed.

There has been a steady increase in book bans and school curriculum censorship in recent years. In fact, PEN America has documented nearly 16,000 book bans in US public schools since 2021. Book bans and other forms of school curriculum censorship can greatly disrupt a school’s ability to provide an inclusive education to students. An inclusive curriculum is essential as it allows students to see their own experiences reflected in what they are learning, thus affirming their identity. On top of this, such a curriculum can help foster empathy and understanding. Current literature on the topic of book bans and curriculum censorship focuses particularly on the perspectives of teachers and librarians in conservative states, where legislative book bans have been fully implemented. An existing gap in the literature is the lack of perspectives from educators and students in progressive states. Though many of these states have mandates for inclusivity in school curricula, the threat of censorship remains prominent. To address this gap, this study examines three specific questions: Are schools creating an inclusive curriculum and school environment? How does the threat of curriculum censorship affect schools in states considered to be the most progressive? Are state mandates for inclusive curricula enough to ensure an inclusive school education? To find answers to these questions, I interviewed students, teachers, and library staff in three US school districts located in progressive states. Simi Valley School District and Conejo Valley School District in California and Princeton Public School District in New Jersey. Findings from this study suggest that although educators in these districts typically try their best to teach an inclusive curriculum, there are still some areas where students and the educators themselves say the curriculum can be improved upon. A contributing factor to this gap is the lack of resources, such as textbooks, that align with the state mandates. In addition to this, parent complaints and local school boards have the ability to severely impact curriculum, as shown in the Conejo Valley School District. Rather than facing “hard restrictions,” such as legislative book bans, progressive states tend to face “soft restrictions” on curriculum, which is censorship that is enforced by societal norms and the local community, rather than through law. While much of the power regarding the specificities of school curriculum resides in local school boards, current federal attacks on diversity, equity, and inclusion have led participants to feel uncertain about what the future holds in terms of curriculum censorship. Based on the findings, in order to ensure an inclusive curriculum to all US students, it is recommended to 1) Respond to the Trump Administration’s anti-DEI invoices through state coalitions, 2) Set forth specific state-level policies for what an inclusive school curriculum looks like at the K-5, 6-8, and 9-12 level AND add inclusivity training requirements for teachers, and 3) Have K-12 mandates for inclusivity on the local level, through inclusivity task forces and Professional Learning Communities.

This thesis offers an analysis of whether political prediction markets should continue to be legal to use in the United States. Through interviews with experts on prediction markets, research of the history of prediction markets, and analysis of a sample of PredictIt traders and their associated trading activity, I evaluate whether political prediction markets pose risks to their users and the general public—and if they exist, if they can be effectively mitigated. Additionally, I examine whether the assumptions that have been made by observers about the demographics of the users of political prediction markets and how they engage with them are accurate. I find that the greatest risks that political prediction markets pose are market manipulation and sabotage or insider trading relating to events linked to individual decisions, misfortune, or loss of life. Additionally, I find that users PredictIt users are unrepresentative of the citizen voting age population from a demographic standpoint, but reflect their partisan preferences well. When pairing data on PredictIt traders with the bets they conduct, I find that traders tend to bet on their preferred political party more than the opposing party to a statistically significant degree. This thesis uses this analysis of the risks and their means of mitigation, informed by an improved understanding of the demographics, political engagement, and betting behavior of the user base of PredictIt and potentially similar markets, to recommend that position limits be imposed on traders to prevent market manipulation and that a class of “meme and misfortune” event contracts be barred from sale on these markets. Additionally, I conclude that traders tend to bet on what they want to happen rather than what they think will happen and that the bulk of activity on these markets is carried out by a small group of active users. I use these conclusions and recommendations to determine that political prediction markets should continue to be legal for use in the United States through the implementation of these recommendations to mitigate the risks they pose. This thesis contributes to the literature surrounding political prediction markets by offering a novel analysis of the detailed characteristics and trading activity of the user base of a political prediction market and synthesizing a thorough review of these markets’ rise to prominence in the 2024 presidential election.

Microfinance institutions (MFIs) operate at the intersection of financial sustainability and social impact, aiming to provide underserved populations, particularly women, with access to credit. While women are often considered more reliable borrowers, existing research has not definitively established whether lending to women enhances MFI profitability. This study examines whether MFIs can achieve financial stability while maintaining their mission of empowering women. Using a dataset of almost 3,000 MFIs in developing countries from MIX Market, we analyze how gender-targeted lending influences MFI financial performance across three profitability measures. Our regression models incorporate key control variables, including institutional size, loan quality, and institution type, to isolate the effects of lending to women. Additionally, we assess whether supplemental non-financial services, such as female loan officers and microenterprise education, amplify the financial impact of gender-targeted lending, by addressing the unique challenges that women face in developing countries. Our results indicate that while targeting women does not significantly affect overall profitability, a higher percentage of female borrowers is associated with lower delinquency rates- a distinction not observed when measuring gross loan allocation to women. Additionally, we find that female loan officers reinforce these positive repayment effects and, among profitable institutions, enhance profitability. However, our analysis also reveals surprising inefficiencies in enterprise training services, which, contrary to expectations, appear to yield minimal or even negative effects. Our findings contribute to the broader discussion on the viability of social impact finance, shedding light on whether prioritizing women as borrowers strengthens or strains MFI financial sustainability.

In 2009, El Salvador’s government embarked on substantial reforms to its healthcare system, with an emphasis on primary health care. The reforms pushed for increased affordability and access to care, and major policy goals ranged from abolishing voluntary fees that made medical services too expensive for many Salvadorans to creating primary care and specialist teams (ECOS) across the country and increasing the national health budget. Despite the immense potential of this reform period, little research has been conducted on the reform-making process, and even less has been conducted on the results of the reforms. Using key informant interviews and a document content analysis, I argue that the 2009 reforms were unsuccessful despite good intentions. Key barriers to implementation included a lack of financing; a lack of political continuity, commitment, and support; failures of reform leaders and government officials; a failure to compensate for negative consequences of reforms; a limited scope; a failure to fully consider the unique country context and challenges (e.g., gang violence); and problems in the actual execution of the plans. I further argue that identifying the barriers to implementation in 2009 is crucial for future policymaking efforts — circumstances have changed dramatically since the FMLN governments, and the Bukele administration has the power to markedly improve health access among Salvadorans. Policy proposals outlined in this thesis include an increased budget for health (particularly for the first level of care), a thorough “testing and diagnosis” of the country’s health system, a consolidation of public health institutions, and a multisectoral approach to health.