| Students Working on their PhD | Students with their PhD | |
| Patrick Armshaw | Jacqueline H.R. DeMeritt (2009) | |
| Andreas Beger | Ronny Lindström (1996) | |
| Courtenay Ryals Conrad | Andrew G. Long (2004) | |
| Daniel Hill | Robert L. Parrillo (2009) | |
| Daniel Milton | Stephen M. Shellman (2003) | |
| Sunhee Park | Kürşad Turan (2005) | |
| Jeffrey Weber | John A. Tures (2000) | |
| Joseph K. Young (2008) | ||
| Click links above for details |
How do intra-regime dynamics affect state decisions to sign, ratify, and comply with international human rights law? Existing research in this area typically assume that the same domestic actors are responsible for treaty signing, ratification, and compliance. But under an individual government, the domestic actors responsible for treaty signing are rarely the same as those who are expected to ratify the treaty or comply with its terms. More importantly, these different actors often have divergent preferences about the extent to which they believe the state should internationally commit to respecting domestic human rights. In a three-paper dissertation, Ryals unpacks the interactions between domestic political institutions and pro-rights groups that affect state decisions to support human rights law.
The project investigates US foreign policy during 25 years of the Cold War, 1966-1992, and argues that the US Congress and the Soviet Union made strategic choices in response to the domestic political environment faced by the US President. The extant literature has appealed to strategic interaction to explain cases where conflict is avoided, yet it has not addressed the more interesting question of when, if ever, one should expect conflict to occur. To fill in this gap, Weber argues that partisanship influences the incentives leaders have to adopt dovish versus hawkish foreign policies. He distinguishes a leader's preferences (i.e., hawkish or dovish) from their strategic environment (i.e., domestic/international competition and electoral threat) to explain the ebb and flow of interactions between a leader in one state, and their competitors at home and abroad.
I am also serving as a committee member on the following students' dissertations: