Key Advisors Research Articles

ПРОЕКТ РЕФОРМЫ УПРАВЛЕНИЯ РУССКОЙ ЦЕРКВИ, ВЫРАБОТАННЫЙ СТОГЛАВЫМ СОБОРОМ, И ПРОБЛЕМА ЕГО РЕАЛИЗАЦИИ

The purpose of the article is to study the problem of relations between the state and the Church in the era of Ivan the Terrible. The main trend in this area emerged in the second half of the 15th century - the gradual subordination of the Church to the state. This process was not straightforward. At the initial stage of Ivan the Terrible's reign, another attempt by the Church to weaken the guardianship of the state occurred, associated with the activities of Metropolitan Macarius, one of the outstanding archpastors of the Church. The study of the topic requires the use of various methodological approaches and tools. The documentary method helped to consider the resolution of the Bishops' Council of the Russian Church, which went down in history under the name of the Stoglav Council. The historical and analytical approach was the main research method, which allowed not only to describe, but also to interpret the events associated with the work of the Stoglav Council. The author focused on those that concerned changes in the field of church administration. The reforms were intended to restore the canonical order of church governance, firstly, by increasing the role of the episcopate in it, and secondly, by strengthening control by society and the state. The article examines the data from sources on the degree of practical implementation of the reform program. It is concluded that the measures that were aimed at strengthening state control over the Church were implemented to the greatest extent. The system of governing bodies of the Russian Church had undergone a long evolution by the middle of the 16th century. As the clergy formed as an estate and in the course of the development of church land ownership, the Church's governing apparatus increasingly acquired features characteristic of the state apparatus, with all its advantages and disadvantages. Accordingly, the project for the reform of church governance, developed by the Stoglav Council, in many ways echoed the reforms that were carried out in the sphere of state construction in the 1550s. This indicates that the reform program was developed in one decision-making center, which historically was called the «Chosen Council». One of the key advisers to the tsar during this period was Metropolitan Macarius. Apparently, it was he who put the main idea of the reform of church governance into the acts of the Stoglav Council: strengthening the power of the episcopate to weaken state control over the Church. This idea contradicted the main trend of state-church relations of the era. Therefore, after the death of Saint Macarius, the implementation of the program of reforms of church governance was curtailed. In practice, only those measures were implemented that contributed to the further strengthening of state control over the Church.

Implementation Challenges for a Multisite Advance Care Planning Pragmatic Trial: Lessons Learned.

Advance care planning (ACP) pragmatic trials are needed. We determined key system-level activities to implement ACP interventions for a cluster-randomized pragmatic trial. We identified patients with serious illness from 50 primary care clinics across three University of California health systems using a validated algorithm. If patients lacked documented ACP within the last 3 years, they were eligible for an intervention: (Arm 1) an advance directive (AD); (Arm 2) AD+PREPAREforYourCare.org; (Arm 3) AD+PREPARE+lay health navigator outreach. Triggered by an appointment, we mailed and sent interventions through automated electronic health record (EHR) messaging. We collaborated with patients/caregivers, clinicians, payors, and national/health system leader advisors. We are currently finalizing 24 months follow-up data. We used the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) and Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) frameworks to track secular trends and implementation efforts. Required multisite, system-level activities: 1) obtaining leadership, legal/privacy, and EHR approvals; 2) standardizing ACP documentation; 3) providing clinician education; 3) validating an automated serious illness identification algorithm; 4) standardizing ACP messaging with input from over 100 key advisors; 5) monitoring secular trends (e.g., COVID); and 6) standardizing ACP workflows (e.g., scanned ADs). Of 8707 patients with serious illness, 6883 were eligible for an intervention. Across all arms, 99% received the mailed intervention, 78.3% had an active patient portal (64.2% opened intervention), and 90.5% of arm three patients (n=2243) received navigator outreach. Implementing a multisite health system-wide ACP program and pragmatic trial, with automated EHR-based cohort identification and intervention delivery, requires a high level of multidisciplinary key advisor engagement, standardization, and monitoring. These activities provide guidance for the implementation of other large-scale, population-based ACP efforts.

At Any Cost. Gorbachev, the National Question, and His Struggle to Prevent the Country’s Disintegration

Abstract The article deals with the evolution of Gorbachev’s thinking on the national question during perestroika, providing additional empirical proof to the existing literature on the subject. It looks at why Gorbachev did not consider the national question a priority initially and how he approached nationalist mobilization and interethnic conflicts throughout his period in office. Prominent scholars agree that Gorbachev was blind in managing the national question. The article argues that, while Gorbachev could not elaborate a compelling nationalities policy, his approach did not fundamentally differ from the one he adopted in other policy spheres. Besides, the article shows how his position on the Baltic states and Ukraine led to growing disagreements with some of his key advisors. Also, it stresses the dilemmas Gorbachev had to cope with when dealing with the national question, which he could have hardly solved with single solutions or a new conception of nationalities policy. The article builds on declassified material, Gorbachev’s speeches, notes of the Politburo meetings, and memoirs of former Soviet politicians.

The Archbishops of Canterbury and their Advisors: A Personal Retrospect

Abstract Using the recollections of Bishop Richard Harries and myself, this article describes some of the ways that Archbishops of Canterbury Robert Runcie, George Carey and Rowan Williams were variously advised about theology, medical ethics, mission and safeguarding. The work of two Archbishop’s Advisory groups – on theology and on medical ethics – is outlined, together with key individual advisors, especially Graham Howes, Wesley Carr and Graham James. Carey is identified as an especially strategic archbishop.

Implementation of Data Mining Using the K-Nearest Neighbor Method to Determine the feasibility of a lecturer's functional promotion

As we know now, every lecturer is obliged to determine the use of the momebase for managing the national lecturer identification number, after getting this, the lecturer concerned can already apply for an academic rank. The data that will be processed in this system is where every lecturer has legal rules to propose academic ranks. The data tested are expert assistant lecturers, lectors (L) lectors are divided into 2 lectors 200 (coordinators/III-C) and 300 lectors (administrators (TKT-1/III-D), head lectors are divided into 3 coaches/(IV-A ) kum 400, supervisor of TKT-1/(IVB) kum 550, main coach of junior/(IV-C) 700, professor of intermediary main coach/(IV-D), KEY Advisor/(IV-E). has shown results by displaying data from lecturers who are eligible to apply for a rank using the K-NN method.

Arms intervention: Weimar Germany, post-imperial influence and weapons trafficking in warlord China

The Treaty of Versailles aimed to strip Germany of both its colonial empire and the global reach of its arms industry. Yet the conflicts in warlord-era China led to the reestablishment of German influence on the other side of the world via the arms trade. Weimar Germany had declared a policy of neutrality and refused to take sides in the Chinese civil war in an effort to demonstrate that as a post-colonial power, it could now act as an honest broker. From below, however, traffickers based in Germany and German merchants in China worked to evade Versailles restrictions and an international arms embargo to supply warlords with weapons of war. Although the German state officially aimed to remain neutral, criminal elements, rogue diplomats, black marketeers and eventually military adventurers re-established German influence in the region by becoming key advisors and suppliers to the victorious Guomindang. Illicit actors in Germany and China proved to be crucial in linking the two countries and in eventually overturning the arms control regimes that were imposed in the wake of World War I.

Burma/Myanmar and the United States: The Dilemma of a Delicate Balance

Burma/Myanmar and the United States:The Dilemma of a Delicate Balance Moe Thuzar (bio) In 2021, in the midst of a "confluence of crises" catalyzed by the Myanmar military's seizure of state power on February 1, the year 2015 will be viewed as the halfway point in Myanmar's now interrupted journey of reform and democratic transition.1 Bilateral relations between Myanmar and the United States, which started to normalize in the almost ten years between April 2011 and January 2021, are now "paused" at best, with Washington imposing and increasing targeted sanctions against the military regime in Myanmar since February.2 In 2015 I suggested that Myanmar would be engaged in an "eternal balancing act" between the United States and China.3 I continue that assessment in this essay, taking a closer look at how this balancing act is underpinned by domestic perceptions that motivate Burmese policymakers and diplomats to continue this policy of a "delicate balance."4 Examining the domestic underpinnings to foreign policy takes on heightened relevance in the current geopolitical moment where major-power competition seizes imaginations globally, including in Southeast Asia. The current political moment in Myanmar, where the military coup has catalyzed a contest for foreign policy dominance and legitimacy assertion in the international arena, also calls for this additional lens of assessment. In this essay, I briefly assess Burmese domestic perceptions of the United States and its policy toward Myanmar along three broad themes: perceptions and expectations, [End Page 134] the importance of legitimacy (to the Burmese), and revealed pragmatic preferences in bilateral interactions.5 Expectations and Perceptions The "dawn" of bilateral relations with the United States dates from a letter sent in February 1857 from King Mindon—the penultimate monarch in Burma's last dynasty before the country came under British rule—to President James Buchanan, the fifteenth U.S. president.6 The letter, which does not address the president by name, was originally intended for President Franklin Pierce and expressed the Burmese king's hope to seek bilateral ties with the United States. In 1856–57, Burma had already fought and lost two wars with the British, ceding territory with each loss. King Mindon's perception of the United States as a former British colony now independent was probably tinged with an expectation of a possible alliance against the United Kingdom. The alliance did not materialize; the United States was on the brink of the Civil War, and James Buchanan merely sent a cordial but noncommittal reply. Burma under British occupation had little formal contact with the United States. In the 1930s the general view seemed to be that U.S. interests were more aligned with those of the UK and thus of less use to Burma.7 Washington's interests in Southeast Asia—and Burma—increased as a result of U.S. military involvement in the region during World War II and continued after the war in light of the rising tide of Communism. The United States and Burma established diplomatic relations in September 1947 before the latter gained independence from the British in 1948.8 Following independence, Burmese decision-makers' perceptions (and expectations) of the United States became linked to ethnic tensions at home. Burmese senior government officials were suspicious of U.S. intent and motives regarding the separatist movements that had sprung up after independence. Among Prime Minister U Nu's key advisers, some leaned left, while others nursed grudges against "American-inflicted slights," and [End Page 135] the then army chief, General Ne Win, was frustrated with both U.S. and British policies toward Burma.9 Notwithstanding his own largely favorable attitude toward the United States, Nu himself was frustrated with U.S. support of the Kuomintang remnant forces that had fled China to the border areas of Burma and Thailand. The Kuomintang emergency exposed CIA moves in Southeast Asia and fanned further suspicions in Burma, particularly in the military. This dilemma tested U.S.-Burma relations, leading to Nu lodging a formal complaint to the United Nations in 1953 after several failed efforts at bilateral negotiations. Burmese suspicions and perceptions of U.S. motives in the geopolitical moment of the times serve as a...

Walter Heinrich Munk. 19 October 1917—8 February 2019

Born in Vienna, Austria, shortly before the Austro-Hungarian Empire lost its access to the sea, Walter Munk became a leading geophysicist and physical oceanographer after being sent to school in New York State and later moving west to California. He and Harald Sverdrup developed wave prediction schemes that were used by the Allies in World War II to evaluate whether amphibious landings would be feasible. His post-war research included further major contributions to the understanding of ocean waves, as well as ocean circulation, tides, internal waves, mixing processes and many other phenomena. He showed how variations in the Earth's rotation contained a wealth of valuable geophysical information and was an instigator of the ‘Mohole’ project that failed for political reasons but paved the way for the Deep Sea Drilling Project. Although primarily a theoretician, throughout his career he was an enthusiastic adopter of new technologies and data analysis techniques. He showed how acoustic transmissions could be used to map ocean eddies and currents as well as to monitor temperature changes of whole ocean basins. He was a key adviser to the US Navy and a dedicated member of the science advisory group, JASON, that focuses on national security. As well as his scientific contributions, his legacy includes the La Jolla Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics. He was liberal in his political outlook, gregarious, hospitable and treated everyone, from undergraduate to admiral, with the same interest and respect.

Extractive visions: Sweden’s quest for China’s natural resources, 1913–1917

ABSTRACT This article scrutinises one of the most fascinating and ambitious cases of Swedish informal empire-building in the industrial age: the skilfully orchestrated attempts by scientists, diplomats, industrial companies and financial institutions to seize control over early Republican China’s most strategic industrial sector – its iron and steel complex. Sweden’s ‘extractive vision’, as we call it, started with the recruitment of Johan Gunnar Andersson, head of the Swedish Geological Survey, as a key advisor to the Chinese government. Contrary to earlier research on Andersson’s Chinese career, which narrowly portrays Andersson as a scientist, we show that he was closely affiliated with the exploitative interests of Swedish industrial and foreign-policy actors. In the end he took the lead in seeking to secure, for Sweden, a quasi-colonial presence in Republican China, centring on large-scale extraction of Chinese iron ore, profit-maximising iron exports throughout the Pacific region and construction and operation of China’s largest steel mills and weapons factories.

The Science of Administrative Change

Donald Trump repeatedly vowed to reduce regulation during the 2016 presidential campaign. Indeed, one of his key advisors promised to deconstruct the administrative state. Since taking office, President Trump has attempted to make good on his promises, spurring federal agencies to brush aside countless regulations that previous administrations had promulgated based on scientific, technological, or economic evidence. Those efforts, which have been dubbed a war on science, implicate a long-contested question in administrative law: to what extent should a change in presidential administrations excuse agencies from an obligation to justify changes in policy with expert, reasoned analysis of relevant data? Perhaps surprisingly, the Trump administration's efforts align with views that have dominated administrative law scholarship in recent decades. By the time Trump took office, many leading administrative law scholars had already championed enhanced presidential control over agency decisions, dismissed expert analysis as an anachronistic relic of the New Deal, and suggested that the considered judgments of previous administrations should be amenable to quick and easy change. This article takes a contrary view and asserts a renewed role for expert, reasoned analysis in the face of politically motivated administrative change. Unlike earlier work, this article identifies change as a fundamental and essential aspect of much expert decision-making, and it explains that regulatory statutes often call for an exercise of expert judgment capable of incorporating frequently changing bodies of scientific, technological, or economic knowledge. This positive procedural account of agency decision-making shows that the reasoned analysis contributed by agency expertise is far from superfluous, but contributes legitimacy and transparency to administrative government. By identifying the value of expertise within the context of politically directed policy changes, this article addresses an under-theorized aspect of judicial review of agency decisions and reinforces the need for agencies to support changes in policy with reasoned, expert analysis.

Courts and the Executive in Wartime: A Comparative Study of the American and British Approaches to the Internment of Citizens during World War II and Their Lessons for Today

Author(s): Tyler, AL | Abstract: This Article compares and contrasts the legal and political treatment of the detention of citizens during World War II in Great Britain and the United States. Specifically, it explores the detentions as they unfolded, the very different positions that President Franklin D. Roosevelt and Prime Minister Winston Churchill took with respect to the detention of citizens, and the manner in which British and American courts reviewed challenges brought by those detained during the war. Comparing the experiences of the two countries reveals that in both cases the courts deferred extensively to the political branches when it came to reviewing challenges to the wartime detention policies, essentially staking out roles that left them largely relegated to the sidelines of public debates over the propriety of internment policies. A comparison of the British and American experiences also reveals that, as the war continued, the two chief executives struck decidedly different positions as to the wisdom and lawfulness of detention policies directed at citizens. In the United States, Roosevelt ignored the legal advice of many of his key advisers regarding the unconstitutionality of the detention of Japanese American citizens and-again against the advice of his advisers-later delayed the closing of the internment camps until after the 1944 election. By contrast, Churchill-who operated in a different legal context that granted him greater powers than his American counterpart-came to view such policies as inconsistent with British constitutional tradition and became a crucial voice urging the termination of such detentions. The Article then attempts to understand both why the two executives charted different courses on this issue as the war unfolded and whether there are any lessons to be drawn from these events with respect to how we should think about the separation of powers during wartime today. Focusing on the British experience during the war, Churchill's change of course suggests that the executive can and sometimes will take the lead in declaring and protecting a country's constitutional values without prodding by the courts, even in wartime, and even in the absence of legal compulsion. But as is explored in the pages that follow, the British experience may be a particularly British story and more generally one that differed in significant ways from the American story. This, in turn, calls into question just how much the British experience during the war should inform debates over the separation of powers in American constitutional law. The American experience during the war, moreover, proves a cautionary tale. Specifically, it reveals a series of failings on the part of the executive branch to acknowledge and engage with the facts on the ground and honor long-accepted constitutional traditions in formulating wartime policies. This example therefore suggests that the executive branch is ill equipped to self-regulate on this score in times of war. These failings in turn call into question the common practice of courts to defer extensively to the executive on matters of national security and more generally implicate fundamental questions about the judicial role in a constitutional democracy. Although grounded in events that took place over seven decades ago, this study is undertaken for a very timely purpose. Once again, we live in a time in which the executive branch has argued that its decisions ostensibly predicated upon heightened concerns about national security should receive extensive, if not complete, deference from the Supreme Court. In addressing such arguments now and in the future, the Court would be wise to remember how judicial deference to executive branch assertions on matters of national security played out during World War II.

Coronavirus: reducing the impact of quarantine

On the 26th February 2020, a meeting was held at the Royal Society of Medicine between key advisers in UK healthcare and law enforcement to discuss quarantine measures in response to the current COVID‐19 outbreak. This article is a brief summary of the comments and questions raised at the meeting.

Edward Osmund Royle Reynolds CBE. 3 February 1933—24 April 2017

Edward Osmund Royle Reynolds was the founding father of neonatal medicine in the United Kingdom and a major leader in the field worldwide; he was a key advisor to government for a decade. He was one of the first paediatricians to specialize in the care of the newborn. He brought to the field a new emphasis on scientific medicine and intellectual rigour with an adventurous investigative and collaborative spirit. Known as Os by his colleagues, he inspired a team of clinicians and scientists who contributed to major advances in our understanding of lung disease in preterm infants and of neurological insults arising in the perinatal period that have contributed to the markedly improved survival and developmental outcomes observed in the twenty-first century compared with those of the 1950s and 1960s. The whole-body cooling, now widely utilized in the management of perinatal asphyxia, owes its introduction to the ground-breaking research utilizing magnetic resonance spectroscopy in animal and newborn studies initiated by Os. His enthusiasm for new ideas was often in evidence as was the breadth of his interests, knowledge and support. His wider influence is his legacy of the reports to government in which he was involved and is seen today in the National Neonatal Audit Programme run by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health since 2006.

The Mysterious Mr. Maxwell and Room M-1: Clandestine Influences on American Postal Censorship during World War I

Infrequently examined archival sources raise the possibility that British press mogul Lord Northcliffe and his country’s intelligence agents enabled America’s purging of journalistic dissent during World War I. William Maxwell—Northcliffe’s representative in the United States and a liaison with a British-funded spying ring—performed a pivotal role in suppressing America’s foreign-language press. He displayed a remarkable ability to install himself as the spearhead of the Post Office’s wartime monitoring and censorship activities in New York. The information he gathered also served the Department of Justice, the Bureau of Intelligence, the Military Intelligence Section, and the Office of Naval Intelligence. Maxwell later became a key advisor to the Post Office and lobbied to expand his responsibilities to include surveilling all of the country’s foreign-language publications.

Charles Wickens: The Australian Government’s First Economist

The contribution of Charles Wickens to Australian economics has been overlooked for too long. As well as his distinguished service as Commonwealth Statistician, and high reputation as an actuary, he was a key economic adviser to government for many years. He was effectively the first Australian government economist. He was the man to whom other public servants turned with economic problems. Along with Douglas Copland, he had a major role in the establishment of the Economic Society. He was a major contributor to its journal, the Economic Record. He challenged the then economic orthodoxy, giving proto-Keynesian advice on responding to the great depression, which influenced the plan developed by Ted Theodore. He chaired the committee of Australian economists which produced a globally significant report on tariffs. He did pioneering work on estimating a national balance sheet for Australia and in other areas of economics. He should be better remembered.

POLITICAL PRAGMATISM AND ETHICS IN KAUTYLA’S ARTHASHASTRA: CONTRADICTION OR COMPLEMENTARITY

Is there always an inherent contradiction between political pragmatismand ethics? This paper explores this through the classical Indian realist politicaltreatise, the Arthashastra, written by Kautilya. He was the key advisor to EmperorChandragupta Maurya (c. 317-293 B.C.E), credited with first consolidating theIndian subcontinent into an empire under centralized control. Kautilya is widelyagreed to be a pioneer in developing a ‘science of politics’- a great departure fromthe hitherto existing moralistic, spiritual, ascetic preoccupations and, religiousspeculations of Indian political philosophy. Kautilya blurred the distinctionbetween morality and political utility. Much of political theory tradition remainsoblivious to Kautilya’s contribution to morality in realpolitik and his continuinginfluence in non-Western societies. His treatise is a significant point of entry intoexploring the dilemmas attached to active pursuance of ethical goals while alsobalancing the imperatives underpinning political pragmatism- a concern whichhas carried on to this day.

The Blind Instructing the Sighted

This article examines representations of Music Master Kuang in early Chinese historical and philosophical texts. Music Master Kuang was entirely blind, at a time when people with disabilities suffered serious discrimination. However, in spite of his handicap, he was able not merely to become a fine musician, but also served as a key advisor to two rulers of Jin, Lord Dao (r. 573–558 BCE) and his son, Lord Ping (r. 557–532 BCE), and in some texts is said to have acted as their prime minister. In achieving this transition, he is unique among Music Masters of the period. This article classifies the stories told about him into two main thematic groups, as a musician and as a statesman, to show the way in which music was related to statecraft through the persona of an individual who was both a highly respected government minister and a noted performer on the qin.

Whose Speech Is It Anyway? Ownership, Authorship, and the Redfern Address

Whose Speech Is It Anyway? Ownership, Authorship, and the Redfern Address

The Political Perils of Cold War Foreign Relations: Adlai Stevenson’s Democrats and Foreign Policy in the 1956 Presidential Election

ABSTRACTThis analysis uses the case of the 1956 American presidential election between Adlai Stevenson and Dwight Eisenhower to highlight the ways that an obsession with foreign relations could prove problematic to a campaign. Focusing primarily on Stevenson’s advisors, long-standing problems in the Democrats’ strategy on foreign relations, coupled with the emotional attachments that several key advisors had to the issue, combined to ensure that the Democrats failed to develop an effective foreign policy platform—particularly when running against a president believed to be so successful in that arena. Ultimately, it argues that the Stevenson campaign’s failure to forge an effective position highlights the problematic relationship between domestic policies and foreign relations.

Russia and global governance: the challenge to the existing liberal order

The focus of this article is on global governance in an era in which major new actors join those who have for the past quarter century, and longer, set the rules for the liberal international order. That order has been characterized by Western political and economic dominance, the expansion—one might even say imposition—of democratic political institutions and ‘open-door’ economic policies. For the past decade, Russia has increasingly challenged the West and the existing international order across a broad set of fronts. These actions have ranged from rhetorical challenges to the global system to the use of military intervention meant to impose its policy objectives on other states, as well as cyber-attacks on national elections and direct support for right-wing political groups in the West seemingly meant to instill instability within the member states of the Western community, to support like-minded right-wing political groups, and to challenge the very existence of that community itself. Russia’s efforts to redefine the existing world order and to reduce the dominant position of the USA in defining and maintaining that order seem to have gained an important new ally in Donald Trump and some of his key advisors, who appear to question the very foundations of that order and to call for the US withdrawal from it.