Author: pstaniland

Students, don’t use ChatGPT for your literature reviews. I asked it to “Compare and contrast Paul Staniland’s two books” since this is a topic I know pretty well. It spit out a detailed analysis that looks quite thoughtful and analytical, but inconveniently happens to include a made-up book I very much never wrote:

“As of my last knowledge update in January 2022, Paul Staniland, a political scientist, had published two notable books: “Networks of Rebellion: Explaining Insurgent Cohesion and Collapse” (2014) and “Ordering Anarchy: Armies and Leaders in Tacitly Networked Warfare” (2018). I’ll provide a brief overview of each book and then compare and contrast them based on common themes and approaches.

1. Networks of Rebellion: Explaining Insurgent Cohesion and Collapse (2014):
   • Focus: This book delves into the dynamics of insurgent groups, examining the factors that contribute to their cohesion or collapse.
   • Key Themes: Staniland explores the importance of internal organizational structures, leadership dynamics, and external influences in shaping the resilience or fragility of insurgent groups.
   • Methodology: The book draws on extensive fieldwork and case studies from South Asia, particularly in Sri Lanka and India.
2. Ordering Anarchy: Armies and Leaders in Tacitly Networked Warfare (2018):
   • Focus: This book shifts its focus to the role of armies and leaders in tacitly networked warfare, exploring how these entities operate in the absence of clear organizational structures.
   • Key Themes: Staniland examines how military organizations function in environments characterized by ambiguity, fluidity, and informal networks. The book addresses the challenges and strategies of military actors in such contexts.
   • Methodology: Similar to his first book, Staniland employs a mix of qualitative research and case studies, with a particular focus on insurgencies and conflicts.

Comparison:

1. Common Thread of Networks: Both books share a common thread in their exploration of networks, whether it be insurgent networks in the first book or tacitly networked warfare in the second. Staniland is interested in understanding how informal structures and relationships impact conflict dynamics.
2. Focus on South Asia: Both books draw heavily from case studies in South Asia, showcasing Staniland’s expertise in the region. This regional focus allows for in-depth analysis and context-specific insights.
3. Temporal and Spatial Scope: “Networks of Rebellion” primarily deals with insurgencies, while “Ordering Anarchy” broadens the scope to examine military organizations in various conflict settings. The second book, therefore, has a more expansive temporal and spatial scope.

Contrast:

1. Different Analytical Lenses: While both books deal with conflict and networks, they approach the subject from different analytical perspectives. The first book concentrates on insurgent groups, emphasizing their internal dynamics, while the second shifts the focus to military organizations operating in ambiguous environments.
2. Scale of Analysis: “Networks of Rebellion” tends to focus on the micro-level dynamics within insurgent groups, examining their internal structures. In contrast, “Ordering Anarchy” looks at the macro-level challenges faced by military organizations in navigating tacitly networked warfare.

In summary, while both books by Paul Staniland share a thematic emphasis on networks and conflict, they differ in their analytical lenses and the scale at which they examine these issues. The first book is more focused on insurgencies and their internal dynamics, while the second broadens the scope to explore the challenges faced by military organizations in complex conflict environments.”

I am teaching my PLSC 26100/36100 Civil War seminar during the spring quarter of 2024. A draft of the syllabus can be found here.

All kinds of cool stuff in here, from the US government’s assessment of the new Nepali ambassador (“Although essentially a democrat, he has come to accept the need for increasing measures of discipline and authoritarianism to overcome the enormous problems presented by the challenge of modernization in Nepal”) to the disarming of the Khampas to drug smuggling to Indian foreign policy in Nepal (“WE ASSUME THAT INDIAN PREFERENCE WOULD BE FOR LIBERALIZED REGIME IN NEPAL IN WHICH NCP HAD SHARE OF POWER AND WHICH WOULD THEORETICALLY AT LEAST BE LESS OBSESSIVELY PREOCCUPIED WITH INDIA, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME MORE RESPONSIVE TO GOI DESIDERATA. IN OUR VIEW, HOWEVER, THIS PREFERENCE FALLS FAR SHORT OF DEFINITIVE COMMITMfNT TO OVERTHROW OF CURRENT REGIME OR TO INSTIGATION 0F COUP OR lNSURRECTION WE WOULD APPRECIATE HAVING EMBASSY DELHI’S VIEWS OF INDIAN ASSESSMENT OF INTERNAL SITUATION IN NEPAL” to the possibilities of revolt against the king. Go check it out.

This is with Film Ferraria P30 on a Canonet QL17 G-III (I think).

(Not including family shots I don’t share publicly). Lots of others I really enjoyed can be found on my Flickr and Instagram pages. All of these were shot with either the Canon RF 24-105/4 or the Canon EF 100/2.8 Macro; I clearly like either very large or very small subjects to photograph.