1. As some people know, I've recently become the Editor in Chief of @monkeycageblog , taking over from @johnmsides. This is less of a transition than it looks. For one thing, I've worked informally with John for years, and we have very similar understandings of how to do the job.
2. For another, it is less a formal transition, than a splitting of responsibilities for a position that had become too big for one person, especially one person who also had other extensive professorial responsibilities. John will still be the publisher.
3. This means that he will both handle the organizational aspects of the MC, and long term thinking about how the MC should evolve. I will handle the day to day editing queue and hopefully have some time to plan our stories more proactively than has been possible in the past.
4. But that will have to wait a little. I expected to be able to take advantage a gradual transition in the slow period when people are getting back from holidays in the New Year. I did not expect that we would have to field a major international relations crisis.
5. How we have done it, however, highlights the crucial role that @monkeycageblog can play, especially at a moment when many of the more traditional channels through which academic work filters through to policy debate aren't working as they should be.
6. As @dandrezner said this morning - washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/0… - we are in a very unusual moment, when cable news anchors are throwing around political science terms of art such as "escalation dominance" and "audience costs" to explain US-Iran dynamics.
7. We need a basic understanding of what political science tells us and how it can be applied to better understand the complex situation that is unfolding. That's the kind of job that @monkeycageblog was set up to do, and thanks to our editors and writers, we're doing it.
8. In the last few days, we've had @AOstovar at @NPS_Monterey provide an immediate assessment of how the US-Iran crisis arose, detailing how Iraqi and Iranian politics intersect, and predicting that Iran would push for the ouster of US forces washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/…
9. We've had a detailed explainer from @dbyman at @Georgetown of why Iran has relied on proxy organizations such as Hizbollah and terrorism to project power, albeit with serious costs in reputation and relationships with other states in the region washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/…
10. Michael Tesler at @ucirvine has drawn on political science to show how unlikely it is that confrontation with Iran will help Donald Trump win the next presidential election, in analysis that has been taken up by @paulkrugman and @ezraklein. washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/…
11. @rudalevat .@BowdoinCollege has explained why Trump has been happy to act unilaterally, despite the War Powers Resolution, which apparently requires Congressional authorization for acts of war washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/…
12. @Malfrid_BH at @unioslo has put the Iran crisis in the broader context of increased risks of nuclear proliferation and the breakdown of multilateral agreements - washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/….
13. @JackieGSchneid at @hooverinst explains how the overheated speculation that Iran could mount crippling cyberattacks against the US in retaliation misunderstands the relationship between cyberweapons and more traditional forms of aggression - washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/….
14. @StaciePettyjohn at @randcorporation has provided an in-depth analysis of the debate over eviction of US forces from Iraq, pointing to past precedents where unauthorized US operations have poisoned the political relationship with hosting countries - washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/….
15. Elissa Ewers at @CNASdc and @ArianeTabatabai at @RANDCorporation have explained the options that Iran can employ retaliate against the killing of Soleimani - washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/…
16. Douglas Kriner at @cornell has detailed the options that Congress has if it wants to respond to Trump's order for a drone strike, and why it probably won't do much. washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/…
17. @mchorowitz at @penn and @ProfSaunders at @georgetown have explained why war between the US and Iran is still highly unlikely. washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/…
18. @proflupton at @colgateuniv provides a detailed understanding of the dynamics of escalation, and why escalation increases the risks of spirals of miscalculation - washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/…
19. Finally, @tokyomay at @GeorgeMasonU and @slloydwilson at @unevadareno explain how the killing of Soleimani largely united Iran's fractious Twitter commentariat in anger, including many dissidents unhappy with the Iranian regime washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/…
19. This is an impressive marshalling of academic expertise, showing how a wide variety of perspectives, and different bodies of political science thinking can be brought to bear on an urgently relevant set of questions over a very short period of time.
20. Of course, it would not have been possible without our editors, especially @ejgraff and @vanessalide, and the political science editors, many of whom (especially @profsaunders ) have been scrambling to deal with this while beginning to teach classes.
21. Of course, we will be publishing more as the situation continues to unfold. But what @monkeycageblog offers is the ability quickly and rapidly to bring a variety of political expertise to bear on urgent policy situations so as to inform policy debate and public opinion.
22. I'm grateful to have the opportunity to help do this, and to help build on the work that @johnmsides and the academic and non-academic editors have been doing, and continue to do.
And @gihaneaskar has helped publicize and spread word about the posts.
