RESEARCH | Nazli Choucri

In a departure from tradition in international relations, we now recognize that all actors and entities are embedded in three interconnected systems or contexts, namely, the human system and its physical and social properties, the natural system and its life supporting properties and, more recently, the constructed cyber system with its enabling potentials for all actors and entities worldwide.

The theory of lateral pressure, developed jointly with the late Robert C. North (Stanford University), has provided the theoretical direction for our research before and after the construction of the cyber domain—as well as an appreciation of our dependence on and development of the natural environment for security and basic survival. We proceed from the assumption that the basic premises of lateral pressure theory are generic for all forms of interaction, "real" and cyber, with all forms of impact on the natural environment and all other constructed contexts.

Lateral pressure refers to the propensity of states to expand behavior and exert leverage outside territorial boundaries (for non-state actors, lateral pressure is the propensity to extend power and influence in world politics and markets). To simplify, if unimpeded by internal or external conditions, lateral pressure leads to the expansion of external influence, consolidation of competing interests, and intersection of spheres of influence.

Working with Professor North as a research assistant at Stanford University, I was able to follow his development of very detailed, historical narratives of the antganoizing processes in internatoinal relations. Gradualy, I began to articulate an empirical representation of what was then an early framing of the theory of lateral pressure. My research evolved over time, as we combined quantitative and qualitative analysis - in different contexts, for different purposes--from 1870 to mid-20th century. My own contribution was to represent the logic of lateral pressure theory in the form of a system of simultaneous questions in teh effort to represent the dynamics of growth, expansion, and international interactions.

The construction of cyberspace had, and continues to have, major impacts on international relations. I was intrigued by the possibility of understanding teh cyber-real connections. The "virtual" seemed as "real" as empirical. That was not surprise since my Ph.D dissertation, titled The Perceptual Base of Non-Alignment, (1967) focused on quantitative analysis of expressed perceptions by leaders of India, Egypt, and Indonesia. This work is an early application of automated content analysis and teh measurment and metrics of political discourse.

By the mid-20th century, it was evident that cyberspace captured many aspects of power and purpose for almost everyone and everywhere. My research shifted to Cyber International Relations and consumed almost all of my professional attention. There were many puzzles to resolve, and many challenges to take note of.

Indeed, for me the very bases of intenational relations theory appeared to be primed for large-scale review and reassessment. More specfiically, traditional concepts of security - national and international - could no longer remain tied to the "real" in the world of increasingly interconnected virtual threats, vulnerabilities, and emergent challenges. All of this created what David D. Clark and I labelled teh "Co-Evolution Dilemma".

Concurrently, the international community began to consider matters of international law and order in the cyber domain. More recently, the increasing salience of artifical intelligence contributed to a growing concern for articulating AI norms, and a large number of states have adopted formal regulations for AI.

In collaboration with colleagues and another lead researcher, I began to explore the area of Cyber Law and Global AI Accord. Close analyses of the Budapest Convention on Cyber Crime and the European Union General DPR - two major international agreements - brought me back, nearly full-circle, to my early work on automated content analysis. The times have changed. The context is different. The metrics, models and mehtods are also different.

An undercurrent throughout the foregoing is the persistence of international threat and potentials for violent conflict. A "bundle" of factors converged to pull me towards the NSA Program on the Science of Security and Privacy Program (SoS), that motivated me to return once more to poilcy documents and supported my work. Policy analytics here refers to the methods and models applied to individual policy documents, or to a cluster thereof. It is a form of customization in the analysis of policy texts. In contrast to the use of large language models, here the intent is to customize analysis in the effort to identify the quantitative evidence for the salience of meaning. And, closely connnected, is the anchor of security science that focuses on measures to reduce vulnerablity in the use of the Internet. It could be argued that policy analytics is aspiration, while security science is operational.

Dispite the salience of cyberspace in my research, two interconnected and very powerful issues of 20th century international politics remain critical priorities, namely, Environment and Sustainable development. They were coupled in ways that appeared intimately connected to the logic of my evolving research agenda. The first term highlights the negative externalities of human activities; the second term represents the international community's negotiated framing of what must be done. Stated simply, the global task is to reset the redress.

One way of providing an overarching view of the empirical research is to focus on 5 issue areas, broadly framed as:

Throughout, the theoretical direction focuses on the use and the development of lateral pressure theory—as noted in the THEORY segment of this website.