Tom Pepinsky

Author: tompepinsky

  • Political Science on Syria

    As political scientists gather for APSA’s Annual Meeting in Chicago, and the U.S. government considers its response to the suspected use of chemical weapons by Assad’s regime in Syria, it is worth stepping back to look back at how political scientists as academics are engaging with this critical question. There has been a lot of recent commentary on Syria by political scientists, so much so that I can link to summaries here, here, and here.

    Yet something is missing from the conversation among political scientists: Syria experts.

    Now let me be absolutely clear here: I am not opposed whatsoever to using general theories and general statistical associations to inform how we think of contemporary events like those in Syria. (Although I am surprised we’re not hearing more about prediction rather than explanation, and I’m still waiting for Jay Ulfelder to post on this [for now, this post is good enough].) But I also want to read informed commentary from people who really know Syria, who have lived there and who have contacts within the regime and real knowledge about how it works, what Assad’s constraints and incentives are, and so forth.

    This kind of knowledge cannot be gained from reading the news, reading the secondary literature, or from a couple of visits—although these are better than nothing. It requires careful and focused study, and real language proficiency, all with an eye towards the types of questions that political scientists ask.

    People with this sort of deep knowledge about Syria exist, they just aren’t part of the political science academic community, at least not the one participating in this conversation. And that leaves our discipline at a disadvantage. Especially given reasonable worries, such as those expressed by Erik Voeten, that Syria may be different from other cases. (There are also massive selection issues in the quantitative study of the effects of military intervention on war outcomes and killings, but I’ll just ignore these for now.)

    Think about it this way: if China had used chemical weapons against an insurgent opposition, we would be having an interesting and hopefully productive conversation between quantitative security scholars and China hands about what U.S. policy options would be. Why do we have so many China hands, but no Syria hands? Probably because of the professional incentives associated with the learning about small countries. It also may have something to do with the way that Middle Eastern studies and East Asianstudies operate, and how they interact with political science as an academic field. I’m not an expert in either so these are only guesses.

    It may be inevitable that political science will not produce a deep pool of Syrianists(?) whose expertise can inform the academic discussion of Syria in the context of a possible foreign military intervention. Yet it is worth acknowledging that this leaves us at a distinct disadvantage at a moment that we most want our discipline to be relevant.

  • How to Eat in Jakarta

    Tyler Cowen went to Jakarta recently and has provided his advice on how to eat well there. It makes sense to look for his advice: Cowen has a very interesting book on the economist’s take on good eating. Now, the “economist takes on some unrelated field and writes a trade book” genre is so very tiring, despite the very attractive promises that these economists can optimize my life. That said, Cowen’s food book is pretty good, and very sensible about most things. His advice about eating in Jakarta, though, misses the mark.

    Some principles:

    1. Sanitation is a mess in Jakarta. Street food—real street food—will very frequently make you sick[*] unless you stick only to bakso. I mean really sick. Typhoid or hepatitis sick. The problem is that many dishes are served lukewarm, or with lukewarm sauces or sambals, or with raw vegetables as garnishes (common in Sundanese cuisine, from the region surrounding Jakarta).
    2. As a rule, regular restaurants are no better. On average you are less likely to get sick at a “restaurant with walls” but this is really only a statement of averages. Mall restaurants, and especially padang food restaurants, can be very dangerous.
    3. There is a category of food-for-sale that lies between cart (kaki lima) and restaurant: the warung. I suspect that this is what he means by “street food.”

    There are plenty of lousy restaurants in Jakarta (my favorite example is Bakmi GM). But as a rule, restaurants and more established warungs completely and totally dominate street food. There are good examples of street food (of the warung variety) that is tasty, but here’s the funny thing: the best street vendors morph into more regular establishments! It ceases to be “street food” in the customary sense of the word because entrepreneurs know how to make money, and it’s not by doing street food.

    Examples: Nasi Goreng Kambing Kebon Sirih has a website and offers catering! Another favorite Menteng warung of mine, Warung Ngalam, also has a website, and twitter.

    This means that Cowen’s final sentence is exactly wrong:

    Knowledge of specific restaurants is not the key here.

    On the contrary, knowing specific restaurants is absolutely key. That’s how you know a tasty and safe warung from a typhoid warung, and also how you know which of many warungs with the same name in the same place is the “right” one. It’s also, obviously, how you know a good restaurant from an average one.

    Another issue that Cowen touches on is malls and buffets. I think he’s on firmer ground here, although I will say that I’ve never had good Indonesian food at any Indonesian buffet. You can get really, really good food at a nice Indonesian hotel buffet, but it’s good Chinese, Japanese, Indian, or Western food.

    So if the goal is to eat good Indonesian food in Jakarta, and you’re a newcomer, I don’t at all recommend following Cowen’s advice. Instead, you need recommendations from trusted and experienced sources. Do not waste your time with real street food: any version of anything you can find on the street will probably taste better at a restaurant. But even then, be careful, because four walls and air conditioning is no guarantee of safety. Malls are fine, and upscale malls are the most likely to be safe. But the best restaurants and warungs are still the stand-alone kind, and to figure out which ones are worth the time and effort to get there, you need an expert.

    [*] You often hear the recommendation that you should eat street food in foreign countries even if it makes you sick. I agree that it’s an interesting experience, but there should be limits to this. And especially if you’re new in town, or only have a few days, spending three of them in bed with a horrible stomach bug does not seem like the best use of your time. Having experienced that myself, I can assure you that nothing for sale on the street in Jakarta tastes that good.

    The same is not true in Kuala Lumpur, where the food is tastier and less likely to make you sick. Go to Jalan Alor or Bangsar or Masjid India and have at it.