Publications
Strategic cooperation against terrorism 2.0? Russia's initial positions on Syria. 1:2
This project examines the prospects for Russia-Western practical cooperation against the Islamic State (IS) in Syria and, more broadly, for a rapprochement between Russia, NATO and key NATO member states post-Crimea. The analytical point of departure is two-fold: Firstly, the project will examine how Russia’s longstanding rejection of a ‘Western’ world-order, along with various Western leaders’ increasing depiction of Russia as an ‘adversary’, shape the two parties’ room for manoeuvre with respect to practical collaboration on the ground in Syria. Secondly, and operationalizing ‘the West’ as two key ‘Atlanticist’ member states in NATO, the United States and Britain, it will examine how Russian and Western domestic debates constrain governments and political leaders’ scope for action, and their ability to adjust their commenced policy paths in Syria. When adversarial statements about ‘the other’ are voiced by state leaders in an international setting, they are often portrayed in the media as being reflective of that particular leader or government’s position alone. In this project, we suggest that the dynamics of Russia-Western relations cannot be properly understood without alsoconsidering how states’ security policies are empowered and limited by domestic security policy debates. The project will provide an up-to-date, in-depth analysis of how contemporary Russian, American and British security policies are being constituted and constrained by domestic debates. Furthermore, it will trace how domestically negotiated security policies materialize in actions on the ground in Syria. Against the backdrop of the empirical analysis, publications from this project will discuss the likelihood of these states finding common ground against IS in Syria, and the prospects for Russia-Western rapprochement more generally.
Strategic cooperation against terrorism 2.0? Collaborating with adversaries. 2:2
In October 2016, international media reported that the Russia– US diplomatic dialogue over Syria had collapsed, with both sides holding the other party to blame. While the US State Department observed that ‘everybody’s patience with Russia has run out’, Russia’s Foreign Minister criticized the United States for using ‘a language of sanctions and ultimatums while continuing selective cooperation with our country’ (CNN 2016). The breakdown and the statements that ensued marked the endpoint of a turbulent diplomatic year, which had begun with a brief handshake between presidents Obama and Putin at the UN General Assembly late in September 2015. In the months following that handshake, Russia and the US-led coalition participated in talks and activities aimed at finding a negotiated solution to the civil war in Syria as well as to defeat international terrorism there.
Norsk forsvarspolitikk. Territorialforsvar og internasjonal innsats 1990-2015
Norsk forsvarspolitikk har gjennomgått store omstillinger siden den kalde krigens slutt, spesielt i perioden 1990–2005. Regjering og Storting sendte stadig flere soldater til fredsbevarende og fredsopprettende operasjoner i utlandet, mens Forsvaret selv fremdeles hadde forsvar av landet som sitt primære fokus. Forfatter Græger viser hvordan kaldkrig-tenkningen og etablerte praksiser i forsvaret og forsvarsmiljøer lenge bremset en politisk ønsket omstilling fra invasjonsforsvar til innsatsforsvar tilpasset internasjonale operasjoner. Boken viser hvordan norsk utenriks-, sikkerhets- og forsvarspolitikk er tett sammenvevet, og stadig utfordres av endringer i trusselbildet og i NATO, men løfter også fram de nasjonale forutsetningene for handling. Forfatteren har analysert debatter både på Stortinget og innen Forsvaret, og kombinerer dette med studier av hvordan forsvarspolitikken utformes i praksis – blant annet gjennom langtidsplanlegging, militær utdanning og profesjonsutvikling. Boken tilfører ny kunnskap om forhold av vesentlig betydning for norsk forsvars- og sikkerhetspolitikk.
From State-led development to embedded neoliberalism: India’s Industrial and Social Policies in Comparative Perspective
In the literature, there are mixed opinions about the links between economic globalisation and social policies. On the one hand, it is argued that increased global economic integration compels states to promote their countries’ economic competitiveness. In an increasingly liberalised world economy, this leads to a ‘race to the bottom’, in which states, in order to attract investment and prevent capital flight, must cut spending and reduce tax rates (Swank 2001; Brooks 2009). On the other hand, it is claimed that in the face of increased economic insecurity, citizens will demand more social protection by the state, as compensation for increased insecurity. According to this argument, increased economic liberalisation will be accompanied by expanded social policies, along the lines seen in Europe in the period of ‘embedded liberalism’, when welfare states were built. For India, similar arguments have been made by Partha Chatterjee, who argues that along with a (neoliberal) policy promoting the ‘primitive accumulation of capital’, the state has undertaken to ‘reverse the effects of primitive accumulation’ by funding programmes that provide alternative means of livelihood to those that have lost them (Chatterjee 2013: 214). This chapter will assess the role of the state in industrial development and welfare provision in India. It will trace the evolution of state policies, focusing mainly on the period from the 1970s until today, to identify patterns of both continuity and change. It will focus on: 1 Economic policies, including the system of regulation, degree of state ownership and industrial policy (state ownership, licensing, trade policies, tax system); 2 Social protection (direct or conditional cash transfers, social assistance, pensions, unemployment benefits, public works, health and education).
Slutten på demokratiet? Globalisering, nyliberalisme og demokratiets framtid
Makt og avmakt i cyberspace: hvordan styre det digitale rom?
A secure cyberspace is a necessity for the functioning of the economic, political and social structures of modern-day society. The stability and development of cyberspace is not preordained, but something that has to be facilitated. Cyberspace is constantly changing and to govern the complex set of interests, agendas and implications multistakeholder initiatives that promote cooperation between the public and private sector and civil society are increasingly put forth as the solution. This form for cooperation is widely seen in the policy community as a panacea for securing cyberspace. While academics have questioned these initiatives’ functionality, few have studied why they do not work in practice. By focusing on the power dynamics between the different actors this article takes a step towards understanding how these dynamics create conflict of interest in governing cyberspace. Through case studies of multistakeholder initiatives on the international level and in Norway, this paper argues that these initiatives are implemented without the necessary preconditions for such a form of governance. This article is published in Norwegian.
Towards UN counter-terrorism operations?
The United Nations (UN) peacekeeping operation in Mali (MINUSMA) has become among the deadliest in UN history, suffering from attacks by violent extremists and terrorists. There are strong calls to give UN peacekeeping operations more robust mandates and equip them with the necessary capabilities, guidelines and training to be able to take on limited stabilisation and counter-terrorism tasks. This article conceptually develops UN counter-terrorism operations as a heuristic device, and compares this with the mandate and practices of MINUSMA. It examines the related implications of this development, and concludes that while there may be good practical as well as short-term political reasons for moving in this direction, the shift towards UN counter-terrorism operations will undermine the UN’s international legitimacy, its role as an impartial conflict arbiter, and its tools in the peace and security toolbox more broadly, such as UN peacekeeping operations and special political missions.
Negotiating justice: legal pluralism and gender-based violence in Liberia
The plural legal system in post-conflict Liberia expresses tensions between modern and customary institutions. This article seeks to understand how Liberians navigate choices in the plural legal system to address gender-based violence cases. By asking how and why people make the choices they do, we highlight how Liberians solve tensions between institutions, by creating flexible categories that allow them to pursue a course of action that does not compromise their ability to access social networks and resources.
Trusselen fra cyberspace
(Op-ed in Norwegian only): Cyberangrep øker i omfang verden over. Norge er et av verdens mest digitaliserte land og dermed spesielt utsatt, men dette blir i stor grad oversett av politikere og næringslivsledere.