Master's course: China - Features of a New Geopolitical Power
Norwegian public’s attitudes to foreign policy in 2024: a status quo nation in a time of global turmoil
What is the Norwegian public’s opinion on the state of the world? And what foreign policy does it want the Norwegian government to pursue? In this report, we present the findings from an opinion poll conducted by Sentio for NUPI in the period 18 to 24 April 2024. The global landscape is deeply unsettled, and we find ourselves in an era marked by considerable uncertainty about future developments in world politics. The great power rivalry between the United States and China is intensifying, the war in Ukraine continues to rage, the war in Gaza is causing immense human suffering and having major ramifications for the Middle East, and the effects of global warming are becoming increasingly apparent. The Norwegian government has warned through, for example, its intelligence service’s annual report on security threats, that Norway is facing its most serious security situation in decades.1 However, a key finding in our report is that the Norwegian public is somewhat measured in its assessments and considers the general threat level for Norway to be moderate, i.e. at a normal level. This suggests that the government’s actions have minimal impact on public opinion on world politics. The public’s failure to grasp the severity of the security situation is both surprising and alarming, as is its disregard for official communications about the geopolitical threats facing Norway. Against the backdrop of limited crisis comprehension, we see a relatively stable development in the Norwegian public’s attitudes to foreign policy since 2021, with the notable exception of attitudes to Russia, which have clearly hardened. NUPI conducted similar studies in 2020 and in connection with the general election in 2021,2 and in this report, we have asked many of the same questions as previously, in addition to some new ones. We therefore take this opportunity to compare our findings with the previous studies where appropriate, to gauge the extent of change in public opinion. This report and the survey it presents is financed by the Konrad Adenauer Stiftung.
Reinforcing Trust, Evoking Nostalgia and Contrasting China: Japan's Foreign Policy Repertoire and Identity Construction in Myanmar
In the immediate aftermath of the military coup in Myanmar in February 2021, Western countries and the EU condemned the coup, imposed targeted sanctions against military leaders and military-owned companies, and redirected essential humanitarian aid to NGOs. Japan, however, chose to neither align with its democratic allies nor completely suspend its aid. Despite a long and complicated pre-war history and limited engagement after 1988, Japan-Myanmar relations experienced a resurgence between 2012 and 2021. This article contends that one key driving force in contemporary relations is identity construction. Drawing on the literature on relational identity and foreign policy repertoires, the article demonstrates how the discursive statements and embodied practices of a network of Japanese identity entrepreneurs activate, negotiate, and renegotiate the identities of the Japanese Self and its Others. Through an analysis of interviews conducted with elite stakeholders in Myanmar and Japan, the article studies Japan’s constructed identity as an economic great power and post-war development pioneer, peace promoter, and diplomatic mediator. It finds that Japan constructs its identity temporally in terms of nostalgia (natsukashisa) and a longing for a time when Japan was a post-war industrial powerhouse, but also spatially in terms of Japan’s legal, moral, and industrial superiority over other countries involved in Myanmar’s development, in particular vis-à-vis China.
Understanding Xi Jinping’s China
Zooming in on the U.S.
Norway’s handling of knowledge relations with states outside its security cooperation
Norwegian authorities have for several years actively promoted internationalization of the knowledge sector. This includes collaboration with authoritarian countries such as China and Russia, which are not part of Norway’s security cooperation. However, in the last few years, we have seen a clear turn towards questions of national security and the status of liberal norms garnering more attention, also with consideration to knowledge relations. We observe this in sharper warnings from the security services, revised legislation and regulations and new guidelines for knowledge collaboration with countries such as China and Russia. In this article we study these changes and discuss their possible implications. Empirically, we build on survey and interview data, and we examine policy documents and media reports on relevant incidents. In terms of theory, we draw on explanations grounded in the geopolitics and securitization literature. We argue that measures that are introduced to protect national security and liberal norms may also limit the operational space for independent research and thus change the parameters for academic freedom, especially in relation to activities with connection to actors from non-allied states. To avoid unnecessarily restrictive conditions, researchers and their institutions should actively demonstrate and communicate how they work to ensure responsibility in their knowledge relations. This is especially important in situations where ethical and security-related challenges are obvious.
Nordic countries and knowledge collaboration with authoritarian non-allied states: conditional openness with stronger demands for protection
The conditions surrounding international knowledge production and collaboration are changing. What has long remained a field characterized by overtly liberal and open practices is now subject to more scrutiny with regards to protecting national security and academic freedom. Developments concerning China especially, but also Russia, and other authoritarian states with knowledge-related ambitions have alerted authorities in many liberal, democratic states. This is the case in the Nordic region, too. In this focus edition, we study why and how stricter conditions for international knowledge collaboration are emerging in Norway, Sweden, Denmark and Finland. We are especially interested in problematizing and explaining what happens when stronger security concerns and calls for protection meet liberal norms, including academic freedom.
China and Evolving Multilateral Craftmanship in the Age of Digitalization (CHIMULTI)
Which international organizations develop responsibilities for digital technology (digitech) governance and how do major powers work to craft influence in these organizations? This is the overarching ...
Climate, Peace and Security in Myanmar
Går verden slik vi kjenner den i oppløsning?
De fleste av oss har vokst opp med tanken om at verden blir bedre og bedre, det blir mindre fattigdom og krig og demokratiet sprer seg. Men nå er...