Will Chad's latest peace agreement hold?
Chad's Transitional Military Council has signed a peace deal aimed at ending decades of conflict. The agreement is the first step towards democratic elections and a new constitution. Although many political factions signed the deal, Chad's largest armed group Front for Change and Concord (FACT) walked out of negotiations when its demands were not met. The question then becomes whether the much-anticipated national dialogue will go ahead on August 20. So, how far off is stability and democracy in the Central African nation? Dr Andrew E. Yaw Tchie discusses the implications of the recent events for peace and security in neighbouring countries in the region.
Japan ruster opp
(This op-ed is in Norwegian): Japan kan få det tredje største forsvarsbudsjettet i verden, skriver Wrenn Yennie Lindgren og Per Erik Solli i denne DN-kronikken.
Fragile states and taxation: Evidence from Afghanistan, Liberia, and the Sahel
Join us on the 30th of August for an illuminating look into the role taxation and state fragility play in modern state-building.
Migrant Workers in Russia. Global Challenges and the Shadow Economy in Societal Transformation
Moen-Larsen reviews Migrant Workers in Russia. Global Challenges and the Shadow Economy in Societal Transformation edited by Anna-Liisa Heusala, Kaarina Aitamurto and published by Routledge.
Putins propagandaproblem
In this op-ed, Moen-Larsen and Gjerde write about the propaganda that has characterized the official Russian media coverage of the so-called “special military operation” in Ukraine.
Brothers and barbarians: Discursive constructions of ‘refugees’ in Russian media
This article maps the unexplored terrain of representations of refugees in Russian media, using discourse theory and the concepts of subject positions and symbolic boundaries to analyse these representations. The research questions are: Who are the refugees? What discourses do they feature in? What kinds of symbolic boundaries do these representations maintain? This study analyses the three Russian newspapers Izvestija, Novaya gazeta and Rossiiskaya gazeta, focusing on how, between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2015, these newspapers came to employ the term ‘refugee’ for persons from Ukraine and for those from the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Analysis of the subject position of ‘refugee’ in discourses about security, humanitarianism, integration and nationalism reveals contrasting images of refugees from Ukraine and MENA refugees. The latter are represented as ‘threatening’ and ‘alien’: symbolic boundaries are maintained between Russians and these refugees as well as between ‘superior’ Russia and ‘inferior’ Europe. In contrast, refugees from Ukraine are often presented as similar to Russians. Nationalist discourse merges with security, humanitarian and integration discourses, creating contrasting symbolic boundaries between these two groups of refugees and Russians. Refugees are classed as ‘preferred’ or ‘non-preferred’ migrants on the basis not of their situation, but their ethnicity.
Suitcase – shelling – Russia’: narratives about refugees from Ukraine in Russian media.
The armed conflict in South-East Ukraine has brought a massive increase in refugees in the Russian Federation. This article examines the meaning-making process surrounding the sudden presence of these refugees, through analysis of narratives in three major national newspapers – Izvestiya, Novaya gazeta and Rossiiskaya gazeta –1 June – 30 September 2014. Three thematic groups of narratives predominated: about war, about refugee reception and aid, and about Russia in international relations. These give meaning to the subject-position “refugees from Ukraine” primarily as war victims and aid recipients.
Norges oljedilemma etter Glasgow: Et umoralsk argument for et raskt grønt skifte
(This article is only in Norwegian) Etter å ha gått seirende ut av «klimavalget 2021», står den rødgrønne regjeringen overfor oppgaven med å sikre Norges grønne omstilling. I den offentlige debatten står gjerne argumenter om global solidaritet og miljøhensyn fremst i begrunnelsene for nødvendigheten av en grønn omstilling, mens motstandere av et raskt skifte fokuserer på de negative økonomiske konsekvensene de mener et raskt skifte vil få for Norge. Denne artikkelen søker å nyansere dette bildet, og argumenterer for et bredere kost-nytte-perspektiv som også tar høyde for diplomatiske kostnader ved å fortsette med oljeleting, samt de økonomiske konsekvensene av en treg omstilling. Selv om man holder konsekvensene av klimaendringene helt utenfor vurderingen, argumenterer vi for at usikkerheten rundt fremtidig oljepris og omdømmerisikoen Norge løper ved å fortsette å basere økonomien på ikke-fornybare energikilder, burde være gode argumenter for å revurdere Norges oljepolitikk.
Russkii as the New Rossiiskii? Nation-Building in Russia After 1991
Russia’s post-1991 nation-building project has been torn between competing interpretations of national identity. Whereas the other former Soviet republics opted for nation-building centered on the titular nation, Russia’s approach to national identity was framed by the fact that the RSFSR had been defined not as a designated national homeland but as a multi-ethnic federation. This, coupled with Russia’s definition as the legal successor of the Soviet Union, suggesting continuity and a history of uninterrupted statehood, has enabled a range of rivaling understandings of how to define the “nation.” Focusing on top-down official nation-building, this article examines how, against a backdrop of shifting political contexts, structural constraints, and popular attitudes, the Kremlin has gradually revised its understanding of what constitutes the “Russian nation.” Four models for post-Soviet Russian nation-building are identified – the ethnic, the multi-national, the civic, and the imperial. Over time, the correlation of forces among these has shifted. The article concludes that, despite some claims of an ethno-nationalist turn after 2014, the Kremlin still employs nationalism instrumentally: National identity has undoubtedly become more russkii-centered, but, at the same time, the Kremlin keeps the definition of “Russianness” intentionally vague, blurring the boundaries between “nation” and “civilization.”
PODCAST: Er Sikkerhetsrådet i krise?