Russian-speakers in Estonia: A Minority Without Agency
This article explores the conditions of the Russian-speaking minority in Estonia and sees the development of these conditions as a product of an interaction between the nationalizing state, the Russian-speaking minority, the minority’s “kin state”, and the international community; a framework dubbed the “quadratic nexus” by David J. Smith, expanding upon the theories of Rogers Brubaker. This article provides an updated empirical analysis of the impact of the quadratic dynamic in Estonian minority relations, as the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine has shifted the balance of power between the agents in Smith’s nexus. The result of this shift is that the conditions of the Russian-speaking minority are now almost entirely decided by the nationalizing state, influenced by Russian aggression. The Russian Federation has made the protection of minority rights in Estonia increasingly difficult by pressuring the Estonian political elite to take an even more conservative stance on nationality policies as a response to the perceived threat from their neighbor in the east, in addition to reinforcing international indifference to minority rights in Estonia. This, combined with the preexisting socio-economic conditions of the Russian-speaking minority has led to the near total loss of the minority’s agency. The article is in Norwegian only.
Deterrence and (Re)assurance in the High North – Finland and Norway Compared
- Finland and Norway are both frontline states to Russia with a similar deterrence and defense strategy. - Finland’s geopolitical position as a frontline state is mainly defined by the long land border to Russia. Norway is predominantly a maritime frontline state. - Norway is both a frontline state and a rear area for staging support to military operations in the Nordic Region. - Geography is a factor influencing the different approaches in Finland and Norway to foreign military activity near Russia. Also, proximity to nuclear forces and test areas.
Building peace through a sustainable environment
Why should we connect the environment to issues of peace and conflict? And in a world of dramatically increased geopolitical tensions, is it possi...
The next migration crisis: Is the EU better prepared?
In this podcast episode we take a closer look on how the EU will handle a new migration crisis. A new wave of mass migration to Europe might be bu...
Abkhazia between Russia and the outside world
De facto states - states that have failed to win international recognition - have long been understudied 'blank spots,' overlooked in academic lit...
Putin’s potential headache: The anti-mobilization protests in North Caucasus
After Vladimir Putin’s announcement of the partial mobilization of the war in Ukraine in September, people, and in particular women, took to the s...
Rethinking radicalisation and resilience in Mali and the Sahel
What does resilience against radicalisation and violent extremism look like in Mali and the Sahel? And which drivers are present for the spread of...
Russian youth, war, and independent journalists in exile
The Russian online magazine DOXA is this year's winner of the Norwegian Student Peace Prize. The committee highlights their work exposing corrupti...
Security realities of freezing politics and thawing landscapes in the Arctic
Russia’s re-invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has had immediate and ongoing effects for Arctic security and cooperative governance at both a regional an...
How Ad Hoc Coalitions Deinstitutionalize International Institutions
As ad hoc coalitions (AHCs) proliferate, particularly on the African continent, two questions crystallize. First, what consequences do they bring about for the existing institutional security landscape? And second, how can the trend of AHCs operating alongside instead of inside regional organizations be captured and explored conceptually? To answer these questions, we closely examine the Multinational Joint Task Force (MNJTF) fighting Boko Haram and its changing relationship to the African Union (AU). Through the case study and a review of policy and academic literatures, the article launches the concept of deinstitutionalization and how it can be characterized. We identify three features of deinstitutionalization – AHCs can bypass standard procedures for decision-making processes; whittle down established institutional scripts, and shift resource allocations. We detail how the AHCs contribute to changing practices of financing international peace and security operations, with an examination of EU and UN policies and practices. In sum, the paper unwraps the processes of deinstitutionalization and identifies three forms of rationales for this process – lack of problem-solving capacity, limited adaptability and path dependency.