Swedish–Norwegian Defence Cooperation: New opportunities?

Swedish–Norwegian defence cooperation has encountered rough seas in recent years, but now seems to have entered smoother waters. This is due to both push and pull factors: push because the new security environment has increased the likelihood of a crisis in the Nordic/Baltic region, which would probably involve all Nordic states, irrespective of NATO or EU membership. Pull because of the renewed US engagement in the region, because of the EU incentives for industrial defence cooperation – and because geographical proximity in itself creates possibilities for shared solutions and practices. This Policy Brief focuses on Swedish–Norwegian defence cooperation in the broader Nordic/Baltic context. We begin by reviewing recent developments in Swedish defence policies, and the implications of previous failed joint Swedish–Norwegian projects. We then turn to opportunities that may emerge as a result of the mentioned push and pull factors. These opportunities are to be considered as ideas; they have not been thoroughly discussed and assessed, but may serve as starting points for follow-on debates and explorations.

Tryggingspolitikk sett frå Tyrkia og Russland

The UK withdrawal from the EU - Legal implications for Norway as party to the EEA Agreement

By leaving the European Union, the United Kingdom withdraws from all EU international commitments. The disentanglement of the UK from the EU, Brexit, will thus affect third states and organisations with which the EU entertains relations. Norway will be no exception, particularly in view of the many agreements the country has concluded with the EU, covering a wide range of areas and entailing a high degree of integration with the Union’s legal order, the EEA being the most important of these agreements.

Wielding influence in a new governance architecture: Norway, the G20 and the 2030 Agenda

The G20 is by dint of its membership – the 20 largest economies in the world – an important decision-making body. Moreover, the challenges currently facing established inter-governmental organi- zations (IGOs) arguably make the G20 even more important. The G20 is perceived as agile, e ective and powerful whereas established IGOs – such as the UN and the World Bank - appear to be bogged down by overly bureaucratic rules, organizational inertia, and a lack of resources to ful l their mandates. This was on display when the G20 convened in Washington DC during the global nancial crisis, and its swift actions, in all likelihood, prevented a more severe glo- bal crisis. For Norway, the power of the G20 as an arena for shaping global gov- ernance represents both a challenge and an opportunity. It is a chal- lenge because Norway has for the last half-century invested heavily in multilateral institutions both as an end in itself, and as a means to embed Norwegian interest within multilateral rules. This was made clear in the government ́s recent White Paper “Veivalg i Utenriks- og Sikkerhetspolitikken.” The G20 may pose a challenge if its seen to undermine the credibility of multilateral institutions with regard to uphold established rules. This in turn, may reduce Norway ́s ability to in uence global governance through these multilateral institutions. It is an opportunity to the degree that the G20 can strengthen global governance on key areas of importance for Norway, such as the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The G20 also rep- resents an underexplored channel for wielding in uence on other issues, which requires a different type of strategy than the one pur- sued vis a vis multilateral institutions.

The G20: Inclusivity and Legitimacy - a Nordic Perspective

At a time of geopolitical uncertainty and strong interdependencies there is a need for more effective global governance. The G20 provides a positive force but there are well founded concerns with regard to its legitimacy and the risk of securing “club goods” at the expense of international institutions such as the UN. In particular, many countries from the southern hemisphere feel excluded from this elite group and continue to expresses their worries but they are not the only ones. The Nordic countries, among them Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Iceland, constitute an economically powerful group of states that has been denied any membership so far. So what is the Nordic perspective towards the G20, and how can the Nordics contribute best to this forum of the largest industrial and emerging states?