Sverige, Finland og NATO
Våre naboland Sverige og Finland har alltid stått utenfor forsvarsalliansen NATO, men da Russland angrep Ukraina, endret svensk og finsk forsvarspolitikk seg på kort tid. Hvor hender det? snakker med seniorforsker Kristin Haugevik fra NUPI om NATO, og om Sverige og Finlands vei mot et mulig medlemskap. Programleder: Therese Leine, senior kommunikasjonsrådgiver hos Norsk Utenrikspolitisk Institutt (NUPI)
Panel 3: How does Norway, Finland and Sweden view Nordic security?
What are the consequences of the changing security landscape for security in the north? At this year’s Military Power Seminar, we invite you to a debate on the important political issues related to security in Norway’s immediate neighbourhood.
Rishi Sunak overtar som britisk statsminister
Rishi Sunak overtar som statsminister etter Liz Truss.
Visit from China to discuss relations to Europe
Beroligelse 2.0: Teori, praksis og rammevilkår i en ny tid
Konseptet beroligelse utgjør en del av «arvesølvet» i norsk sikkerhetspolitikk. Russlands siste invasjon av Ukraina har aktualisert debatten om den «klassiske» beroligelsen: de selvpålagte begrensningene på alliert militær aktivitet i Norge. I denne artikkelen forstås beroligelse som mer enn det å «slipe ned» den alliansebaserte avskrekkingen. Konseptuelt er det er derfor hensiktsmessig å skille mellom to typer beroligelse: passiv og aktiv. En konseptuell oppdatering vil være nyttig for å forstå beroligelsens ulike form(er), mulige effekt(er) og konseptets fortsatte relevans i Norges forhold til Russland – i en tid der den teknologiske utviklingen og markante geopolitiske endringer endrer rammevilkårene og forutsetningene som beroligelse er tuftet på. En mer spesifisert forståelse av konseptet inkluderer en bredere del av norsk utenrikspolitikk – både i teori og i praksis – og inkluderer en rekke samarbeids- og konfliktflater i det norsk-russiske forholdet som går ut over den «klassiske» beroligelsen. Denne artikkelen argumenterer ut fra premisset om at vi ikke vet om beroligelse virker etter hensikten. Beroligelse, et konsept som i utgangspunktet bygget på etterkrigstids-realismens verdenssyn og logikk, bør derfor også analyseres med andre teoretiske «linser» som kan gi bedre forståelse av effektene av de ulike formene for beroligelse i en verden med andre rammevilkår enn da Holst lanserte konseptet.
Ecosystems and Ordering: Exploring the Extent and Diversity of Ecosystem Governance
This article argues that, to grasp how global ordering will be impacted by planetary-level changes, we need to systematically attend to the question of the extent to which and how ecosystems are being governed. Our inquiry builds upon—but extends beyond—the environmental governance measures that have garnered the most scholarly attention so far. The dataset departs from the current literature on regional environmental governance by taking ecosystems themselves as the unit of analysis and then exploring whether and how they are governed, rather than taking a starting point in environmental institutions and treaties. The ecosystems researched—large-scale marine, freshwater, and terrestrial ecosystems—have been previously identified by a globe-spanning, natural science inquiry. Our findings highlight the uneven extent of ecosystem governance—both the general geographic extent and certain “types” of ecosystems seemingly lending themselves more easily to ecosystem-based cooperation. Furthermore, our data highlight that there is a wider range of governance practices anchored in ecosystems than the typical focus on environmental institutions reveals. Of particular significance is the tendency by political actors to establish multi-issue governance anchored in the ecosystems themselves and covering several different policy fields. We argue that, in light of scholarship on ecosystem-anchored cooperation and given the substantive set of cases of such cooperation identified in the dataset, these forms of ecosystem-anchored cooperation may have particularly significant ordering effects. They merit attention in the international relations scholarship that seeks to account for the diversity of global ordering practices.
Criticism of the UK’s Rwanda Policy Misrepresents African Agency
While much of the controversy around the UK–Rwanda partnership is understandable, African perspectives are too often missing from the debate.
Introduction: Is the time nigh for ecological security?
Climate change and the ongoing destruction of the earth's ecosystems have increasingly been depicted as a security issue with the noble but not unproblematic goal engendering an urgent response. These climate and environmental security discourses have been extensively critiqued on both empirical and normative grounds. But is there an ethically defensible and even emancipatory alternative to envisioning the relationship between the environment and security? Matt McDonald in his new book - Ecological Security: Climate Change and the Construction of Security - argues that there is and lays out comprehensive normative framework for doing so. To interrogate McDonald's case for what he calls “Ecological Security”, this forum brings together four leading researchers from Anthropology, Geography, International Relations, and Peace and Sustainability Studies. While all contributors are broadly positive regarding goals of the book, each identifies weaknesses in the approach that move from suggestions on how refine the framework on the one hand to questioning whether the framework risks proving counter-productive on the other.
Whose Revisionism, Which International Order? Social Structure and Its Discontents
While the distinction between status quo and revisionist states is well established in International Relations, only more recently have scholars begun to refine the concept of revisionism itself, emphasizing that revisionism comes in different forms. A number of typologies have been introduced to capture this diversity. In this article, we offer a critique of these typologies, highlighting how many of these works elide the rule-governed and contextual nature of what counts as revisionism. Building on an understanding of international orders as social structures, we argue that the revisionist character of state conduct can only be determined with reference to the conception of the legitimate ends and means current in a particular international order. This leads us to distinguish between three types of revisionism: competitive revisionism that is transgressive of the legitimate means; creative revisionism that is transgressive of the legitimate ends; and revolutionary revisionism that is transgressive of legitimate ends and means. We further emphasize that determining the revisionist character of state conduct always involves interpretation and judgment. The concern for analytical precision conveyed by the development of different typologies of revisionism must therefore be followed by an equally deliberate concern for the politics of revisionism—in both theory and practice.