Russian Certainty of NATO Hostility: Repercussions in the Arctic
How does a security dilemma dynamic between parties deemed not to hold hostile intentions toward each other emerge and escalate? This article investigates Russian official discourse on NATO engagement in Europe post-Crimea (2014), and its impact on security interaction in the Arctic. We also examine how Russia represents NATO intentions and actions in a context seen by Russia as a relation of war. We identify the effect of these changing representations of self and other for the emerging securitization dilemma in relations between Russia and NATO, arguing that they have replaced uncertainty about NATO’s hostile intentions with certainty. Although Russia still articulates the Arctic as a unique cooperative region, there may be little space left for non-conflictual Russian action when encountering NATO in the Arctic. We highlight the agency and importance of evolving political rhetoric in creating a dangerous situation where lethal conflict can occur between parties who do not seek it, and also suggest that adjustments to patterns of official speech could be a tool of mitigation
The Migration Crisis: An Introduction
In 2015, the EU and its member states struggled to coordinate, communicate, and cooperate on the migration crisis as the chapters in this section show. Schilde and Wallace Goodman point out that while border security contains examples of deeper integration, asylum management policy has followed the scenarios of breaking down and muddling through. All the authors highlight the Dublin convention as particularly ill-devised and thus paving the way for the refugee crisis. Bosilca finds evidence for breaking down in addition to minimal reforms of border security policy that constitute muddling through. Crawford argues that the migration crisis provides evidence both of muddling through and heading forward and is thus more optimistic than either Schilde and Wallace Goodman or Bosilca about the prospects for EU integration in this policy area.
Not so unique after all? Urgency and norms in EU foreign and security policy
The EU Global Strategy puts ‘principled pragmatism’ at the core of EU foreign and security policy. This has also been promoted as away of closing the gap between talk and action. Still, the concept has been widely criticized and interpreted as away of making the Union’s ‘organized hypocrisy’ less glaring. By exploring key EU foreign and security policy strategies and policies implemented over the past decade, this article suggests that a certain pattern for when the EU acts normatively and when it acts strategically can be identified. While the overall ambition is still to promote a more normative policy, also when it comes at a considerable economic cost, there is a limit to how it is willing to go. Evidence suggests that when faced with a situation perceived as urgent, the EU becomes more prone to implement policies that are at odds with its own principles.
Climate, Peace and Security Fact Sheet: South Sudan
Unpredictable annual variations in extreme weather events, like flooding and droughts, affect agriculture-dependent communities and influence pastoralist mobility patterns and routes. Such changes may intensify the risk of tensions between herders and farmers, often in connection with land, grazing, water and communal affairs. Transhumance, including cross-border migration from Sudan through the Greater Upper Nile in particular, exacerbates the spread of veterinary diseases and fuels environmental degradation and competition over scarce resources. Women and girls continue to bear the brunt of the effects of climate change; female-headed households are especially vulnerable. Climate-related livestock losses compounded by pre-existing rivalries increase the risk of cattle raiding, which can trigger retaliation, communal conflict, displacement, deepening intercommunal rivalry and the formation of armed groups.
Making Sense of the European Side of the Transatlantic Security Relations in Africa
This article aims to investigate the character of transatlantic security relations in Africa: How can it be characterized? Have they become weaker or stronger over the past decade? How can this development be explained? As NATO has not yet been heavily engaged on the African continent, it is prudent to study the relations between the EU and the US. Africa has been of concern to the EU (and its member states) for decades due to its geographical closeness and historic bonds. Since 2001, for both Europe and the US, Africa has become a region of increasing security concern due to the threat of international terrorism—for Europe, we can also add the migration concern. The European side of this relationship has also been largely dominated by France, making the transatlantic security cooperation in Africa essentially about French-American relations. As France has taken the lead regarding Europe’s security and defense engagement in Africa, increasingly with the support of other EU member states and associated non-members, this bilateral relationship is more than simply cooperation between two states. By applying a framework that understands EU security and defense policy as a process increasingly characterized as a differentiated and flexible integration under French leadership, the development of the Franco-US security relations in Africa must be understood as an expression of the transatlantic security relations in this region.
Ståle Ulriksen
Ståle Ulriksen is a researcher at the Norwegian Naval College, part of the Norwegian Defence University, with a 20 percent position at NUPI, in Th...
Christophe Hillion
Christophe Hillion is research professor at NUPI. He is also Professor of European Law at the University of Oslo, senior adviser at the Swedish In...
Banafsheh Ranji
Banafsheh Ranji was a researcher at the research group Peace, Conflict and Development in 2022.
Asha Ali
Asha Ali was an Advisor at NUPI until the summer of 2024. She worked in the Research Group on Peace, Conflict and Development.
Climate, Peace and Security: Sudan
Sudan is severely exposed to climate change. As one of the world’s least developed countries, extreme weather, recurrent floods and droughts, and changing precipitation interact with other vulnerabilities – such as ecosystem degradation, unsustainable agricultural practices, natural resource scarcities and resource-based conflicts – limiting societal capacities to cope and adapt. The economic consequences of COVID-19, ongoing political instability (further aggravated by the October 2021 military coup), and rising inflation all weaken state and societal resilience, livelihoods and food security. ● Rising temperatures, rainfall variability, and droughts and floods negatively impact agriculture, livelihoods and food security. In particular, the adverse effects of climate change, combined with gender-based disparities in natural resource governance, accentuate the climate-related security risks for women and girls. ● High levels of displacement sharpen humanitarian needs and vulnerability to the effects of climate change; shifting migration patterns in response to changing resource availability may increase the risk of local conflicts in some areas. ● Various conflict dynamics and decades of political interference, local conflicts (interlinked with land and natural resources) and ongoing political instability have undermined traditional resource management systems and state governance. ● The legacies of natural resource mismanagement have increased the marginalisation of rural communities and accelerated land degradation, excacerbating local vulnerabilities that add to the human security risks associated with climate change.