NATO’s response to the new European security environment: Firm deterrence or symbolic posturing?
Are the reforms and initiatives that were decided at the 2014 NATO Wales Summit being implemented as planned? This is the topic for this NUPI seminar, the first in a series of three concerning NATO.
Cyber Security Capacity Building: Security and Freedom
The threats associated with ICT are multifaceted. The present report posits that cyber capacity building (CCB) should not be considered simply a risk management endeavor. The potential for malware, cyber attacks, and cyber crime are not the only challenges associated with the rapid spread of ICT. Policymakers must also consider the intersection of technology and politics, particularly in developing countries still transitioning into democracies.
EU-Russia gas relations: Back to «business as usual»?
Commercial interests in the European Union (EU) and Russia (Gazprom) have agreed to double the capacity in the Nord Stream pipeline transporting gas from Russia to Germany. The project has become one of the most controversial issues in EU gas-related debates today, above all in Central and Eastern Europe.
Energy security in Northern Europe and the Baltic region
This roundtable seminar will discuss energy security in Northern Europe and the Balticum, the effects by the Ukraine conflict and how the new European Energy Union will impact energy security efforts.
The Arctic Future
With the growing global interest in the Artic, a regional security complex is emerging.
Ties that Bind: The Emerging Regional Security Complex in the Arctic
The security situation in the Arctic has begun to produce a 'regional security complex' (RSC) based on shared regional strategic concerns. However, the geography and politics of the region will prevent this RSC from taking on a military aspect in the near future.
Strategic cooperation against terrorism 2.0? Russia's initial positions on Syria. 1:2
This project examines the prospects for Russia-Western practical cooperation against the Islamic State (IS) in Syria and, more broadly, for a rapprochement between Russia, NATO and key NATO member states post-Crimea. The analytical point of departure is two-fold: Firstly, the project will examine how Russia’s longstanding rejection of a ‘Western’ world-order, along with various Western leaders’ increasing depiction of Russia as an ‘adversary’, shape the two parties’ room for manoeuvre with respect to practical collaboration on the ground in Syria. Secondly, and operationalizing ‘the West’ as two key ‘Atlanticist’ member states in NATO, the United States and Britain, it will examine how Russian and Western domestic debates constrain governments and political leaders’ scope for action, and their ability to adjust their commenced policy paths in Syria. When adversarial statements about ‘the other’ are voiced by state leaders in an international setting, they are often portrayed in the media as being reflective of that particular leader or government’s position alone. In this project, we suggest that the dynamics of Russia-Western relations cannot be properly understood without alsoconsidering how states’ security policies are empowered and limited by domestic security policy debates. The project will provide an up-to-date, in-depth analysis of how contemporary Russian, American and British security policies are being constituted and constrained by domestic debates. Furthermore, it will trace how domestically negotiated security policies materialize in actions on the ground in Syria. Against the backdrop of the empirical analysis, publications from this project will discuss the likelihood of these states finding common ground against IS in Syria, and the prospects for Russia-Western rapprochement more generally.
Strategic cooperation against terrorism 2.0? Collaborating with adversaries. 2:2
In October 2016, international media reported that the Russia– US diplomatic dialogue over Syria had collapsed, with both sides holding the other party to blame. While the US State Department observed that ‘everybody’s patience with Russia has run out’, Russia’s Foreign Minister criticized the United States for using ‘a language of sanctions and ultimatums while continuing selective cooperation with our country’ (CNN 2016). The breakdown and the statements that ensued marked the endpoint of a turbulent diplomatic year, which had begun with a brief handshake between presidents Obama and Putin at the UN General Assembly late in September 2015. In the months following that handshake, Russia and the US-led coalition participated in talks and activities aimed at finding a negotiated solution to the civil war in Syria as well as to defeat international terrorism there.
Norsk forsvarspolitikk. Territorialforsvar og internasjonal innsats 1990-2015
Norsk forsvarspolitikk har gjennomgått store omstillinger siden den kalde krigens slutt, spesielt i perioden 1990–2005. Regjering og Storting sendte stadig flere soldater til fredsbevarende og fredsopprettende operasjoner i utlandet, mens Forsvaret selv fremdeles hadde forsvar av landet som sitt primære fokus. Forfatter Græger viser hvordan kaldkrig-tenkningen og etablerte praksiser i forsvaret og forsvarsmiljøer lenge bremset en politisk ønsket omstilling fra invasjonsforsvar til innsatsforsvar tilpasset internasjonale operasjoner. Boken viser hvordan norsk utenriks-, sikkerhets- og forsvarspolitikk er tett sammenvevet, og stadig utfordres av endringer i trusselbildet og i NATO, men løfter også fram de nasjonale forutsetningene for handling. Forfatteren har analysert debatter både på Stortinget og innen Forsvaret, og kombinerer dette med studier av hvordan forsvarspolitikken utformes i praksis – blant annet gjennom langtidsplanlegging, militær utdanning og profesjonsutvikling. Boken tilfører ny kunnskap om forhold av vesentlig betydning for norsk forsvars- og sikkerhetspolitikk.
Makt og avmakt i cyberspace: hvordan styre det digitale rom?
A secure cyberspace is a necessity for the functioning of the economic, political and social structures of modern-day society. The stability and development of cyberspace is not preordained, but something that has to be facilitated. Cyberspace is constantly changing and to govern the complex set of interests, agendas and implications multistakeholder initiatives that promote cooperation between the public and private sector and civil society are increasingly put forth as the solution. This form for cooperation is widely seen in the policy community as a panacea for securing cyberspace. While academics have questioned these initiatives’ functionality, few have studied why they do not work in practice. By focusing on the power dynamics between the different actors this article takes a step towards understanding how these dynamics create conflict of interest in governing cyberspace. Through case studies of multistakeholder initiatives on the international level and in Norway, this paper argues that these initiatives are implemented without the necessary preconditions for such a form of governance. This article is published in Norwegian.