On the Double Exceptionalism of Liberal States
This chapter deals with dilemmas of current European Security Politics in relation to freedom of speech and liberal values more broadly, in what I call the ‘double exceptionalism’ of liberal security policy. Empirically, I focus on the Norwegian balance after the terrorist attack on 22 July 2011. The political foundation of West European societies is based in part on a set of liberal political values, whereby freedom of speech is central. As a value, it is seen as foundational to who “we” as members of a nation are, exemplified through a speech the Norwegian Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg gave in response to the attack: “With the strongest of all of the weapons of the world, the free word and democracy, we will find the course for Norway after 22 July 2011”. At the time, the rhetorical response was applauded by commentators as an exemplary alternative to the typical security-centric response of governments to terrorist attacks. When faced with internal security dilemmas, the response from liberal-democratic states is typically to either enter into a “state of exception”, where some of the normal governing rules no longer apply, or where the laws are altered to enable non-liberal policies. The period after 9/11 and the increased focus on preventive security has been marked by a systematic role-back of liberal values in European societies, justified with the overarching need to protect lives first, values second. Since liberal values are seen as foundational attributes of the state, illiberal actions do not alter their liberal self-perception. This is the double exceptionalism of liberal states: the exceptionalism to transgress law and “normal politics”, and the exceptionalism to not let that transgression alter the identity one has construed as a liberal polity. This chapter discusses these dilemmas in the Norwegian, and how Norwegian governments dealt with the tension of differing logics between liberal identity and the politics of security.
Spaces and Institutional Logics in Post-Conflict Settings of Mitrovica
Spaces structure interactions between communities in post-conflict settings. They are governed by particular institutional logics, which can foster boundary building and boundary transgression. This article proposes an extended version of the concept of ‘everyday peace’ including a focus not only on micro-level individual actorness in social interactions but also on an important meso- level dimension in the analysis of social behaviour and variation in institutional logics governing spaces where social interactions take place. We apply these concepts to the study of perceptions and practices around bridges in Mitrovica in Kosovo.
Det haster med ny etterretningslov
Norway needs a new law on foreign intelligence
Biowar next? Security implications of the coronavirus
In this Strategic Update, Karsten Friis investigates the pandemic's potential consequences for the world, its armed forces, the integration of Europe, US-China relations, as well as the concept and practice of 'war' more broadly. Although much remains uncertain, the disruptions which are beginning to emerge demand a reckoning with a changed world -- and world order.
Åpen høring i Stortingets utenriks- og forsvarskomité torsdag 28. mai 2020
Karsten Friis and Vegard Valther Hansen participated to an open hearing in the Parliament about the proposed new law on the intelligence service.
WEBINAR: Security implications of AI and other emerging technologies
NUPI’s Cybersecurity Centre has the pleasure to invite to a webinar with Dr. Jean-Marc Rickli, who will talk about how the technological development creates new global security challenges.
Critical infrastructure protection and communication thereof: the case of the Baltic states and Norway (CIICPP)
The project aims to ordinarily explain importance of critical infrastructure to societies of Baltic states and Norway....
Conventional arms control on the Korean Peninsula: The current state and prospects
At the end of 2017, the Korean Peninsula reached the brink of a nuclear war, as the US president Donald Trump and the North Korean leader Kim Jong-un exchanged words of nuclear threats each other. A tug of war as to whose nuclear button is bigger and stronger exacerbated the nuclear crisis. However, the South Korean President Moon Jae-in intervened to resolve the crisis by taking advantage of the Pyeongchang Winter Olympics. In doing so, President Moon intended to pursue denuclearisation and peace-building on the Korean Peninsula at the same time. North Korean Chairman Kim Jong-un responded positively to the South Korean call to hold the inter-Korean summit and the Trump-Kim summit. In order to end the Korean war and promote peace-building on the Korean Peninsula including termination of hostile acts on inter-Korean relations, the two Koreas adopted the April 27 Panmunjom Declaration, the September 19th Pyongyang Joint Declaration and the Inter-Korean Military Agreement at their summit in 2018. The Military Agreement is aimed at reducing tension and building trust between the two Koreas through conventional arms control, while the North Korean nuclear issue is being resolved through the US-DPRK summit. The September 19th Military Agreement is a modest but remarkable success in arms control history when compared with a long-term stalemate or even retreat in the contemporary international arms control arena. Indeed, arms control is at its lowest point in history, so dim are its prospects. Nevertheless, heated debates are taking place, both at home inside South Korea and abroad, over the legitimacy and rationality of the Sept. 19th Military Agreement. With little progress on the denuclearisation issue at the Kim-Trump summit and no sign of easing economic sanctions on Pyongyang, North Korea has test-fired short-range missiles ten times to exert pressure on the United States, undermining peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula. Against this backdrop, this policy brief intends to analyse the true meaning of the September 19 Military Agreement between the two Koreas, to identify its problems and policy implications in order to draw up supplementary measures to implement it successfully. Furthermore, the paper will draw some implications for the relationship between progress on North Korea’s denuclearisation issue and further conventional arms control on the Korean Peninsula.
Forsvarets langtidsplan til ompuss
(Op-ed in Norwegian only): The parliament sent the proposed long-term plan for the armed forces back to the government. In this op-ed, Karsten Friis and Ulf Sverdrup gives an onerview of the most pressing concerns the new plan should consider.
Sustaining Peace in the time of COVID-19
NUPI is present with several events at the Stockholm Forum on Peace and Development. See them all here!