Between vulnerability and risk? Mental health in UK counter-terrorism
The relationship between terrorism and mental health has been a scholarly concern for decades. So far, the literature has concentrated on the relationship between terrorism and diagnosable disorders, and the prevalence of certain psychological traits among terrorist offenders. Meanwhile, the incorporation of perspectives regarding mental health in the operational space of counter-terrorism has been largely ignored. This article explores three current approaches to individual mental health in UK counter-terrorism: the use of ‘appropriate adults’ in terrorism-related cases; the ‘mental health hubs’ introduced in 2016; and counter-terrorism-related risk and vulnerability assessments. The article argues that in light of the UK’s new counter-terrorism strategy, these practices show an increasing merger between conceptualisations of vulnerabilities and risks in how UK counter-terrorism approaches mental health.
Political Opportunities for the Extreme Right in Georgia
Over the past several years, right-wing extremists have begun to proliferate in Georgia and their visibility has noticeably increased. More recently, far right groups even announced plans to form a joint party, the National Front, which will “take part in absolutely all political processes.” This policy brief discusses whether there are favorable political opportunities for right-wing extremist actors in Georgia to mobilize. The legal system of the country includes laws that restrict extreme right rhetoric and action. However, an analysis of Georgia’s political space shows that right-wing extremist groups are indirectly supported, or at least not openly condemned, by the ruling party and other political actors. In addition, extreme right opinions largely coincide with general public attitudes, meaning that there are significant discursive opportunities for mobilization. After discussing the factors that contribute to potential mobilization opportunities for right-wing extremism, the brief presents policy options to counter this process.
Georgia's Emerging Far Right
Ethnonationalism has been as common in Georgia as in other post-Soviet countries, but the far-right social movement has especially been gaining traction for the past five years, gradually becoming larger, more diverse, and more violent. The parliamentary elections approaching in 2020 create a window of opportunity for far-right actors to gain access to mainstream politics.
The “Right” Side of Facebook: Online Mobilization of the Georgian Extreme Right
In recent years, extreme-right groups have become increasingly visible in the republic of Georgia. In several cases they have managed to bring exclusion-oriented issues to the agenda, occupying public space and restricting opportunities for liberal groups and human rights activists. Although this has led to growing concern in political circles and civil society, there has been little in-depth research. Drawing on social movement theory, I investigate the role of digital media, specifically, Facebook, in mobilization. The analysis rests on 8,069 Facebook posts of four publicly active extreme-right groups, as well as 18 in-depth interviews with activists and experts. Frame analysis shows that extreme right groups try to align their narratives with public opinion, especially, homo- and transphobic and anti-immigration attitudes, as well as public distrust in political institutions, NGOs, and the media. Social network analysis, in turn, shows that the online network of the Georgian extreme right is decentralized, marked with a battle for influences in the emerging movement. In this loose network, actors with less radical and more populist ideology seem more central, whereas those with more extreme ideologies are more peripheral. Overall, the paper suggests that, given the lack of access to political institutions and mainstream media channels, extreme right groups in Georgia largely rely on Facebook to spread their narrative, garner support and mobilize for action.
Georgian Pride World Wide:” Extreme Right Mobilization in Georgia
During the past few years, Georgia has witnessed an increased visibility of extreme right groups. On many occasions, these groups managed to bring exclusion-oriented issues to the agenda and at occupying public space, thus restricting opportunities for liberal groups and human rights activists. Even though the recent proliferation of extreme right groups has led to growing concern among political circles and civil society, these groups have not been researched in depth. To fill in this gap in literature, this thesis aims to understand how extreme right groups in Georgia mobilize. The thesis rests on social movement theory, according to which political opportunities and organizational resources influence the way movements frame their views and take action. This thesis demonstrates that, overall, extreme right mobilization opportunities in Georgia are limited. Yet, while the legal system of the country restricts extreme right mobilization and the political space only offers narrow opportunities to participate, the public opinion generally supports exclusion-focused policies. The fact that Georgian extreme right groups have limited organizational resources confines their ability to meet this public demand effectively. Yet, they try to capitalize on the insecurities prevalent in the society, adapting their strategies, frames, and actions accordingly.
Drivers of violent extremism: NUPI to coordinate EU-funded project
PREVEX will shed light on how the various drivers of violent extremism operate.
Explaining Russian reactions to increased NATO military presence
Ever since NATO’s enlargement process began, Russia has voiced concerns for the impact of a greater NATO military presence near the Russian border for its national security. While the signing of the 1997 NATO–Russia Founding Act eased some tensions, Russia–NATO relations have had their ups and downs. Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine and annexation of Crimea in 2014 led NATO to adopt countermeasures aimed at improving the security of its members – such as the deployment of NATO troops to areas deemed for geographical reasons most exposed to potential Russian interventions. This Policy Brief examines Russian reactions to these new NATO deployments, placing them in the broader context of the Russian debate on NATO as a source of strategic concern. It starts with a discussion of the general strategic context, follows with examining the main lines in the Russian debate on NATO as a general security challenge, and continues with an examination of official views on a greater NATO military presence in areas close to Russian borders. It ends with some policy-relevant conclusions on striking a balance between NATO concerns for the security of its members and Russian views on what Moscow defines as national security concerns.
Viljar Haavik
Viljar Haavik is a Research Fellow at NUPI's Research Group on Peace, Conflict and Development, as part of the research project Strengthening Frag...
‘Practice time!’ Doxic futures in security and defence diplomacy after Brexit
Time constitutes social life and time management is central to the everyday conduct of international politics. For some reason, however, the practice turn in International Relations (IR) has produced knowledge about how past practices constitute international politics but not about how the future is also a constitutive feature in and on social life. Introducing a novel perspective on practice and temporality, the article argues that intersubjectively situated representations of the future by practitioners in international politics contribute substantially to our understanding of political processes and the making of international politics. To develop what appears a contradiction in terms – that ‘future-practices’ are driven by tacit know-how and conscious reflection simultaneously – the article develops the concept of doxic futures: representations of the future rooted in practical knowledge and tacit assumptions about the self-evident nature of the social world. The argument is illustrated with a case study of European security and defence diplomacy after the UK voted to leave the EU. Through the envisioning of two concrete doxic futures, a ‘Europe of buying together’ and the UK as a third country in EU defence, diplomats effectively tried to save European security and defence cooperation from the potentially disintegrating effects of Brexit.
What does China really want in the Middle East?
In a recent article, NUPI research fellow Henrik S. Hiim and Stig Stenslie aim to find an answer.