Comparing Cyber Security. Critical Infrastructure protection in Norway, the UK and Finland.
Cyber security and protecting critical infrastructures from digital harm are of increasing importance for governments around the globe. Tackling this issue is challenged by two distinct features of cyber security in Western states: Firstly, the transnational nature of digital risks and threats necessitates cooperation and engagements beyond the state, through international and regional organizations and institutions. Secondly, the considerable extent of private ownership forces states to rely on and engage with private companies, through regulation or public–private partnerships (PPP). Through comparative analysis of the approaches taken to PPP and European cooperation for energy and telecommunication in Finland, Norway and the UK, this report examines how states engage with these issues. The greatest difference is found to lie between the two Nordic states and the UK. This is not the result of divergent national perceptions and understandings, but of the more centralized and intelligence-centred approach taken by the UK in contrast to the whole-of-society trust-based approach of the Nordic states. Both approaches entail distinct benefits and drawbacks. The major concern in the Nordic states is the lack of public resources and capacity, as well as the fragmentation of responsibility and capabilities. Realizing the importance of culture, context and history in shaping how public authorities respond to cyber-security concerns is of vital importance for enabling better policies. This report concludes by presenting a set of best practices identified in the three case countries.
The Politics of Stability: Cement and Change in Cyber Affairs
In November 2018, the Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace, inaugurated one year earlier ‘to develop proposals for norms and policies to enhance international security and stability and guide responsible state and non-state behavior in cyberspace’, launched six norms pointing ‘the way to new opportunities for increasing the stability of cyberspace’. However, the Commission has not examined or explained the very concept it was established to explore. Quite the contrary, the Commission argues that its proposed norms will be used to define what cyber stability actually is. Focusing on the interrelationship between international peace and stability, and ways of achieving both in the context of ICTs, the authors will offer a model of stability of cyberspace. They begin by examining the concepts of ‘stability’ and ‘strategic stability’ as understood with regard to international security. This conceptual analysis is followed by a presentation of the political claims of stability expressed in national and international cyber-and information-security discourses. Drawing on the conceptual approaches and the political claims, the report then model the stability of cyberspace in three interlinked and reinforcing dimensions: 1) equal and inclusive international relations; 2) prevention of war: the minimal peace, with emphasis on averting a devastating nuclear war between the superpowers; and 3) the functionality of global and national technical systems and services. After discussing how international law, preventive diplomacy, confidence-building measures, and norms of responsible state behaviour can support cyberspace stability, this report concludes with recommendations for action aimed at helping to create and maintain a stable - resilient and adaptive - cyberspace.
How to negotiate with difficult partners?
Ambassador Christopher R. Hill shares his insights and experiences from the frontline of American diplomacy in this episode of NUPI podcast.
EU Integration and Differentiation for Effectiveness and Accountability (EUIDEA)
EUIDEA is a H2020 project, which aims to break new ground on differentiated integration in terms of conceptual approach, policies and networks....
The strategic importance of a Free and Open Indo-Pacific: Tokyo’s take
While the idea of the Indo-Pacific as more than just a geographic space is only recently taking root in the Nordics and broader Europe, it has already been hotly discussed as a strategically important arena in foreign and security policy circles in Asia for several years.
The internal brakes on violent escalation: Why ‘extremists’ or ‘extremist groups’ choose not to engage in violence
Despite the massive expansion of research on violent escalation, there is insufficient answers to why some extremist groups choses not to engage in violence, even if they are capable of doing so.
Mind the Gap: National Views of the Free and Open Indo-Pacific
Japan has played an intrinsic role in formulating and promoting the concept of a “Free and Open Indo-Pacific” (FOIP) by making its version a core element of its foreign policy repertoire as it continues to strengthen and expand its presence beyond its immediate neighborhood. This chapter discusses the diplomatic, political, economic and security dimensions of Japan’s FOIP, expanding on both the strengths and challenges of the concept and its implementation.
Tre trender som utfordrer norsk utenrikspolitikk
(Available in Norwegian only): Denne policy briefen tar utgangspunkt i tre globale trender, og gir en analyse og vurderinger av hva trendene innebærer av utfordringer og muligheter for norsk utenrikspolitikk i tiden fremover: 1. Nye stormakter vokser frem. 2. Migrasjon brer om seg. 3. Utenrikspolitikk blir innenrikspolitikk.
The future of Russian arms exports
Will Russian arms export continue to boost Russian influence in the world?
Blikket i glasskulen: NATO de neste 70 år
What is the likely future of NATO? Will the alliance survive the next seventy years? Which challenges will it have to deal with? This article gazes into the future and attempts to identify some plausible scenarios for the years ahead. I argue that NATO will persist, but that is relevance is dependent on its adaptability to emerging challenges. Furthermore, the foundational values and the solidarity must be thriving. If not, NATO will be but a paper tiger. In the short term, the strains across the Atlantic is the most worrying tendency. However, climate change, migration and the digital revolution of our societies are long-term trends that eventually will challenge NATO more profoundly.