Line Marie Breistrand
Line Marie Breistrand is a doctoral student and works with China in international politics. In her doctoral project, she analyzes China's foreign...
Ecosystemic politics: Analyzing the consequences of speaking for adjacent nature on the global stage
This article introduces a conceptual framework for analysing and comparing the broader or unintended effects of cooperation anchored in border-crossing ecosystems. The importance of addressing this lacuna in our scholarship on such sub-global cooperation is underscored by research in political geography that has demonstrated how the creation of scale is an important expression of power relations and how interaction with the materiality of different kinds of spaces necessitates distinct political technologies (and thus may have distinct effects). The article introduces three key analytical angles central to policy field studies in international sociology and demonstrates their utility through a case of the Arctic/Arctic Council. These analytical angles – networks (what are the relationships shaping the field?), hierarchies (who leads and how does leadership work?), and norms for political behavior – capture key consequences and dynamics of ecosystemic politics in a concise fashion that lends itself to cross-case comparison. The Arctic case focuses on the changing network positions and roles of non-Arctic actors over time, as an initial exploration of the broader ordering effects of such forms of cooperation. The findings suggest that most non-Arctic actors have experienced a decline in their centrality in Arctic cooperation, even as the Arctic has received intensified global interest and the number of participants in Arctic Council work has increased. Further comparative work along these lines would leave us better equipped to assess whether states speaking for their own immediate environs is better – and if so, in which ways – than seeking common solutions to global challenges.
On digital media in Lebanon’s political crisis
Op-ed: Why Peace Should Matter for the COP, and Why COP26 is Important for Peace
Hvis ikke Norge går i bresjen for en grønn omstilling, hvem da?
The faster Norway embarks on a responsible but speedy end to its reliance on oil, the greater the potential reputational, diplomatic, and commercial gains for Norway, write three NUPI researchers in this op-ed.
Mistenkelig kritikk
Why is media so uncritical towards Norwegian foreign policy?
The Politics of Competence in Global Health: The European Commission’s Global Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic
What was the European Commission’s (EC) global response to the COVID-19 pandemic and how did it use the crisis to claim competence in the area of global health? This article explores the EC’s global coronavirus response. In so doing, it suggests studying the crisis response in terms of how the EC struggled to be recognized as a competent player in the international community of states and institutions. In particular, the article shows how the EC utilized the crisis unleashed by the pandemic to engage in geopolitical positioning in relation to World Health Organization (WHO) funding and the vaccine race, and by using its financial clout to struggle for mastery as a global health actor. The article responds to the challenge of understanding differentiation in the broader field of European foreign, security and defence policies. By treating informal practices by the EC on the world stage in and of themselves, the article shows how the constant struggle for competence plays into the politics of European integration and considers its potential for being instantiated in formal transfers of competence in the area of global health.
Gruppepress – fungerer det?
Can Norway contribute to an effective peer pressure through commitment to the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW)? Espen Mathy argues that peer pressure might push other countries to commit, however only in the cases where commitment does not imply a reduction in national security.
Norges debatt om kinesiske investeringer: Fra velvillig til varsom
The debate in Norway regarding security concerns related to Chinese investments has seen a notable change in character over a short period of time. From a situation where there was little discernible debate at all, and where negative coverage of Chinese investment flows were mainly concerned with working environment issues, Chinese capital flows to Norway have now also become part of the debate on national security. Two particularities make the case of Norway especially interesting with regards to the broader Nordic debates over the issues discussed in this Fokus section. The Norwegian economy has been particularly well placed to benefit from the extraordinary Chinese economic growth, but Norway has also been in a particularly problematic political position towards China over the last decade. The contrast between these two factors has been a structuring trait of the Norwegian China debate. Nevertheless, the Norwegian public debate on China has been relatively positive over a long period of time. This has been given impetus by the positive experiences reported from the Norwegian enterprises that have been the target of Chinese acquisitions. However, lately, the public debate has increasingly come to regard the issue also through a political and security-related lens. This changing character is not due to specific events concerning Chinese activities in Norway, as much as being a reflection of broader regional and global trends. The question of Huawei’s role in the coming construction of the 5G network has been a particularly important driver in this regard, as well as conductive link to the international change in opinion.
Georgia’s Europeanization challenged from within: Domestic foreign policy discourses and increasing polarization
Georgia`s foreign policy, especially the implementation of international agreements, is best understood in the context of domestic contestation among alternative foreign policy views. • Nativist views exert increasing influence on the Georgian public. Georgia’s European partners should engage the Georgian public through civil society support and people-to-people contacts, to build trust and facilitate open debate. • The exclusive character of differing foreign policy positions further fuels the extreme political polarization. The government and opposition should be encouraged to come together over shared democratic values, instead of playing up the differences. • Pluralism and tolerance should be encouraged in the public and media debate.