The Lorax Project: Understanding Ecosystemic Politics (LORAX)
Do regional politics around border-crossing ecosystems share important resemblances and differ in significant ways from global politics?...
European countries differ in how they talk critical issues with China
This is the conclusion in a new report addressing political values in Europe-China relations. Hans Jørgen Gåsemyr (NUPI and UiB) has written the chapter on Norway.
Norden i verden
(Only in Norwegian). Hver for seg er de nordiske landene relativt små, men sammen er de på størrelse med en stormakt. Og med en verdenspolitikk i endring er samarbeidet mellom disse statene enda viktigere enn på lenge.
Stormaktsinteresser og sikkerhetspolitiske utviklingstrekk i Arktis. Mulige implikasjoner for Norge
(Available in Norwegian only): Arktis blir i økende grad trukket inn i de generelle politiske utviklingstrekkene globalt. Ser vi endringene i stormaktenes intensjoner, kapabiliteter og adferd under ett, avtegner det seg et tydelig bilde: regionen prioriteres høyere av så godt som samtlige aktører, den forventes å bli viktigere i økonomisk sammenheng, og den militære betydningen av regionen er økende. Denne policy brief-en ser på implikasjoner for norsk sikkerhetspolitikk i Arktis og gir noen anbefalinger til norske myndigheter.
Norway and the changing Common Foreign and Security Policy of the European Union
For decades, Norway has cooperated with the European Union in matters of foreign policy, security and defence. It has thus participated in EU civilian and military operations, aligned itself with EU political declarations and restrictive measures against states and/or individuals, and collaborated with the European Defence Agency. Unlike other frameworks of cooperation between the EU and Norway, such as the EEA and Schengen agreements, the cooperation in foreign policy, security and defence does not rely on a single setup, with elaborate institutional arrangements and dynamic obligations. Rather, Norway joins forces with the Union in an ad hoc fashion and often based on informal arrangements. This allows for flexibility, but also entails that Norway has few formal channels for exerting influence on EU CFSP decisions to which it subsequently subscribes. Against this backdrop, and as the EU has become more active in this policy area, Norway has shown a renewed interest in deepening its relationship with the Union in CFSP matters. This report examines the ways in which Norway can enhance its cooperation and develop its institutional arrangements with the EU in this fast-evolving field. The discussion is based on an assessment of what the EU is able to offer in view of its constitutional framework, as informed by its on-going discussions with the UK on a future security partnership post-Brexit. Given the increasing interactions between the CFSP and other fields of the EU’s activities, the analysis also discusses whether Norway may draw a cooperation dividend from its participation in the single market through the EEA, to build a deeper and more participatory cooperation with the EU in CFSP matters. The report envisages four possible ways of enhancing the Norway-EU cooperation in the area CFSP: an extension of the present cooperation by ad hoc participation in new CFSP initiatives, a more active use of other existing EU-Norway frameworks of cooperation including the EEA, the setting up of a distinct EU-Norway CFSP agreement and the participation in a multilateralised EU-UK CFSP partnership.
New report on China and multilateral development banks
China is strengthening its position within international development finance and monetary cooperation.
Energy security in Europe: How can Norway and Poland contribute?
A new Polish-Norwegian cooperation will contribute to increased energy security in Europe. The Norwegian Minister of Petroleum and Energy, Kjell-Børge Freiberg, meets his Polish counterpart to talk about the new gas corridor between Norway and Poland.
The emergence of foreign policy
International relations scholarship typically treats foreign policy as a taken-for-granted analytical concept. It assumes either that all historical polities have foreign policies or that foreign policy originates in seventeenth-century Europe with the separation between the “inside” and “outside” of the state. It generally holds that foreign policy differs in essential ways from other kinds of policy, such as carrying with it a special need for secrecy. Halvard Leira argues against this view. The difference between “foreign” and “domestic” policy results from specific political processes; secrecy begat foreign policy. Growing domestic differentiation between state and civil society in the eighteenth century- articulated through a relatively free press operating in a nascent public sphere - enabled the emergence of foreign policy as a practical concept. The concept served to delimit the legitimate sphere of political discourse from the exclusive, executive sphere of king and cabinet. Leira explores these processes in Britain and France, important cases with different trajectories, one of reform, the other of revolution. Historicizing foreign policy like this serves to denaturalize the separation between different forms of policy, as well as the necessity of secrecy. Doing so cautions against the uncritical application of abstract analytical terms across time and space.
Kinship in International Relations
While kinship is among the basic organizing principles of all human life, its role in and implications for international politics and relations have been subject to surprisingly little exploration in International Relations (IR) scholarship. This volume is the first volume aimed at thinking systematically about kinship in IR – as an organizing principle, as a source of political and social processes and outcomes, and as a practical and analytical category that not only reflects but also shapes politics and interaction on the international political arena. Contributors trace everyday uses of kinship terminology to explore the relevance of kinship in different political and cultural contexts and to look at interactions taking place above, at and within the state level. The book suggests that kinship can expand or limit actors’ political room for maneuvereon the international political arena, making some actions and practices appear possible and likely, and others less so. As an analytical category, kinship can help us categorize and understand relations between actors in the international arena. It presents itself as a ready-made classificatory system for understanding how entities within a hierarchy are organized in relation to one another, and how this logic is all at once natural and social.
Norway and Russia in the Arctic: New Cold War Contamination?
The standoff between Russia and the West over Ukraine has already obstructed cooperation across a range of issues. Could it also affect state interaction between Norway and Russia in the Arctic—an area and a relationship long characterized by a culture of compromise and/or cooperation? Here we start from the theoretical premise that states are not pre-constituted political entities, but are constantly in the making. How Russia views its own role and how it views other actors in the Arctic changes over time, calling for differing approaches. That holds true for Norway as well. To clarify the premises for interaction between Russia and Norway in the Arctic, we scrutinize changes in official discourse on Self and Other in the Arctic on both sides in the period 2012 to 2016, to establish what kind of policy mode—“realist,” “institutionalist,” or “diplomatic management”—has underlain the two countries’ official discourse in that period. Has Norway continued to pursue “balancing” policies undertaken in the realist mode with those in the diplomatic management mode? Which modes have characterized Russia’s approach toward Norway? Finding that realist-mode policies increasingly dominate on both sides, in the conclusion we discuss how the changing mode of the one state affects that of the other, and why a New Cold War is now spreading to the Arctic.