Tale ved utdeling av Fritt Ords Pris 2023
Torsdag 11. mai 2023 fikk NUPI-forsker Julie Wilhelmsen Fritt Ords Pris 2023 for å ha bidratt med nyanserende faglig kunnskap i et opphetet offentlig ordskifte, før og etter Russlands fullskala-invasjon av Ukraina. Hun har gjennom dette vist betydningen av ytringsmot og utøvd akademisk ytringsfrihet i praksis, sa styreleder Grete Brochmann.
Kronikk: Enkle merkelapper fanger ikke opp Putins Russland
PODKAST: AI og geopolitikk
Major Powers in a Shifting Global Order
How to measure power in international affairs is an eternal matter of debate, especially among political scientists. Many generic approaches have been suggested, among them control over resources; control over actors; and control over events and outcomes,2 and numerous efforts have been made to develop concrete formulas. In China, academic institutions 3 and independent scholars have competed as to how best to measure “comprehensive national power”. All approaches and formulas have something to offer, and all have inherent limitations.
PODKAST: En forskerspires frykt for å feile
Nytt fokusnummer av Internasjonal Politikk
NUPI på Arendalsuka: Her finn du oss
Myths in the Russian Collective Memory: The “Golden Era” of Pre-Revolutionary Russia and the “Disaster of 1917”
This paper examines shared ideas, values and interpretations of the past in the “collective memory” of the 1917 October Revolution. Employing a qualitative approach to examine collective memory “from below,” two age cohorts were interviewed in three Russian cities from a variety of social groups in 2014–2015. What was revealed was the existence of a strong positive myth about the pre-revolutionary era of 1900–1914, as well as positive references to the current Putin era. Both eras were “positive” in that Russia was/is a “normal European power,” “on the rise economically” and “respected by the other powers.” In terms of the definitive national trauma, an overwhelming majority viewed the 1917 October Revolution as a break or rupture in Russian history that caused appalling destruction. This view of 1917 as catastrophic leads to certain key “lessons”: that revolutionary change is inherently destructive and wasteful and that external forces had (and have) a vested interest in weakening Russia from without whenever she is at her most vulnerable. Overall, at the heart of myths over 1917 we find a central occupation with the threat of disintegration and a yearning for stability and normality, highlighting how collective memory interacts with political values and social identity.