Researcher
John Karlsrud
Contactinfo and files
Summary
John Karlsrud is a Research Professor in the Research group on peace, conflict and development, where he works on coalitions in international security, UN peacekeeping as well as issues related to change in global governance more broadly. He has published a number of books, articles and policy reports on these topics.
Karlsrud earned his PhD at the University of Warwick, and has been a Visiting Fulbright Fellow at the Center on International Cooperation at New York University and a visiting fellow at the European University Institute. He has worked in Bosnia and Hercegovina, Chad, Palestine (West Bank), Norway and USA, and conducted field research and shorter missions to Haiti, Iraq, Liberia, Mozambique, Serbia, Sierra Leone, South Sudan and Ukraine.
Expertise
Education
2014 Senior Executive Course 13, Norwegian Defence University College, Aug-Nov 2014
2010-2014 Ph.D., Politics and Internationals Studies, University of Warwick. Title: Linked Ecologies and Norm Change in United Nations Peacekeeping Operations
2005 Master of Peace and Conflict Studies / International Affairs with Distinction Joint Master from Institute for Graduate Studies in International Affairs, Australian National University and the Peace Research Centre of Oslo
Work Experience
2020- Head of the Reserach group on peace, conflict and development
2015- External Associate, Centre for the Study of Globalisation and Regionalisation, University of Warwick 2015 Fulbright Visiting Fellow, Center on International Cooperation, New York University
2012 Lecturer, IR Master
2010- Programme Manager and Senior Research Fellow at Norwegian Institute of International Affairs (NUPI)
2010- Senior Research Fellow, NUPI
2008-2010 Special Assistant to the Special Representative of the Secretary General (SRSG), United Nations Mission in Chad and the Central African Republic (MINURCAT), Chad
2006-2008 Policy and Strategy Analyst, Strategic and Regional Initiatives Unit (SRIU), Regional Bureau for Africa (RBA), UNDP New York HQ
2005-2006 Researcher and Assistant to the Managing Director, Fafo Institute for Applied International Studies (AIS)
2002-2003 Liaison and Operations Officer for NATO in Bosnia and Hercegovina (BiH), seconded by the Norwegian Army
Aktivitet
Filter
Clear all filtersCoalition of the Willing for Ukraine: A Multinational Force in the Making
In March 2025, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron launched a Coalition of the Willing to support Ukraine. Militarily, 26 countries have reportedly committed to securing Ukraine with troops on land, at sea, and in the air “the day after a ceasefire or peace,” under a planned Multinational Force Ukraine. This briefing highlights the main findings from a collection of country profiles. It concludes that a Multinational Force Ukraine is still hypothetical, but if it materializes, coalition members will be in for the long run. European leaders should act, plan, and prepare based on that assumption.
Norway: Solid political engagement, military reluctance
In the Multinational Force Ukraine series of policy briefs leading experts from allied countries assess key factors for participation in the Multinational Force Ukraine. This includes the political willingness of allies to deploy troops—on the ground, in the air, or at sea—to establish a military presence in or around Ukraine. They also examine the conditions for such deployments to occur (before, during, or after peace negotiations), the roles these forces would be expected to perform (defensive or offensive), the red lines imposed by national governments, and the specific capabilities each country could realistically contribute. This brief analyses Norway.
To scenarier for krigen i Ukraina: Hva betyr de for Europa – og hva vil det koste?
Russlands ulovlige angrepskrig i Ukraina har pågått siden 2014, og har ført til store menneskelige og økonomiske tap. Denne studien undersøker de materielle og økonomiske kostnadene for Europa og Norge dersom Russland vinner fram med sin krigføring, versus en situasjon hvor Ukraina igjen bringes på offensiven og tvinger Russland til fredsslutning. Vi tror ikke på noe gjennombrudd for president Trumps forsøk på forhandlinger og en diplomatisk løsning på krigen i Ukraina. Russland har ikke vist reell vilje til kompromiss, og fremsetter fortsatt sine maksimumskrav, som i praksis betyr ukrainsk underkastelse. Krigen vil derfor trolig fortsette som en utmattelseskrig, der de to landenes økonomiske utvikling, og utviklingen ved fronten, vil avgjøre utfallet. Denne rapporten skisserer to mulige scenarier for den videre utvikling i krigen, hvordan de kan bli realisert, og hvilke konsekvenser de kan ha for europeisk sikkerhet og forsvarsbehov. Rapporten sikter mot å illustrere for norske beslutningstakere hvilke grunnleggende økonomiske og sikkerhetspolitiske valg den russiske angrepskrigen i Ukraina utløser, og hvordan ulike utfall i krigen kan påvirke våre egne sikkerhetsbehov og forsvarsutgifter. Situasjonen stiller Europa overfor krav til resolutt handling. Hovedspørsmålene vi stiller i rapporten er hva som skal til for at Russland eller Ukraina seirer militært: Hva koster det Europa og allierte i økt forsvarsinnsats dersom Russland seirer eller lykkes å nøytralisere Ukraina militært og politisk (Scenario 1), og hvilken kostnad det har å gjøre Ukraina i stand til å motstå russiske angrep og gjenvinne muligheten til begrensede motoffensiver (Scenario 2). Rapporten er skrevet av ledende eksperter innen sikkerhetspolitikk, militær doktrine og økonomi. Forfatternes tilknyttede institusjoner er ikke ansvarlige for innholdet, det er forfatterne selv som er ansvarlige for analysen og konklusjonene i rapporten.
Coalition of the Willing for Ukraine Tracker
This project surveys the political willingness of allies to deploy troops—on the ground, in the air, or at sea—to establish a military presence in or around Ukraine. ...
Integrating ad hoc coalitions in international conflict management
While United Nations peacekeeping has been in decline since 2014, ad hoc coalitions have become prominent in international conflict management. We argue that these two trends have changed the field of international conflict management into what we call ‘conflict management à la carte’. Contemporary examples of ad hoc coalitions in international conflict management are the Multinational Joint Task Force, fighting the Boko Haram insurgency in the Lake Chad region, but also maritime missions such as the US-led Coalition Task Force Sentinel in the Gulf region and the Kenya-led Multinational Security Support mission in Haiti. After analysing the implications of this turn for international conflict management, we sketch out three types of differentiated ad hoc coalition integration in international conflict management and discuss examples. We then provide recommendations for how to synergize and integrate ad hoc coalitions with UN-led and regional organization-led initiatives, to enhance mission effectiveness and preserve a robust and legitimate toolbox of institutional responses for international conflict management. In conclusion, we argue that as the UN reorients itself towards becoming a service provider through adopting a modular approach, it should continue to invest in interorganizational cooperation on issues of logistics, financial and human rights accountability, including with ad hoc coalitions.
The Institutional Dynamics of Global Governance in Hard Times: Innovation or Decline?
In the introduction to this roundtable, we argue that global governance currently faces hard times because it is affected by a set of significant developments revolving around the changing distribution of state power, the rise of nationalist populism, and the frequent occurrence of transnational crises, while seeking to facilitate collective action on complex cooperation problems. Against this backdrop, the essay identifies two major institutional dynamics of global governance in hard times: first, the drift of formal intergovernmental organizations (FIGOs) that is caused by them being gridlocked in a period of significant changes in their social, (geo)political, economic, and technological environment. Second, the proliferation of various types of low-cost institutions. To help us think systematically about how these two interrelated institutional dynamics affect global governance, the essay develops the innovation thesis and the decline thesis. The “innovation thesis” suggests that by transitioning from a rather exclusive and hierarchical system revolving around FIGOs into a more inclusive and heterarchical system revolving around institutional diversity, global governance is currently being adapted to its new environment. The “decline thesis,” by contrast, argues that the two institutional dynamics undermine rules-based multilateralism and may lead to a shift back toward traditional (great) power politics that does not respect institutional constraints.
From ability to defend to willingness to defend – What can Norway learn from Ukraine?
What does it take to create a willingness to defend your country? ...
Is the era of cooperation coming to an end?
International cooperation and the rules-based order as we know it is now at stake. The inauguration of Donald Trump in his second presidential ter...
Ukraine’s secret weapon: Civil society at war
Come Back Alive and other volunteer organisations is an underappreciated, but important factor in Ukraine's fight against Russia. They are a vital...