Researcher
Karsten Friis
Contactinfo and files
Summary
Dr. Karsten Friis is a Research Professor in NUPIs Research group on security and defence.
His research area is security and defense policies in Europe, with an emphasis on NATO, the Nordic region, the Arctic, transatlantic relations, intelligence, cyber security and the Western Balkans. He has published and led several major projects on these topics. Friis is also a frequently used commentator in the public discourse - not least in relation to Russia’s war against Ukraine.
Friis is a political scientist with a PhD from the University of Groningen, a Cand. Polit from the University of Oslo and an MSc from the London School of Economics. Friis has been associated with NUPI since 2007. Before that, he was a political adviser to the OSCE Mission to Serbia (2004 to 2007), the OSCE in Montenegro (2001) and in Kosovo (1999). Friis was also part of the EU's negotiating team for the referendum on independence in Montenegro in 2006. In addition, Friis has worked for several years in the Norwegian Armed Forces and served at NATO/KFOR in Kosovo.
Expertise
Education
2018 PhD, University of Groningen
1998 Cand Polit, Political Science, University of Oslo
1995 Master, International Relations, London School of Economics
Work Experience
2007- Senior Research Fellow/Senior Advisor/Advisor, NUPI
2004-2007 Political advisor for OSCE, Serbia/Montenegro
2001-2004 Advisor, the Norwegian Armed Forces
2000-2001 Political advisor, OSCE, Montenegro
1999-2000 Analyst/E-off, NATO/KFOR HQ, Kosovo
1999 OSCE Kosovo Verification Mission
Aktivitet
Filter
Clear all filtersVideokonferansehøring: Vilje til beredskap - evne til forsvar. Langtidsplan for forsvarsektoren (Prop. 62 S (2019-2020))
Ulf Sverdrup and Karsten Friis participated in open hearing about the long-term plan for the armed forces
Forsvarets langtidsplan til ompuss
(Op-ed in Norwegian only): The parliament sent the proposed long-term plan for the armed forces back to the government. In this op-ed, Karsten Friis and Ulf Sverdrup gives an onerview of the most pressing concerns the new plan should consider.
The Shifting Boundaries of Nordic Defence Cooperation
Nordic security and defence cooperation is shifting with the rapid rise and expansion of European defence cooperation. Spanning industrial collaboration, capability development, training and operations, planning, as well as other strategic measures, this new European momentum has manifested itself in several new multilateral frameworks, including the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), the Framework Nations Concept (FNC), the European Intervention Initiative (EI2), and the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) However, with so many parallel initiatives emerging, there is a risk they could undermine each other and become a drain on scarce resources.This is the key issue this research paper addresses. It takes stock of recent developments in Nordic defence cooperation, before situating Norway within current European developments and highlighting some of the convergences and possibilities a stronger European defence agenda may bring.
Nordic perspectives on European security: Norway
How does Norway relate to the various new European defence cooperation formats? Which states are Norway coordinating with when engaging in these projects? Is there unexploited potential for common Nordic initiatives within the European formats? Or do traditional security relationships still take precedence? These are the questions discussed in this chapter
Forsvarets langtidsplan, det fagmilitære råd og trusselbildet.
As assessment of the upcoming new defence long term plan, CHODs advise, and the security landscape.
Europeisk sikkerhet under press – hva med Norge?
The lecture addressed European security in a historical and contemporary perspective, and asked what implications the new security landscape have for Norwegian security policy.
Civil-Military Relations in International Interventions: A New Analytical Framework
It is frequently claimed that success in interventions hinges largely on military–civilian coherence. However, despite high ambitions among politicians and organizations, coherence among intervening actors has proven challenging to achieve in practice. Why is this so? To answer this, the book approach the various military and civilian actors in interventions from several angles. It discusses different relationships between the intervening actors, and their relations to those intervened upon. It also analyses different military concepts, such as peacekeeping and counterinsurgency, and the often troubled relationship between the humanitarian and military intervening actors. The book argues that to capture these relationships, an analytical framework which is capable of covering all the intervening actors, is required. It offers such a framework, based on identification theory, which illuminates how the interveners represent those they have deployed to engage, as well as their own identity and role. Based on this we can develop a better understanding of if and when coherence emerge – or not – between the intervening actors.
A Governance and Risk Inventory for a Changing Arctic
Many government officials, military leaders, and political observers have proclaimed the rise of a new, post-Cold War global great power competition between the United States, Russia, and China with myriad implications. Using this new reality as the backdrop for the Arctic Security Roundtable at the Munich Security Conference 2020, roundtable participants are asked to explore, discuss, and debate this issue in the context of, and implications for the new globalized Arctic. This paper – a primer of Arctic trends, risks, and institutions – provides a useful starting point for the discussion. Discussing Arctic security in high-level forums is important. One might ask why we should take the time to discuss the Arctic if we are not fighting a war there. The answer is this: there is a new ocean opening up due to global climate change. There is a promising track record of governance cooperation in the region that serves as a basis for pursuing sustainable management of and peace in this new ocean. The point of dialogue – with an emphasis on cooperation, joint governance and outlining risks and potential tipping points – is to make sure that we do not add the Arctic to the already far-too-long list of global hot spots. The Arctic Security Roundtable at the Munich Security Conference 2020 provides one such confidential forum for proactive and constructive debate on Arctic security issues.
New frameworks for Norwegian security and defence policy (TEOTEK)
This project aims to employ diverse theoretical perspectives to enhance our understanding of the development of new technology, and its consequences and implications for Norwegian security and defence...
Governance Entrepreneurs as Spoilers in Nordic Defence Cooperation
The deteriorated security situation in Europe has contributed to a renewed focus on Nordic defence cooperation. Recent political statements indicate an increased interest among the Nordic states to strengthen regional security cooperation in times of peace, crisis and conflict. Nonetheless, the main obstacles preventing close integration remain in place, in particular the different strategic orientations when it comes to NATO and EU membership among the Nordics. While this is well known among scholars, less emphasis has been on the lowerlevel challenges Nordic defence cooperation initiatives has met. Bureaucratic mismatches and diverging industrial interests can have an important negative impact on politically endorsed projects. Governance entrepreneurs can not only undermine a specific project, but may also contribute negatively to the larger political climate between states. This article will illustrate the argument with several cases of botched Swedish-Norwegian cooperation, with particular emphasis on the Archer artillery project. This was a politically prestigious joint procurement project which failed, with significant souring of political relations as a result.