Researcher
Minda Holm
Contactinfo and files
Summary
Dr. Minda Holm is a Senior Research Fellow at NUPI. Her research spans three main areas: the theory of international ideology and ideological resistance in world politics; global liberalisms and liberal internationalism, liberal exceptionalism and ideological and conceptual changes in global order, international norms, state ideals, sovereignty and international law; and the international ideology and networks of far-right and reactionary movements. She also works on diplomacy and foreign and security policy, particularly Norwegian, US and Russian. Her work is both theoretical and empirical, and situated in interdisciplinary dialogue with International Relations, global historical sociology, social theory, critical international law and political philosophy.
She has researched liberal internationalism and liberal exceptionalism, including in Norwegian foreign policy, and changing notions of sovereignty and state ideals in international law and politics. Since 2017, she has also researched far-right, national-conservative and reactionary movements and their global ideas. Between 2018 and 2023, she led a research project at NUPI for the Norwegian Ministry of Defence on the international ideology and networks of the ‘New Right’ in Europe, Russia and the US, and she was part of the research project World of the Right at the Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS).
She holds a PhD in Political Science from the University of Copenhagen (2023). Her doctoral thesis, a monograph, is titled Towards a Social Theory of International Ideology, Ideological Scripts, and Counter-Ideology: Rethinking “Liberal International Order” and the Far Right’s Critique. It develops a theory of how ideologies structure the international through the state as a legal and political subject, and of the distinct forms of resistance this generates. She is currently developing it into a book proposal, and its core empirical arguments are summarized in the NUPI report A Postliberal Global Order? Challenge(r)s to the Liberal West (2025).
Holm has published in journals such as Review of International Studies, International Studies Review, Cooperation and Conflict, The Hague Journal of Diplomacy and New Perspectives, on topics including sovereignty, (mis)recognition, securitization theory, the transatlantic community of values and international diaspora politics.
For eight years, she wrote a monthly column on global politics in Dagsavisen and Klassekampen, and she was Editor-in-Chief of the journal Internasjonal Politikk between 2018 and 2024. Holm holds a double master’s degree in International Relations from LSE and George Washington University, where she was a Fulbright scholar.
See her personal website for more, including publications.
Expertise
Education
2018 – 2023 PhD, Department of Political Science, University of Copenhagen. Submitted November 2022, defended after maternity leave September 2023.
2015 – 2016 MA George Washington University, USA (Fulbright scholar)
2013 – 2014 MSc London School of Economics and Political Science, England
2008 – 2013 BA (2, in parallel), Political Science and Russia studies, University of Oslo and American University in Cairo, Oslo/Egypt
Work Experience
2025– Board Member, Norwegian Polytechnic Society’s Geopolitics Network
2023– Senior Research Fellow, NUPI
2020–2025 Columnist (global politics), Klassekampen
2018–2024 Editor-in-Chief, Internasjonal Politikk – Scandinavian Journal of International Studies
2018– Board Member, Human Rights House Foundation
2018–2023 PhD Fellow/Researcher and Project Leader (Norwegian Ministry of Defence), NUPI
2018–2023 PhD Fellow, University of Copenhagen (supervisors Ole Wæver and Ole Jacob Sending; submitted November 2022, defended September 2023 following parental leave)
2018–2023 PhD Fellow, World of the Right research project, Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS; based in both Oslo and Copenhagen)
2018–2021 Board Member, European International Studies Association (EISA) Early Career Development Group
2017–2020 Columnist (global politics), Dagsavisen (“Internasjonalen”)
2017–2018 Research Fellow, NUPI
2015–2019 Board Member, Fulbright Alumni Association of Norway
2012–2017 Research Assistant, NUPI (full-time from January 2016)
2012 Intern, Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), Tajikistan
2010–2011 Trainee, Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Kazakhstan (covering Central Asia)
2009–2010 Journalist, Radio Nova
Aktivitet
Filter
Clear all filtersLegitimering gjennom (selektiv) felles fortid: russisk bruk av historie i Ukraina-konflikten
How has Russia used history to justify its actions in the conflict in Ukraine? Through an analysis of official statements of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as well as speeches and remarks by Putin, this article argues that history has played an important but varying role in official rhetoric. With Crimea, the emphasis was on the ‘sanctity’ of the territory for Russian Orthodox identity, drawing on history dating back to the baptism of Prince Vladimir in 10th century AC. The shared past of the two states has not been as central in official Russian policy justification regarding Ukraine outside Crimea: the ‘brotherhood’ of the two nations has been noted repeatedly, but usually secondary to arguments pertaining to economic and political interests. The two world wars have been used as a cautionary tale, with Russia effectively seeking to delegitimize the new Ukrainian government by evoking carefully selected elements of its past. Finally, the author looks at the use of international precedence as a form of justification, turning the history of Western – US in particular – actions back on Russia’s critics. The official usage of history is placed within broader strategies of legitimation, as it is not enough to study propaganda and manipulation strategies as part of information warfare to explain how the Kremlin achieves support for its policies. The ‘thick’ historical narratives of Crimea play on elements linked to issues of national identity, making it difficult to dispute using the type of counter-propaganda and rebuttal of disinformation proposed by some. Article in Norwegian only.
Instruments of State Power: History and Theory (ISPO)
The ISPO Workshop Series will develop new and innovative analytical tools and vocabularies to help understand current developments in global politics. ...
Beyond Mothers, Monsters, Whores: Thinking about Women’s Violence in Global Politics
Det er ofte fokus på offerrollen når det snakkes om kvinner i krig og konflikt. Det er en viktig del av den kjønna erfaringen av konflikt, og var lenge neglisjert i både akademia og politikken. Samtidig overser mange fremdeles kvinners aktive deltagelse i politisk vold. Det analytiske utgangspunktet i «Beyond Mothers, Monsters, Whores: Thinking about Women’s Violence in Global Politics» er at feminisme ikke handler om å argumentere for at kvinner er mindre voldelige enn menn, eller at verden automatisk ville vært et bedre sted om kvinner styrte den. Det handler om å analysere manifestasjoner av kjønn i global politikk. Kvinner som voldelige politiske aktører går imot de dominerende bildene av kvinner som fredelige, moderlige, emosjonelle, rene, uskyldige, fredselskende. I konfliktsituasjoner er de dermed gjerne fremstilt som enten årsaken (det som skal beskyttes) eller ofrene. Hvis det er først er fokus på kvinner som voldsutøverer, blir det gjerne individualisert og knyttet til dem som kvinner. De er ikke bare voldsutøverer, de er kvinnelige voldsutøverer – både voldelige, og dårlige som kvinner, sjelden fremstilt som «bare» terrorister eller soldater. Tilsvarende blir de sjelden fremstilt som «rasjonelle» aktører, og deres valg tolkes gjerne som noe personlig, ikke politisk.
Duty of Care: Protection of Citizens Abroad (DoC:PRO)
How can Norwegian society best be protected, when increasing numbers of citizens are found outside the borders of the state? ...
Erika Fatland: Sovjetistan
En diskusjon som lenge har pågått i forskningen på postsovjetisk Sentral-Asia er hvor mye mening det gir å avgrense det som et eget forskningsfelt. Hvor like er egentlig Kasakhstan, Kirgisistan, Tadsjikistan, Turkmenistan og Usbekistan, og bør man inkludere Afghanistan i regionsdefinisjonen? Den samme ambivalensen gjenspeiles i måten styresmaktene snakker om seg selv på. Forsøkene på regionalt samarbeid – ofte initiert av eksterne aktører – har som regel feilet på grunn av en blanding av manglende tillit og manglende vilje til å gi avkall på kontroll over interne affærer vis-a-vis sine naboland. Dyrkingen av den nasjonale identiteten har vært i sentrum siden uavhengigheten, blant annet i forsøk på å integrere de mange subnasjonale identitetene. Det er ikke ofte man møter på folk i disse landene som ser seg selv som en del av et større sentralasiatisk felleskap: de mange andre identitetsmarkørene er langt viktigere.