Forskningsprosjekt
Transatlantic Security – Challenges and Opportunities
Events
Norwegian security policy has had a transatlantic foothold for at least 70 years. In the foreseeable future, the United States will remain Norways’s most important security guarantor and partner in defense and security. This reflects US overall interest in Europe, primarily in the NATO framework, and Russa’s maritime and nuclear forces in the north that constitute a challenge to US and transatlantic security. That all Nordic countries will become members of NATO will contribute to deepening the USA engagement in Northern Europe.
However, we must prepare for the fact that American policy may undergo major shifts. The United States increased awareness of Asia may lead to less vigorous engagement in Europe and a change in form. The demographic and geographical center of gravity of the United States is moving away from the east coast with its traditional connection to Europe. In two or six years, there will be a new president who might be less enthusiastic about the transatlantic partnership. It is even more important than before to understand the American scene and the long-term consequence of foreign and security policy, regardless of administration.
After Brexit, the UK has an ambition to be a global security actor. It has at the same time increased its interest for Northern Europe, particularly within the framework of the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF). There is every reason to pay close attention to its further development as it poses an opportunity for Norway to further strengthen its bilateral security cooperation.
This projects hosts yearly seminars at NUPI, in Oslo, at CSIS, in Washington DC, and at RUSI, in London.
For publications, articles and other output at NUPI, see below.
Other publications:
Max Bergmann: The Transatlantic Alliance in the Age of Trump: The Coming Collisions, CSIS Report, 14 Feb 2025.
Other articles and op-eds:
Karsten Friis, Hjemme Alene, Commentary, Dagsavisen 23 Dec 2025.
Max Bergmann, The NSS That Could Destroy the NATO Alliance, CSIS Commentary, 5 Dec 2025.
Max Bergmann, Why It’s Time to Reconsider a European Army, CSIS Commentary, 28 Feb 2025.
Max Bergmann, Trump Needs a Plan to Get Europeans to Step Up on Defense, CSIS Commentary, 31 Jan 2025.
Karsten Friis, Kan Trump avslutte krigen?, Op-ed, Klassekampen 14 Nov 2024.
This project is funded by the Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Project Manager
Participants
Articles
title.podkast
Transatlantic security in times of trouble
The American security guarantee to Europe appears to be less iron clad than it used to be. The Trump administration seeks to shift military assets...
New publications
How to Support Ukraine: Peace Will Require Ukrainian Strength
A revived Western effort to finance Ukraine’s war effort will send a clear message to Russia of the West’s commitment. It may also help revitalize the West’s defense industrial production and leave U.S. and European security on firmer footing. This will be costly, but it is a cost that both the United States and Europe can easily manage. Furthermore, continued Western support should go hand in hand with a renewed effort to address its critical manpower shortages. The war and the world may be currently turning against Ukraine. But this is not a permanent condition. Russia is also suffering greatly, experiencing massive battlefield losses and economic strain. Europe, the United States, and Ukraine can turn the tide of the conflict back in Kyiv’s direction. Doing so is likely the only way to bring Russia to the negotiating table.
Kan Trump avslutte krigen?
President-elect Donald Trump’s statements claiming he will end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours have received considerable attention. What is interesting is not the feasibility of achieving this within a day – which no one believes – but rather the fact that he expresses a desire to bring the war to an end. President Biden’s repeated pledges to support Ukraine “for as long as it takes” have been rightly criticized by Republicans and others for lacking strategic vision. Trump, by contrast, appears to seek a plan to conclude the conflict. However, there is a significant difference between the intention to act and the ability to deliver. What, realistically, can Trump do?
The Joint Expeditionary Force and its Contribution to European Security
The paper has three chapters. Chapter I identifies and assesses the advantages of the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) and makes a comparison with other European defence and security frameworks. Chapter II examines how the JEF has responded to Russia’s war against Ukraine and the subsequent dramatic changes it has driven in European security. Chapter III considers the challenges to the UK, the JEF and European security following the war in Ukraine and the 2024 US presidential election. It provides recommendations for the new UK government for the further development of the JEF to best contribute to European security. The Conclusion argues that the UK must take the opportunity to strengthen the JEF to respond to a deteriorating security environment.
US and UK Elections: Implications for NATO and Northern European Security
How will the outcome of the US election impact security policy in the UK and Northern Europe? The report discusses potential consequences of a victory for Harris and Trump respectively, as well as the new British government's security policy orientation. What does this mean for Norway and Northern Europe?
Solving Europe’s Defense Dilemma: Overcoming the Challenges to European Defense Cooperation
Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine has led to a transformational moment for European defense. However, Europe has a dilemma: it is spending more on defense but cooperating less—all despite three decades of political initiatives designed to improve European defense cooperation.
Trump 2.0 og internasjonal politikk
I denne spesialrapporten har Senter for geopolitikk samlet en rekke bidrag fra forskere tilknyttet senteret, fra Fridtjof Nansen Institutt, Institutt for Forsvarsstudier, Universitetet i Oslo, UiT – Norges Arktiske Universitet og Norsk Utenrikspolitisk Institutt. Bidragene setter søkelys på noen konkrete temaer som inntak til å forstå et USA i endring og hva det vil kunne bety for andre stater, og for utviklingen på konkrete politikkfelt. Rapporten har særlig fokus på hva disse endringene, hver for seg og samlet, betyr for Europa og Norge. En oppdatert versjon ble publisert 12.06.25, klokken 12.40.
USAs demokratiske krise og dets utenrikspolitiske konsekvenser
Under og etter andre verdenskrig konstruerte USA en internasjonal orden som USA selv skulle lede. Denne til dels liberale verdensordenen (avhengig av hvor i verden man befant seg under Den kalde krigen) gagnet USA økonomisk og sikkerhetsmessig. Dette var det tverrpolitisk enighet om, en enighet som ble forsterket av måten slutten på den kalde krigen ble tolket på i USA: Den amerikanske modellen hadde beseiret kommunismen, og liberalt, kapitalistisk demokrati var, som Francis Fukuyama så berømt skrev, enden på verdens ideologiske historie.