Publications
European defence beyond institutional boundaries: Improved European defence through flexibility, differentiation and coordination
As a response to the changing geopolitical situation, initiatives aimed to strengthen European defence have been taken in NATO, in the EU, but also bi- and multilaterally between EU member states and associated non-members, such as Norway. This policy brief argues that all these processes must be taken into account when we want to measure the full security and defence capacity of Europe. Rather than a sign of fragmentation, they are preparing the ground for a new European defence architecture, characterised by a high degree of flexibility, which in the end may be better adapted to the current security context. To maximalise the effect of this differentiated defence architecture, however, a certain coordination between the different initiatives is needed. There is now a window of opportunity for such coordination, as two key processes are now running in parallel: the development of a new “strategic concept” for NATO and the development of a “Strategic Compass” in the EU. If this succeeds, we can hope for the development of a more flexible and capable European defence.
Nordic Airpower Cooperation and Finland’s F-35 decision: Towards a New Era?
The Nordic states air forces have cooperated closely, especially after Russia reinvigorated its military posture in the region from 2007-2008. With regional security policy and military strategy becoming more closely integrated after 2014, this tactical activity has become a key part of an emerging strategic-level pattern of cooperation. Closer political and military integration has enabled regional security cooperation to proliferate across unit types and activities. With the introduction of new generation fighter aircraft in the short term, and future air combat systems in the longer term, cooperation is set to change, but given its dual imperative is bound to continue and expand as new avenues emerge. Especially, the continuation of CBT in the short and long term has both a tactical and strategic rationale. Finland’s decision to procure the F-35 Lightning II will enable even closer airpower cooperation in the Nordics and in a broader European and trans-Atlantic framework, both in peace, crisis, and armed conflict. System similarity with Norway extends to the JSM, which opens the possibility for joint development of this weapon system and its operational use. As such, the procurement sets the stage for closer collaboration at both the tactical, operational and military-industrial levels.
AUKUS and its implications for Asia, US-European relations and non-proliferation
The political, strategic and technological aspects of the AUKUS deal may be more important than the provision of nuclear-powered submarines. The deal is a clear sign of the US tilt towards Asia and will have important implications for both USFrench, US-EU and US-NATO relations. AUKUS does not imply any nuclear weapons proliferation risk. However, it paths the way for a proliferation of nuclear-powered submarines, which will open for legitimate and illegitimate claims for producing Highly Enriched Uranium. It remains to be seen whether the strategic benefits of AUKUS in the Indo-pacific will outweigh its political costs for transatlantic relations and the image of the United States as a trusted security partner.
Trade, Trust, and De Facto State Conflicts: Abkhazia’s International Economic Engagement
Does trade really foster trust? In the case of conflict-torn regions, developing trade links is often believed to contribute to transforming conflict or even facilitate peacebuilding. However, when it comes to de facto states—states with no or limited international recognition—the relationship between the two may not be quite as straightforward. A closer look at Abkhazia, a de facto state in the contested neighborhood between Russia and the EU, shows that trade can thrive even in a post-conflict situation where mutual distrust is high. However, as long as trade occurs informally and in the shadows, it does not help in building trust at the state level.
The Role of External Powers in EU–Asia Security Relations
This chapter maps out the changing roles played by the United States, Russia and India as security actors in East Asia, and their influence on EU foreign and security policies in the region. Detailing the waxing and waning of the US’ ‘unipolar moment’, Russia’s military resurgence, and the increasingly assertive balancing acts of India, the chapter reviews the main policy developments implemented by these three actors since 1990 and how their policies converge or diverge with the EU’s approaches across a range of traditional and non-traditional security issues. The chapter concludes that the challenge for the EU is to advance its interests, and augment the effects, of its policies and instruments in Asia considering the potential for collaboration and contestation with the United States, Russia and India, three very different actors that diverge considerably in both strategic intentions and capabilities.
Nordic cooperation amid pandemic travel restrictions
Since 2020, the Nordic countries have been confronted with the Covid-19 pandemic, which has been a multi-level stress test for the region. The strong basis of open borders and free movement in Nordic cooperation has been questioned by national pandemic measures, including wide travel restrictions. The Nordic dimension to pandemic responses has largely been missing, the trust between the countries has arguably been put to test and cross-border commuters have been subjected to differential treatment. Especially cross-border regions have suffered the consequences of travel restrictions, causing disruptions to work and private life. The report draws attention to the preparedness of the Nordic Region to jointly confront global crises. It explores the different strategies and travel restrictions adopted by four Nordic countries: Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. It also studies how Nordic cooperation functioned in a time of crisis. At the local level, it examines the economic, labour market and social implications for three cross-border regions, that is, Tornedalen, Svinesund and Öresund. The report finds that while there is room for improvement in handling a crisis like the pandemic, there are diverging views on the desirability to have all-Nordic approaches to situations affecting national security. The consequences are, however, serious for free movement and the aim to become the most integrated region in the world.
Background study: Cross-regional comparison of ‘DOs and DON’Ts’ in the EU’s PVE Measures: Balkans, Maghreb/ Sahel & Middle East
The following report presents the research findings of a cross-societal comparison of PREVEX-related regions, with the aim of providing ideas about what has been successful and what has proven detrimental to the EU’s preventing violent extremism (PVE) efforts. As per the PREVEX consortium’s project architecture, structured comparisons serve as a central pillar for the extrapolation and generation of cross-cutting lessons and policy recommendations concerning PVE. While sporadic, intra-regional, comparative elements are already apparent within three PREVEX regional Policy Briefs – on the Balkans (D5.1), the Maghreb/Sahel (D6.1) and the Middle East (D7.1) – these documents are confined to countries within these respective regions that partly share territorial, societal, and cultural similarities. In contrast, the explicit mandate for the research to be undertaken here under Work Package 8 is to conduct cross-cutting comparisons between these radically different regions – all without losing sight of domestic-specific PVE aspects, the highlighting of which might help to generate ideas for other contexts. The conduct of such cross-regional comparisons is premised upon the methodological prerequisite of being aware, as the comparisons are being conducted, of some wide qualitative differences between the regions compared. The identification of lessons for policymaking will be considerably stronger if one can demonstrate that, despite considerable divergences, certain PVE strategies continue to perform well across the board. The consolidation of such lessons – based on validations from across different cultures, structural contexts, and radically divergent Islamic traditions – provides for an additional measure of confirmation as to their pertinence. The overt attempt of the authors of this study has been to search diligently for such ‘across-the-board’ lessons.
Nordic partnership choices in a fierier security environment: Towards more alignment
Nordic states’ partnership choices in security and defence are more aligned than they were a decade ago. When Danish, Finnish, Norwegian and Swedish government officials now identify key security challenges and partners, and reflect on the potential for Nordic cooperation, they have the same reference points and use similar wording. Since 2014, the toolbox for Nordic defence cooperation has also solidified and different formal affiliations with NATO and the EU seem to matter less than before. Furthermore, an array of multi- and minilateral cooperation structures have emerged across and beyond the EU and NATO, expanding the possibilities for Nordic cooperation under a larger Euro-Atlantic umbrella. However, two limitations remain: First, Nordic security and defence cooperation still remains subordinate to and a supplement rather than an alternative to NATO. Second, putting Nordic response mechanisms into practice remains dependent not only on the context and issue at stake, but also on the political appetite of the individual Nordic governments to choose a Nordic solution.
On digital media in Lebanon's political crisis
The technology-driven transformation of the media environment is changing politics worldwide. Yet everywhere is not the same. The digital revolution yields different results in different political contexts. This policy brief analyses digital media’s role in the political crisis unfolding in Lebanon – a weak, divided and contested state. It discusses the implications for Norwegian development aid to the country. Part 3 of 4 in the series: Digital technology and international politics
Russian reframing: Norway as an outpost for NATO offensives
Moscow increasingly views the ‘Collective West’ as an offensive actor and the High North as terrain for NATO ‘expansion’. Norway figures as an active partner in this endeavour. For Norway, this situation is precarious: to the degree that Norway is seen as an inimical ‘NATO in the North’, Norwegian policies across a range of issue-areas increasingly risk being perceived as actions in an existential Russia–West struggle. This is worrisome because a key pillar of official Norwegian policy towards Russia involves balancing NATO deterrence with reassurance. As the military/non-military distinction becomes blurred in the eyes of Russia this crucial balancing becomes very difficult – the intended ‘reassuring’ signal might not come across.