How should the EU navigate multilateral cooperation?
This special episode of The World Stage is the first of a series that will give insight to the research from the NUPI-led research project The EU...
How should the EU navigate multilateral cooperation?
The future of the US nuclear guarantee
The war in Ukraine has the potential to fundamentally reshape Europe’s security landscape. This challenge is compounded by the deepening security cooperation between China and Russia. At the same time, political dysfunction in the United States raises concerns, and significant shifts in US security policy could diminish its commitment to Europe. Nuclear weapons play a pivotal role in great power politics. The modernization of US strategic nuclear forces presents a major challenge. These developments may erode the credibility of the US extended deterrence and nuclear guarantee to Europe. Given this context, it is crucial for European allies to strengthen their conventional defense capabilities, reducing reliance on nuclear forces. In addition, Europe should actively advocate for a robust nuclear deterrent. Although US tactical or sub-strategic nuclear weapons stationed in Europe represent only a small portion of America’s overall nuclear arsenal, they remain important. European nations should also pursue greater operational cooperation with US strategic forces, including hosting US strategic aircraft operations in their airspace and participating in joint training and exercises.
The Most Important U.S. Election in a Generation
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?
Three new projects to NUPI
Breakfast seminar: How to ensure democratic resilience in Europe?
NUPI invites you to take part in the discussion about how we can safeguard democracy in Europe.
Dorthea Gradek
Dorthea Gradek is a Visiting Research Fellow at the NUPI research group for Security and Defence (SECD), where she will take part in the Norway an...
Reimagining NATO after Crimea: Defender of the rule-based order and truth?
Russia’s annexation of Crimea and war on Ukraine has led to upheaval in NATO’s discourse and practice. Taking a step back from the security debate, this article contends that the very process of responding to Russian aggression has led to the reimagining of NATO’s identity. While NATO tends to present change as continuity, this article’s mixed methods analysis illuminates how a trio of new and ambitious self-representations have risen to prominence within NATO’s post-Crimea discourse. NATO has anointed itself defender of the international rules-based order and purveyor of truth and facts amidst a world of disinformation, while pushing a resilience policy agenda that expands its authority into new domestic domains. Problematizing these shifts, the article warns that NATO’s new narrative ignores its own role in the problems it seeks to solve and thus risks undermining NATO efforts to rally global support for Ukraine.
Extreme moderates: Understanding low levels of violent extremism in Bosnia-Herzegovina
How can low levels of violent extremism in enabling environments be explained? The post-war history of Bosnia-Herzegovina has been marked by prolonged political crises, economic instability, and precarious security for citizens. The combination of a relatively young, unstable democracy and social grievances creates fertile soil for different forms of radicalization and the proliferation of various extremist ideologies. This has, in turn, allowed extra-institutional groups to challenge formal institutions. Despite this, there have been few violent extremist attacks, and those that have been carried out were small-scale and failed to expose any deep reservoir of violent extremism. What, then, does this deviant case reveal? Utilizing social movement theory and political opportunity structures, this article explores how structural conditions in the political and discursive space of Bosnia-Herzegovina affect the protest repertoires of extremist movements. Two main arguments are put forward. First, extra-institutional groups must be understood as rational actors with broader claims that exceed the use of violence. Second, distinguishing between radicalization that links to violent extremism and radicalization that aims to initiate societal change through non-violent means can help us better understand the dynamics behind societal change in fragile environments.