Semi-peripheries in the world-system? The Visegrad group countries in the geopolitical order of energy and raw materials after the war in Ukraine
What are the geopolitical risk implications related to the war in Ukraine for the raw material and energy policies of countries highly dependent on Russia? This paper looks at the Visegrad Group (V4) states – Czechia, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia – as some of the most impacted countries and assesses their position in the emerging new geopolitical and energy order. V4 countries display a semi-peripheral position in the world-system, as defined by Immanuel Wallerstein. On the geopolitical level, they were balancing between dependence on Russia in energy and raw materials (a result of Cold War legacies) and economic integration with Western countries. However, after the Cold War, dependence on raw materials from the East went hand in hand with dependence on technology and investment from the West, as the V4 region saw the emergence of ‘dependent capitalism.’ The war in Ukraine may reshuffle these dependencies by changing the meaning of the ‘centre,’ for which such actors as the United States, Western Europe or China will strive after Russia's importance has weakened in the V4 countries. It may also create an opportunity to redefine the V4's semi-peripheral status. Drawing on an analysis of recent documents and governmental strategies that emerged in the aftermath of Russia's invasion in 2022, we offer a structured comparative analysis of the way V4 states responded to the crisis along four dimensions (positioning in the international political economy of energy and technology, role of the state, visions of energy futures, geopolitical and geoeconomic course). In the conclusions, we outline the main changes in the import of raw materials, fuels and technologies in individual V4 countries and consider the possible position of the region in the future energy geopolitical order.
Kristin Haugevik appointed Research Professor
Julie Stensønes
Julie Stensønes is a master's student at the University of Oslo with a specific focus on climate politics. Her research interests include internat...
Bendik Manum
Bendik is a master's student at NUPI in the Research group for Russia, Asia, and International Trade, and is currently writing his Master’s thesis...
Rethink territory: How Ukraine can redefine victory
How to ensure European security amid global turmoil?
External Voting among Central European Migrants Living in Western Europe
Non-resident citizens’ participation in national elections is known as external voting. This report presents the first comparative dataset of external voting, both in parliamentary and presidential elections. We gathered voting results among migrants from nine Central and Eastern European countries, with the main analysis focusing on six where most data were available: Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland and Romania. The analysed countries of residence where diasporas cast their votes were Austria, Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Spain, Finland, France, Great Britain, Greece, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden (EU members) as well as two countries belonging to the European Economic Area (Norway and Iceland) and Switzerland. How different are external voting results from those seen in countries of origin? What are the ideological differences between voting migrants and the ‘mean’ voter back home, and to what extent does that matter? These are some of the questions the data gathered may help shed light on.
On the formation of content for 'political remittances': an analysis of Polish and Romanian migrants comparative evaluations of 'here' and 'there'
Migration may affect migrants’ ideas as they become exposed to different contexts over time. But how does such exposure and opportunities for comparative evaluation of origin and settlement contexts, translate into content for potential political remittances? To answer this question, we analyse 80 interviews with Polish and Romanian migrants living in Barcelona (Spain) and Oslo (Norway). Starting from the established ‘social remittances’, literature, our contribution is to unpack the process of their formation by focusing on what happens at the content-creation stage. We do so through analysis of migrants’ comparative evaluation of their ‘origin’ and ‘settlement’ contexts in regard to three explicitly political issues: corruption, public institutions and democracy. We analyse how exposure to, and comparative evaluation of, different contexts inform migrants’ views, and find non-linearity and inconsistency between migrant groups’ and in individuals’ own patterns of views. This underscores the salience of, first, recognising how the change that migration prompts in migrants’ outlooks may or may not be stronger than preceding political preferences, anchored in ongoing processes of (re)socialisation; and second, of better understanding how migration impacts migrants’ outlooks, by considering the specifics of exposure and comparative evaluation, whether or not ultimately articulated in forms traceable as ‘political remittances’.
Har Putin satt Sikkerhetsrådet sjakkmatt?
Har krigen i Ukraina dyttet sikkerhetsrådet ut i en eksistensiell krise? Spørsmålet har kommet til uttrykk i flere debatter, både i Norge og inter...
Monarken og politikken
Hvor hender det? snakker med førstelektor Øivind Bratberg ved Universitetet i Oslo om dronning Elizabeth, hennes rolle i politikken, britisk parti...