Nordic-Baltic Security in Times of Uncertainty: The Defence-Energy Nexus
The report shows that energy and defence in the Nordic-Baltic region are closely interrelated. During the Cold War, the energy cooperation of Western European countries with the USSR was seen as an element of strengthening the status quo and reducing the risk of conflict. In the new strategic situation, when Russia is interested in regaining the status of regional and global power, there is a real threat that Kremlin will use Europe's dependence on Russian gas to divide NATO and the EU. The Russian military advantage in the region, the ability to block access to Alliance forces and the ability to influence its members through energy blackmail may encourage Russia to test NATO's credibility, increasing the risk of conflict in the region. NATO's ability to deter Russia creates a natural platform of cooperation for Norway and Poland. Both states should also be interested in reducing the Alliance's dependence on Russian energy resources.
Tryggleik i Norden og Baltikum i usikre tider – korleis hengjar forsvar og energi saman?
Korleis påverkar endringar i trusselbiletet og reaksjonar på tryggingsutfordringar knytt til Russland energipolitikk i den nordiske og baltiske regionen?
Trump, Putin and rejected greatness
Why do Putin and Trump undermine the international consensus knowledge that their national academic and governmental milieus have been so central to building?
EU climate and energy policy: new challenges for old energy suppliers
Climate policy will transform the EU energy demand mix. This has implications for the main suppliers of fossil fuels to the EU, foremost among which are Algeria, Colombia, Kazakhstan, Nigeria, Norway, Russia, Saudi Arabia and the USA. Norway has a better starting point for adapting to changing EU energy demand than the other energy suppliers and therefore represents a best-case scenario. Whatever Norway fails to do, the other countries are even less likely to achieve. The question is whether Norway has been quick enough to exploit the opportunities to play a proactive role in the EU’s energy transition. This chapter argues that it has not, dragging its feet on natural gas vehicles, Norwegian wind power, electricity interconnectors, green battery development and mixing of hydrogen into natural gas. Some possible reasons for the tardiness are Norway’s dual resource course of oil and hydropower, carbon lock-in, energy populism, resource nationalism and blind spots in the perception of Norway’s place in international climate and energy policy.
Great Powers and Arctic Politics (GPARC)
GPARC analyser hvordan stormakter (USA, Russland og Kina) forholder seg til maritim politikk i Arktis. ...
Kazakhstan: Civil Society and Natural Resource Policy in Kazakhstan
In Kazakhstan, civil society is held back and has had a limited role in the management of the petroleum sector. As this chapter notes, civil society has had little experience of promoting its own interests vis-à-vis the state, and public discussion of natural resource issues has been mainly government-driven. The fact that Kazakhstan made a notable step forward—from being a collapsing socialist economy in the 1990s to becoming a regional economic player with improved social and economic performance—has helped to legitimize non-transparent natural resource policies. As long as the socio-economic situation continues to improve or remains stable, the non-transparent management of natural resources is likely to be accepted by the population, which, like the Russian population, puts a premium on stability. The relative passivity of civil society has been compensated by Kazakhstan’s exposure to international initiatives and organizations such as the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), and numerous UN agencies. As in Azerbaijan, the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) has provided a platform for some civil society engagement with industry and government.
Public Brainpower: Civil Society and Natural Resource Management
This book discusses how civil society, public debate and freedom of speech affect the management of natural resources. Drawing on the work of Robert Dahl, Jürgen Habermas and Robert Putnam, the book introduces the concept of public brainpower. Good governance of natural resources requires fertile public debate – to conceive new institutions, to provide checks and balances on existing institutions and to ensure their continuous dynamic evolution as the needs of society change. The book explores the strengths and weaknesses of these ideas through case studies of 18 oil and gas-producing countries: Algeria, Angola, Azerbaijan, Canada, Colombia, Egypt, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Libya, the Netherlands, Nigeria, Norway, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, the UK and Venezuela. The concluding chapter presents 10 tenets on how states can maximize their public brainpower, as well as a ranking of how well 33 resource-rich countries have succeeded in doing so. Four of the chapters – ‘Introduction’, ‘Norway’, ‘Kazakhstan’ and ‘Russia’ – are available under a CC BY 4.0 Open Access license at ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320656629_Introduction_Civil_Society_Public_Debate_and_Natural_Resource_Management (Introduction) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320657120 (Norway) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320657015 (Kazakhstan) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320657842 (Russia)
The Duty of Care for Citizens Abroad: Security and Responsibility in the In Amenas and Fukushima Crises
This article analyses the state’s duty of care (DoC) for citizens who fall victim to unforeseen catastrophic or violent events abroad. The DoC highlights the challenges, dynamics and relations involved in diplomatic practice that is aimed at protecting citizens outside of state borders and where traditional security concepts have little relevance. How has a globalized, more insecure world — with shifting relations and responsibilities among states, their subordinates and other carers — affected the provision of DoC? How do governments and private actors act on the DoC during and after crises? To illustrate, the article draws on the terrorist attack at a gas facility in Algeria in 2013 and the nuclear disaster in Japan in 2011, focusing particularly on the Norwegian framework and approach to protecting citizens abroad. In both crises, implementing the DoC required practical skills and measures beyond traditional diplomacy and institutionalized crisis mechanisms.