Forsker
Morten Bøås
Kontaktinfo og filer
Sammendrag
Morten Bøås (PhD) er seniorforsker og jobber i hovedsak med tema knyttet til fred og konflikt i Afrika, inkludert problemstillinger som landrettigheter og statsborgerskapkonflikter, ungdom, eks-stridende og det nye landskapet som tegner seg med hensyn til opprør og geopolitikk.
Bøås har forfattet og redigert en rekke bøker og artikler i akademiske tiddskrifter. Han har gjort dyptpløyende feltarbeid i en rekke afrikanske land.
Ekspertise
Utdanning
2001 Dr.Polit. (Ph.D) i statsvitenskap, Universitetet i Oslo
1995 The CRE/Copernicus Seminar on Environmental Law
1994 Cand.Polit. i statsvitenskap, Universitetet i Oslo
Arbeidserfaring
2013- Seniorforsker, NUPI
2010-2012 Forskningssjef, Fafo Institutt for anvendte internasjonale studier as
2002-2010 Forsker, Fafo
Aktivitet
Filter
Tøm alle filtre
Rethinking radicalisation and resilience in Mali and the Sahel
Hvordan ser motstandsdyktighet mot radikalisering og voldelig ekstremisme ut i Mali og Sahel? Og hva driver spredningen av ekstremisme? I denne ep...
NUPIpodden#3: Afrikas opprørere - hvem er de?
NUPI-forsker Morten Bøås snakker om sin nye bok "Africa's Insurgents: Navigating an Evolving Landscape. Hvem er disse opprørerne? Og hva kjenneteg...
Understanding the roots of Kurdish resilience to violent extremism in Iraq
Hva er grunnene bak den lave impakten til voldelig ekstremisme og den Islamske Staten i Kurdistan-regionen i Irak? I denne episoden av The World S...
Afrika i en global krisetid: Noen utviklingstrekk
Afrika står overfor store utfordringer. Fattigdommen øker igjen etter mange års nedgang. Mange land står overfor en økonomisk krise som følge av koronapandemien, med blant annet økende inflasjon. Flere land er indirekte berørt av Russlands krigføring i Ukraina, som har ført til høye energipriser og redusert tilgang på korn og kunstgjødsel. Flere land og regioner er preget av terror og voldelige konflikter. Og ikke minst skaper klimaendringer økt risiko for flom, tørke og hetebølger. Samtidig er stormaktenes rolle i Afrika i rask endring. Etter en periode med sterk europeisk og amerikansk dominans har andre stormakter, som Kina og Russland, økt sin aktivitet på kontinentet. Kina har investert massivt i infrastruktur, handel og bistand, mens Russland har fått en viktig rolle i en del land, særlig med militærhjelp og våpenleveranser. Samtidig har også andre land, som India, Tyrkia og Qatar, gjort store investeringer på kontinentet. Dette skjer samtidig som Afrikas globale betydning sannsynligvis vil øke. For det første inneholder regionen viktige naturressurser som olje og gass, samt sjeldne mineraler og jordmetaller som det er stor etterspørsel etter i et grønt skifte. For det andre er regionen svært påvirket av klimaendringer, noe som kan føre til sosial uro, voldelige konflikter og omfattende migrasjon. I en tid med økende geopolitisk rivalisering og ustabilitet betyr dette at utviklingen i Afrika vil ha betydelige globale konsekvenser. Selv om andre land har økt sin interesse for, og blitt en viktigere partner for land i Afrika, er EU og Europa fortsatt Afrikas største handelspartner og bistandsgiver. Det er ikke langs denne aksen EU og Europas innflytelse i Afrika utfordres, men innenfor områder som styresett, infrastruktur, energi, og spesifikt fra russisk side innenfor det vi kan omtale som en nisje av sikkerhetsmarkeder. Her har Russland kunne operere ved å tilby våpensalg, militær trening og tjenester fra det private sikkerhetsselskapet Wagner-gruppen, til regimer som Europa og USA ikke ønsker å gi den typen støtte til. Kampen om politisk og økonomisk innflytelse i Afrika er sterkere og mer tilspisset enn siden Den kalde krigen og det er grunn til å tro at dette vil vedvare. Dette gir også afrikanske land større valgmuligheter og autonomi vis-à-vis eksterne enkeltaktører. De afrikanske statene er ikke bare objekter som omverdenen handler overfor, det være seg gjennom bistand, investeringer eller i internasjonale fora. De er også handlende subjekter, som med økt selvbevissthet vil forsøke å navigere det nye landskapet både av global stormaktrivalisering og fragmentering. Dette er en utvikling som må tas på alvor. Verken Norge eller Europa har råd til å ta Afrika og afrikansk støtte til våre posisjoner i internasjonal politikk for gitt. Dette notatet er skrevet på oppdrag for Utenriksdepartementet (UD), med hensikt om å gi en kort oversikt over de viktigste utviklingstrekkene i Afrika, som innspill til UDs arbeid med og utvikling av ny, norsk Afrika-strategi.
Re-Engaging with Neighbours in a State of War and Geopolitical Tensions (RE-ENGAGE)
RE-ENGAGEs skal hjelpe EU med å styrke sin utenrikspolitiske verktøykasse, inkludert utvidelses- og naboskapspolitikken. Dette vil styrke unionens geopolitiske innflytelse og gi den bedre verktøy for ...
Working paper on EU’s policies and instruments for PVE
This working paper maps and analyses the toolbox of the EU and a handful of European countries by providing a comprehensive overview of existing measures aimed at preventing violent extremism (PVE) within and outside the EU. It lists the institutional set-up, the decisionmaking processes and coordinating practices at both the EU and state levels. In addition to an analysis of counter-terrorism and PVE strategies at the level of EU institutions, the toolbox of four EU member states (Germany, France, Ireland, Spain) and one former member state (UK) is analysed because of their particular experiences with and competences in the area of prevention of violent extremism.
Working paper on the implementation of the EU’s policies
This working paper builds on earlier research in which we mapped and analysed the toolbox of the European Union (EU) and a handful of European countries by providing a comprehensive overview of existing measures aimed at counter-terrorism (CT) and preventing violent extremism (PVE) within and outside the EU. It listed the institutional setup, the decision-making processes, and co-ordinating practices at both the EU and state levels. In addition to an analysis of CT and PVE strategies at the level of EU institutions, the toolbox of four EU member states (Germany, France, Ireland, Spain) and one former member state (UK) was unpacked because of their particular experiences with and competences in the area of prevention of violent extremism. Overall, our research found that the PVE agenda is quite a recent phenomenon in most member states and principally aims at preventing violent Islamist extremism through community engagement. The UK has been a pioneer in developing a ‘prevent’ pillar as part of its 2003 CT strategy and has since then actively contributed to the development of an EUlevel PVE framework. This EU framework has in turn pushed other member states, such as Ireland and Spain, to develop their own national PVE strategies in recent years. While Germany has also over the past decade made significant strides in preventing involvement in extremism and has brought its national practices to the EU level, France has generally favoured a more securitized than preventive approach. The present working paper takes the research one step further by looking more closely at the implementation of adopted PVE measures and practices in the EU and the abovementioned key states, both domestically as well as vis-à-vis the Western Balkans and the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. As such, we present a more evaluative overview geared towards identifying best practices and lessons learned in this field. The paper not only focuses on how policy is implemented and followed up, but also assesses the EU’s experiences in co-operating with member states and vice versa. In doing so, the research tries to take on board key recent developments, in particular in France and at the EU level, in response to a new series of terrorist attacks that took place in Paris, Nice, and Vienna between the end of October and mid-November 2020. The research builds on a set of in-depth interviews with PVE officials and practitioners within the EU and national administrations.
Policy brief on the implementation of the EU’s policies
Violent extremism is not a new phenomenon and terrorism has a long history in Europe, often linked to separatist movements, anarchism, and far-right and far-left extremism. The trends, means, and patterns of radicalization have evolved rapidly since the Arab uprisings flared exactly a decade ago. Counter-terrorism (CT) and preventing violent extremism (PVE) strategies have developed alongside these trends at the national and supranational level. In the wake of a series of Jihad-inspired terror attacks in Spain, France, Germany, Belgium, the UK, and elsewhere, European Union (EU) member states ramped up their military campaigns against the Islamic State (ISIS, aka Daesh) and al-Qaeda in Syria and Iraq. But since the fall of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS), governments’ interest in fighting terrorism in the Middle East has decreased. Nevertheless, some European countries remain on the front foot in their securitized PVE approach. Although there is no apparent connection between the anti-jihad war waged by the French army in Mali and the radicalization in France, the government is calling for more support from European countries to fight against jihadi movements in the Sahel. But the appetite for costly expeditionary campaigns is decreasing. By and large, the phenomenon of violent extremism is perceived as homegrown. And whereas large differences remain in individual countries’ approaches to tackling the challenges posed by violent extremism, it has nevertheless become increasingly clear that today’s security challenges – whether it is terrorism, organized crime, cyberattacks, disinformation, or other evolving cyber-enabled threats – are shared threats that require a transnational approach. Indeed, Europe as a whole faces new security issues and specific challenges for preventive work that (lone) actors and (returning) foreign terrorist fighters raise, while the internet and social media give extremist and terrorist groups and their sympathisers new opportunities for spreading their propaganda, mobilization, and communication. It is against this changed backdrop that this policy brief asks what lessons the EU can learn from best practices identified at the national level, and in the co0ordination efforts with the supranational institutions.
Working Paper on enabling environments, drivers, and occurrence/nonoccurrence of violent extremism
Why does violent extremism not occur in enabling environments? Based on recent field work in the Sahel and the Maghreb region this is the main question we seek to understand in this working paper. To understand non-occurrence and thereby the foundations of social and individual resilience, we also need to understand the drivers of violent extremism and why they gain traction among some populations while others show much higher degrees of resilience. To achieve this, we will zoom in on cases in Mali, Niger, Tunisia and Morocco, showcasing different trajectories of occurrence and non-occurrence.
Policy brief summarizing lessons learnt on the EU’s measures to prevent violent extremism in the region
How do EU initiatives that are geared to help prevent and counter violent extremism in North Africa and the Sahel match the underlying drivers of radicalisation? This PREVEX Policy Brief offers a reading of EU strategies in the backlight of our findings, which stem from fieldwork that was conducted in cases of both occurrence and non-occurrence of violent extremist escalation across North Africa and the Sahel. As scholarly literature lays emphasis on how phenomena such as violent extremism are highly context-dependent, it is crucial to understand regional and local dynamics of social change and intermediation. This brief therefore provides an overall assessment of EU P/CVE policies and projects in North Africa and the Sahel, focusing on key contextual policy issues: democratic governance, rule of law, education, gender, reintegration. It argues that EU’s emphasis on rule of law is particularly appropriate, while there is room for greater engagement in the fields of education and reintegration – provided that conflict-sensitive lenses are carefully applied. In the fields of democratic governance and gender, instead, a mismatch between general strategies and on-the-ground implementation can be observed. Targeted research in these critical areas of intervention and assistance is highly needed. Overall, our analysis invites to consider radicalisation processes not as social pathology but as ongoing social phenomena that take place in a space where several actors rival for material and ideational resources, and therefore require careful assessment and multi-scalar prioritisation, including at the regional and transnational level.