Suchergebnisse

This brief synthesises the IECEU project's most essential findings on the effectiveness of European Union (EU) missions in four Africa countries: Libya, South Sudan, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and the Central African Republic (CAR). It describes the main elements and impact of the EU missions in these countries, identifies key strategic and operational shortfalls and offers recommendations on how the EU can improve its effectiveness in future conflict prevention and crisis management missions. The EU missions investigated differ in scale, length, objective, budget, priority and context. However, the EU missions presented in this brief share the main characteristic that they have all been deployed under the union's Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP)2 with the explicit intent of improving the overall security situation and addressing conflicts in Africa. This brief will start by providing a short overview of each case, describing the conflict(s), security situation, mission objectives and obstacles. In this way, it compares the overall effectiveness of EU operational conflict prevention across the four African countries and discusses what lessons can be learned from them. The brief does not include all factors needed to answer thisquestion, but highlights the IECEU project's most significant findings in these cases.

Ansettelsen i 2020 av ny sjef for Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM) har igjen skapt debatt om skatteparadiser som har vært et økende internasjonalt tema siden finanskrisen i 2008. Artikkelen analyserer Norges Banks tilnærming til skatteparadiser slik den fremkom gjennom ansettelsesprosessen, og illustrerer tradisjonelle skillelinjer i debatten om skatteparadiser. Artikkelen har derfor relevans ut over å klargjøre Norges Banks tilnærming. Analysen bygger på offentlig tilgjengelige muntlige og skriftlige uttalelser knyttet til ansettelsen, og relevante dokumenter som opplyser bakgrunnen for at skatt ble innlemmet i NBIMs etikkarbeid fra 2017. Vi argumenterer for at sentralbanken posisjonerer seg tydelig på en forsvarslinje som utfordrer en anmodning fra Stortinget om å innlemme selskapers skatteposisjon i etiske retningslinjer. Det begrunnes med fire aspekter ved sentralbankens tilnærming til skatteparadiser: en snevrest mulig definisjon av skatteparadiser som fenomen; en uklar holdning til aggressiv skatteplanlegging; en nedtoning av skatteparadisenes negative konsekvenser; en snever tolkning av eget ansvar. Diskusjonen illustrerer et behov for en avklaring av innholdet i norsk politikk på skatt og åpenhet, herunder skatteparadiser.
Abstract in English:In the Central Bank's Blind SpotThe appointment in 2020 of a new head of the Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM), has actualized a debate on tax havens, a growing concern following the international financial crisis of 2008. The article analyses the Norwegian central bank's approach to tax havens as it unfolded throughout the appointment process and illustrates traditional divisions in tax haven debates. The analysis builds on publicly available oral and written statements following the appointment, and relevant documents that inform the background of how tax and transparency became integrated in NBIM's work on ethics from 2017. The central argument put forward here is that the central bank position represents a traditional defense of tax haven use, in which challenges a request by the Norwegian Parliament to subordinate companies' tax strategies to ethical guidelines. We show that this is justified with four identified aspects of the central bank's tax haven approach: a narrow definition of the tax haven phenomenon; an unclear attitude to aggressive tax planning; a downplay of negative consequences of tax havens; a narrow interpretation of its own responsibilities. The discussions illustrate the need to clarify the content and practical management of the Norwegian policy on tax and transparency, including tax havens.

Nogle kalder hvidvask-skandalen i Danske Bank for verdens største. Men i skyggen af den mere end to år lange kampagne i både Danmark og internationalt står en forhenværende amerikansk statsborger ved navn Bill Browder. Han var indtil 2005 den største udenlandske kapitalfondschef i Rusland. Han var i årevis en stor fan af Ruslands præsident Vladimir Putin, indtil adskillige skattesager, et indrejseforbud og en død skatterådgiver, ændrede historien. Siden har Browder udnævnt sig selv til Putins fjende No. 1. Han har de seneste 10 år med kolossal succes kørt en verdensomspændende mediekampagne under dække af sin døde skatterådgiver, Sergej Magnitskij. Om hvidvask, menneskerettigheder og lejemord. Han har sin egen hær af advokater, sin egen lov i USA og sin egne partnere i den etablerede medieverden. Bogen afslører, hvordan hans historier i bedste fald er fordrejede og til tider helt og aldeles falske. Og hvordan han er blevet en af de centrale figurer i den nye kolde krig mellem Vesten og Rusland. Danske Bank har de seneste år været en central brik i Bill Browders kyniske spil om opmærksomhed, der handler om alt mulig andet end hvidvask

Denne artikel foretager en diskursanalyse af en række centrale tekster fra partierne Nye Borgerlige og Dansk Folkeparti med fokus på disses brug af den populistiske figur hjertelandet: Et narrativ om det altid allerede tabte eller truede harmoniske fællesskab, der skal forsvares imod folkets fjender. Det konkluder-es, at idéen om hjertelandet er stærkt til stede i partiernes respektive diskurser, og at det i Nye Borgerliges diskurs i lige høj grad trues af de fremmede og eliten, mens det i Dansk Folkepartis diskurs mest trues af de fremmede, og antagonismen til eliten er nedtonet. ; This paper analyzes a series of central texts from the Danish parties The New Right and the Danish People's Party with emphasis on their use of the populist figure of the heartland: A narrative about the always already lost or threatened harmonic community that needs to be protected against enemies of the people. The paper concludes that the idea of the heartland is strongly present in the discourses of both parties, and that in The New Right's discourse the heartland is equally threated by foreigners and the elite, while in the discourse of the Danish People's Party it is mostly threatened by immigrants whereas the antagonism to the elite is downplayed.

Nesten to tiår etter den USA-ledete intervensjonen i Afghanistan, på tross av massiv innsats for å bygge en afghansk stat, så kollapset den afghanske regjeringsstrukturen i august 2021, og Taliban gjeninntok hovedstaden Kabul. Hvorfor mislyktes det internasjonale statsbyggingsprosjektet? Kunne ekstern statsbygging ha lykkes om tilnærmingen var en annen? Denne artikkelen tar utgangspunkt i nyere litteratur (David Lake, Melissa Lee, Roland Paris, Timothy Sisk) og gjør en analyse av hvordan dilemmaer i ekstern statsbygging manifesterte seg i Afghanistan henholdsvis på det politiske, militære og økonomiske området. Historisk har stabilitet i Afghanistan hvilt på en balanse mellom en svak sentralmakt og et betydelig rom for tradisjonelle samfunnsstrukturer. USA, som ekstern statsbygger, var opptatt av lojalitet fra en sterk sentralmakt, og underminerte derfor en maktfordeling som kunne gitt større grad av legitimitet. Resultatet ble en stat som var helt avhengig av ekstern støtte, og idet USA inngikk en avtale direkte med den væpnede opposisjonen, Taliban, så går den afghanske staten i oppløsning.
Abstract in EnglishDoomed to Fail? The US and the Afghan State-building Project, 2001–2021Nearly two decades after the US-led intervention in Afghanistan, following a massive effort to build an Afghan state, the country's government structure collapsed in August 2021, and the Taliban took control of the capitol Kabul. Why did international state-building fail? Could external state-building have been successful if the approach had been a different one? This article takes recent contributions to the literature on the dilemmas of external state-building as its point of departure (David Lake, Melissa Lee, Roland Paris, Timothy Sisk), and presents an analysis if how these dilemmas came to the fore in the political, military, and economic domains. Historically, Afghan stability have rested on a balance between a weak central authority, with considerable influence resting with traditional societal actors. The US, as an external state-builder, was concerned with loyalty from a strong central power, and thereby undermined the division of power that could otherwise have gained a higher degree of legitimacy. The result is a state which was fully dependent on external support, and as the US entered a treaty with the armed opposition, the Taliban, the Afghan state apparatus collapses.

Aktivisme bruges hyppigt blandt forskere og praktikere som en "overordnet etikette på dansk udenrigspolitik" (Pedersen & Ringsmose, 2017, s. 339). Der er ikke konsensus om, hvornår Danmark blev aktivistisk, eller om etiketten passer lige godt på alle områder af udenrigspolitikken. Ikke desto mindre er der bred enighed om, at Danmarks militære engagement i de seneste årtier, herunder særligt deltagelsen i Irak- og Afghanistan-krigene, udgør et højdepunkt i dansk aktivisme. Vores analyse diskuterer og nuancerer denne karakteristik ved at formulere en alternativ forståelse af politisk aktivisme inspireret af Hannah Arendts politiske teori. Med vores konceptualisering gentænker vi centrale begreber i litteraturen – initiativ, risiko og deltagelse – og sondrer mellem militært engagement og egentlig politisk aktivisme. Ud fra denne begrebslige ramme genbesøger vi Danmarks krigsdeltagelse i 2000'erne. Vi argumenterer for, at dansk udenrigspolitik, selv hvad angår krigsdeltagelsen, har været reaktiv, risikoavers og med begrænset folkelig forankring og derfor mindre aktivistisk, end litteraturen hidtil har antaget. Ved at fjerne den aktivistiske etikette forsøger vi at rejse nye spørgsmål om, hvad udenrigspolitisk aktivisme fremadrettet kan og bør være.
Abstract in English:Military Activism Without Political Action? Towards a New Conception of Activism in Danish Foreign and Security Policy Inspired by Hannah ArendtActivism is frequently used by researchers and practitioners alike as "a general label on Danish foreign policy" (Pedersen & Ringsmose, 2017, p. 339, authors' translation). There is no consensus as to when Denmark became activist or if the label is equally fitting to all foreign policy issue areas. However, there is broad agreement that the military engagements in recent decades, particularly the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, constitute a high point in Danish activism. Our analysis challenges and nuances this characterization by exploring an alternative understanding of political activism inspired by Hannah Arendt's political theory. Our alternative concept of activism revisits the central elements of activism; initiative, risk and participation, and distinguishes between military engagement and political activism. Drawing on this conceptual framework, we revisit Denmark's war engagements focusing on Iraq and Afghanistan in the 2000s. We argue that from a political perspective even Denmark's war engagements have been reactive, risk averse, and with limited popular anchorage, and are therefore, less activist than hitherto argued. By tearing off the activist label we aim to revitalize the discussion about what Danish Foreign and Security policy can and should be at a time when such questions have rarely had more relevance.

Svalbard og vernesonen rundt øygruppen står sentralt i det bilaterale forholdet mellom Norge og Russland, både økonomisk og sikkerhetspolitisk. Siden 1977 har en konflikt mellom landene omhandlet Norges rett til myndighetsutøvelse i disse farvannene. Hva er russiske persepsjoner av norsk politikk i vernesonen? Hvordan har persepsjoner og reaksjoner utviklet seg siden årtusenskiftet? Hvilke endringer – om noen – ser vi i forbindelse med forverringen i det bilaterale forholdet etter 2014? Og hva betyr dette for faren for en eventuell konflikt i dette området? Oppsummert finner vi at 2014 ikke fremstår som noe vannskille med hensyn til forholdet mellom Norge og Russland i vernesonen. Den store endringen kom da de russiske føderale myndighetene fra og med «Elektron»-saken i 2005 gikk over fra protest til dialog. Siden har Russland lagt seg på en relativt forsonlig linje. Unntaket er en kort periode etter arrestasjonen av den russiske tråleren «Sapfir-2» i etterkant av delelinjeavtalen mellom Norge og Russland fra 2010, da store deler av rederinæringen og andre i det russiske nord var i harnisk og krevde handling angående vernesonen. Etter 2011 har hendelser i vernesonen blitt håndtert uten ytterligere eskalering. Dette er derimot ikke en naturtilstand, men en situasjon underbygd av en rekke spesifikke faktorer som kan komme til å endre seg.
Abstract in EnglishSafeguarding Norwegian Rights around Svalbard: Russian Perceptions and ReactionsSvalbard and the maritime zone around the Arctic Archipelago are central to the bilateral relationship between Norway and Russia, both in terms of economic and security concerns. Since 1977, a dispute between the countries has concerned Norway's right to assert sovereignty in these waters. What are Russian perceptions of Norwegian sovereignty enforcement in the Fisheries Protection Zone (FPZ)? How have perceptions and reactions evolved since the turn of the millennium? What changes – if any – do we see in connection with the deterioration in the bilateral relationship after 2014? And what does this mean for the danger of a possible conflict in this area? In summary, we find that 2014 does not appear to be a watershed with respect to the relationship between Norway and Russia in the FPZ around Svalbard. The change came when Russian central authorities after the Elektron-case in 2005 switched from protest to dialogue. Since then, a relatively conciliatory line has been emphasized regarding this dispute. The exception is a short period after the arrest of the Russian trawler Sapfir-2 following the 2010 Norway-Russia Delimitation Agreement, when large parts of the fishing industry and other regional actors in the Russian north were in harness and demanded action. After 2011, incidents in the FPZ have been handled without further escalation, although this is by no means a state of nature, but a situation underpinned by a number of specific factors that could be subject to change.

A current ambition in welfare states across Europe and in the US is for political decision-making to be based on rigorous research (Bason 2010; Cartwright et al 2009; Mulgan 2009; Nilsson et al. 2008). Promoted as 'evidence-based policy-making', 'good analysis, or 'better governance' (Nilsson et.al. 2008) the aspiration finds its roots in the governance paradigm generally referred to as 'new public management' (Hartley 2005) and the central concern for developing a cost-effective and agile public sector (Rod 2010). . Sound as this ambition may seem, it has nevertheless been problematized from within the civil services and from the research community (e.g. Boden & Epstein 2006; Cartwright et al. 2009; Elliott & Popay 2000; House of Commons 2006; Nilsson et al. 2008; Whitty 2006; Rod 2010, Vohnsen 2011). Some warn that the term 'evidence-based' is used too lightly, and often in cases where 'evidence' has not fed into the policy processes but rather has been invoked after the fact to support already agreed upon policy (House of Commons 2006; Nilsson et al. 2008); others warn that politics and science are – if not incompatible – then at odds with one another (e.g. Boden & Epstein 2006; Whitty 2006). The article pin-points the friction points between science and policy-making and discuss why it is that evidence rarely feeds into policy-making and how the evidence-based paradigm effectively challenges the traditional craftsmanship of the civil service.

Mesteparten av norske havområder ligger nord for polarsirkelen og er åsted for noen av verdens rikeste fiskerier. De største fiskebestandene er delt med andre land, og internasjonalt samarbeid om ressursforvaltningen er derfor en viktig dimensjon ved nordområdepolitikken. Slikt samarbeid er basert på globale normer om hvordan levende marine ressurser skal forvaltes og deles og foregår på en rekke arenaer både bilateralt og regionalt. Samtidig er det også utfordringer knyttet til blant annet fordeling av ressurser i Norskehavet og klimaendringer som medfører at fiskebestandenes utbredelse er omskiftelig. Et føre-var tiltak i forhold til det siste er etableringen av en avtale om å forhindre uregulert fiske i Polhavet.
Abstract in English:Oceans, Fish and Resource Management in the Northern AreasMost of Norway's oceans are situated to the north of the Arctic Circle and some of the world's richest fishing grounds are there. The largest fish stocks are shared with other countries, and international cooperation on the management of the resources is therefore an important aspect of Norway's northern policy. Such cooperation is based on the international norms for how living marine resources are to be managed and shared, and it takes place in a number of bilateral and regional fora. There are challenges related to the allocation of pelagic resources in the Norwegian Sea and climate change driving change in the geographical distribution of fish stocks in the ocean. A recent precautionary measure in relation to climate change and its effects on marine ecosystems is the establishment of an international agreement to prevent unregulated fishing in international waters in the central Arctic Ocean.

The regional powerhouse, South Africa, has since the introduction of the nonracial democratic dispensation in 1994, played a central and important role in the formation of both the regional and continental security architecture. With the establishment of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) in 1992, one of the central areas of collaboration for the community was envisioned to be security, understood within a broadened human security framework. Security was therefore from the outset one of the cornerstones of integration in the SADC. It was believed that the formation of a security community would help dismantle the enmities that had plagued regional relations during the apartheid era. For some parties, institutionalisation of relations pointed to a means of stabilising and disseminating a particular order. Such institutions depict the power relations prevailing at the time of their establishment, which, however, can change over time (Cox 1981:136). The integration ambition surrounding security correlated with the ambitions of South Africa, the new democratic government in the regional powerhouse. South Africa and its overall foreign policy ambitions desired the pursuit of peace, democracy and stability for economic growth and development in the region and within South Africa itself. Since South Africa's acceptance into the SADC in 1994, the organisation has attempted to set up the required institutional framework to enable co-operation on security, both in terms of narrow military co-operation and regarding designated 2 softer security issues, such as migration and cross-border crime. The military cooperation moved forward in the early years after 1994 with the 1996 decision of creating an Organ for Politics, Defence and Security Co-operation (OPDSC)1 and later the signing of the Mutual Defence Pact (MDP) in 2003, and eventually the creation of the Strategic Indicative Plan for the Organ (SIPO) in 2004, which operationalised the OPDSC (SADC 2004). However, the actual military cooperation, e.g. military exercises, came close to a standstill. Several developments obstructed military co-operation of which the evolving crisis in Zimbabwe and the subsequent withdrawal of donor support to, for instance, the Regional Peacekeeping Training Centre (RPTC) in Harare are but two examples. The RPTC constituted the backbone of the co-operation, but political differences between member states illustrated during the Zimbabwean crisis and following the mandate of the interventions in especially the DR Congo and partly Lesotho in 1998 all contributed to regional tensions.2 Despite the crisis, SADC members, and in particular South Africa, declared that the organisation would be able to form a regional stand-by brigade for the use of the African Union (AU) as part of its wider security architecture. On 17 August 2007, the SADC declared its stand-by-force operational at a large parade in Lusaka, Zambia and at the same occasion signed a memorandum of understanding on the SADCBRIG (SADC 2007). According to the timeline provided by the AU, the brigade should be fully operational by June 2010. Former South African deputy foreign minister Aziz Pahad stated after the launch that this was an important step, but that now there was much to be done securing joint levels and types of training, interoperability, etc. (Pahad 2007). The question that continues to linger is to what extent this brigade is operational and for what purpose. Is this new regional military formation in its present form just a paper tiger, or is it "real progress" and an example of "successful" regional cooperation and integration? This article scrutinises the security co-operation and integration in SADC and asks whether an apparent lack of common values between SADC member states are blocking the security integration process, the creation of a security community, and thereby the establishment of an effective stand-by brigade, the so-called SADCBRIG. The article furthermore attempts to scrutinise the role played by South Africa in establishing the SADCBRIG.