Suchergebnisse
Filter
Avskrekke hvem? Betydningen av strategisk kultur for cybersikkerhet
In: Internasjonal politikk, Band 77, Heft 3, S. 278-287
ISSN: 1891-1757
Det er en pågående debatt i akademia om hvorvidt og hvordan man kan benytte avskrekkingsteori i cyberdomenet. Avskrekking var originalt en teori utviklet for å unngå konvensjonell eller nukleær krig. I diskusjonen om cybersikkerhet har det blitt påpekt en rekke tekniske problemer med å overføre en teori fra den fysiske verden til cyberdomenet. Vi anerkjenner disse tekniske utfordringene ved avskrekking i cyberdomenet, men i denne artikkelen ønsker vi å belyse et annet aspekt ved avskrekking, nemlig samspillet mellom sosiale og tekniske faktorer ved avskrekking i cyberdomenet. I denne artikkelen vil vi diskutere hvordan avskrekking som strategi i cyberdomenet vil påvirkes av den spesifikke strategiske kulturen i et land. For å belyse argumentet vil vi benytte Kina som en casestudie. Motsetninger mellom kinesisk og «vestlig» strategisk kultur resulterer i konkrete forskjeller i hvordan Kina og vestlige land agerer i cyberdomenet. Ved å benytte fire komponenter av avskrekkingsteori (nektelse, gjengjeldelse, gjensidig avhengighet og normer) ønsker vi å vise hvordan en dyptgående innsikt i en stats sikkerhetspolitikk og strategiske kultur kan anvendes til å skreddersy en mer effektiv avskrekkingsstrategi og styrke evnen til å forhindre uønsket aktivitet.
Abstract in English
There is an ongoing debate in academia about if and how deterrence theory may be used in cyberspace. Deterrence was originally a theory developed for avoiding conventional and nuclear war. In the current discussion on cyber security, there has been pointed out a range of technical problems of transferring a theory about the physical world to cyberspace. We recognize these challenges of deterrence in cyberspace, but in this article we want to shed light on a different aspect of deterrence. That is the interplay between social and technical factors of deterrence in cyberspace. In this article we will discuss how deterrence as a strategy in cyberspace is influenced by the specific strategic culture of a country. We will use China as a case study to showcase our argument. Contrasts between Chinese and "Western" strategic culture results in concrete differences in how Chinese and Western countries act in cyberspace. By utilizing four components of deterrence theory (denial, punishment, entanglement and norms), we will show how an in-depth knowledge of a state's security policy and strategic culture may be used to tailor a more effective deterrence and enforce the capacity of hindering unwanted activity.
Ruslands strategi i Arktis ; Russia's Strategy in the Arctic
In: Staun , J M 2015 ' Ruslands strategi i Arktis ' Forsvarsakademiets Forlag .
Russia's strategy in the Arctic is dominated by two overriding discourses – and foreign policy directions – which at first glance may look like opposites. On the one hand, an IR realism/geopolitical discourse that often has a clear patriotic character, dealing with "capturing", "winning" or "conquering" the Arctic and putting power, including military power, behind the national interests in the area – which is why we, in recent years, have seen an increasing military build-up, also in the Russian Arctic. Opposed to this is an IR liberalism, international law-inspired and modernization-focused discourse, which is characterized by words such as "negotiation", "cooperation" and "joint ventures" and which has as an axiom that the companies and countries operating in the Arctic all benefit the most if they collaborate in peace and friendliness. So far, the IR liberalism discourse has set the trend of the Russian policy carried out in relation to the Arctic. Thus, it has primarily been the Russian Foreign Ministry and, above all, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov that have drawn the overall lines of the Arctic policy, well aided by the Transport Ministry and the Energy Ministry. On the other side are the Russian national Security Council led by Nikolai Patrushev and the Russian Defence Ministry headed by Sergey Shoygu, which both have embedded their visions of Russia and the Arctic in the IR realism/geopolitical discourse. Russia's president, Vladimir Putin, does the same. Nevertheless, he has primarily chosen to let the Foreign Ministry set the line for the Arctic policy carried out, presumably out of a pragmatic acknowledgement of the means that have, so far, served the Russian interests best. Moreover, it is worth noting that both wings, even though they can disagree about the means, in fact are more or less in agreement about the goal of Russia's Arctic policy: namely, to utilize the expected wealth of oil and natural gas resources in the underground to ensure the continuation of the restoration of Russia's position as a Great Power when the capacity of the energy fields in Siberia slowly diminishes – which the Russian Energy Ministry expects to happen sometime between 2015 and 2030. In addition to that, Russia sees – as the polar ice slowly melts – great potential for opening an ice-free northern sea route between Europe and Asia across the Russian Arctic, with the hope that the international shipping industry can see the common sense of saving up to nearly 4,000 nautical miles on a voyage from Ulsan, Korea, to Rotterdam, Holland, so Russia can earn money by servicing the ships and issuing permissions for passage through what Russia regards as Russian territorial water. The question is whether Russia will be able to realize its ambitious goals. First, the Russian state energy companies Gazprom and Rosneft lack the technology, know-how and experience to extract oil and gas under the exceedingly difficult environment in the Arctic, where the most significant deposits are believed to be in very deep water in areas that are very difficult to access due to bad weather conditions. The Western sanctions mean that the Russian energy companies cannot, as planned, obtain this technology and know-how via the already entered-into partnerships with Western energy companies. The sanctions limit loan opportunities in Western banks, which hit the profitability of the most cost-heavy projects in the Arctic. However, what hits hardest are the low oil prices – at present 50 dollars per barrel (Brent). According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), the fields in the Arctic are not profitable as long as the oil price is under 120 dollars per barrel. Whether Russia chooses to suspend the projects until the energy prices rise again – and until it has again entered into partnerships that can deliver the desired technology and know-how – or whether the Russian state will continuously pump money into the projects is uncertain. The hard-pressed Russian economy, with the prospects of recession, increasing inflation, increasing flight of capital, rising interest rates and a continuously low oil price, provides a market economic incentive for suspending the projects until further notice. Whether the Kremlin will think in a market economic way or a long-term strategic way is uncertain – but, historically, there has been a penchant for the latter. One of the Kremlin's hopes is that Chinese-Russian cooperation can take over where the Western-Russian cooperation has shut down. Russia has long wanted to diversify its energy markets to reduce its dependence on sales to Europe. At the same time, those in the Kremlin have had a deeply-rooted fear of ending up as a "resource appendix" to the onrushing Chinese economy, which so far has been a strong contributing reason for keeping the Russian-Chinese overtures in check. The question now is whether the Western sanctions can be the catalyst that can make Russia overcome this fear and thus, in the long term, support the efforts to enter into a real, strategic partnership with China. ; Russia's strategy in the Arctic is dominated by two overriding discourses – and foreign policy directions – which at first glance may look like opposites. On the one hand, Russia have an IR realism/geopolitical discourse that often has a clear patriotic character, dealing with "exploring", "winning" or "conquering" the Arctic and putting power, including military power, behind the national interests in the area – which is why we, in recent years, have seen an increasing military build-up, also in the Russian Arctic. Opposed to this is an IR liberalism, international law-inspired and modernization- focused discourse, which is characterized by words such as "negotiation", "cooperation" and "joint ventures" and which has as an axiom that the companies and countries operating in the Arctic all benefit the most if they cooperate peacefully.
BASE
Revolusjonens forløpere og konsekvenser
In: Internasjonal politikk, Band 79, Heft 4, S. 377-387
ISSN: 1891-1757
Det skjer en dreining i utviklingspolitikken som kommer til uttrykk i form av mindre oppmerksomhet på konkrete endringer i lav- og mellominntektsland, og økte ambisjoner om politiske og institusjonelle løsninger på «globalt» nivå. I praksis innebærer dette et brudd med bistandens originale formål og etos, og gjør sannsynligvis bistanden mindre nyttig for bistandens målgrupper. Utviklingen kan forklares med intern dynamikk i utviklingspolitikken og insentiver blant viktige aktører, og er muliggjort delvis fordi aktører som tidligere bidro til å bremse slike avvik fra bistandens originale formål, selv vender oppmerksomhet mot det «globale». Utvikling får lite politisk oppmerksomhet, så lite at vi ikke egentlig vet om dette er en ønsket utvikling fra bevilgende myndigheter (parlamentet) eller ikke. Artikkelforfatteren tar til orde for at det tas grep som sikrer at eventuelt fortsatt dreining av utviklingspolitikken mot globale fellesgoder blir gjenstand for offentlig debatt og politisk bevisste valg.
Abstract in EnglishThe Precursors and Consequences of the RevolutionA trend is seen in Western development policy, in which the attention of key actors drifts away from tangible improvements in low- and medium income countries, towards policy and institutional changes in the global domain, including global public goods. In practice, this is a drift away from the original purpose and ethos of development aid, likely to make aid less useful for its target groups. This article explains the trend by internal dynamics in the development industry, incentives among key actors to move towards 'the global', and that actors who used to protest against a 'mission drift' in aid have themselves turned their attention towards 'the global'. The ongoing changes receive little attention, to the extent that we do not really know if they are wanted by parliaments or not. The author suggests mechanisms to ensure that a possible further drift of resources, from development aid's original purpose towards global common goods, can only happen as a result of explicit political consideration.
Kina, investeringer og sikkerhetspolitikk: Politikk og perspektiver i Norden – Island
In: Internasjonal politikk, Band 78, Heft 1, S. 68-78
ISSN: 1891-1757
Forholdet mellom Kina og Island er blitt stadig viktigere på 2000-tallet, og det er inngått betydningsfulle avtaler knyttet til frihandel og valutautveksling, i tillegg til arktisk og geotermisk samarbeid. Island ble i 2005 det første vesteuropeiske landet som anerkjente Kina som en utviklet markedsøkonomi, og var i 2013 det første europeiske landet som undertegnet en frihandelsavtale med Kina. Samtidig som bilateral handel og strømmen av kinesiske turister til Island har økt kraftig, forblir kapitalstrømmen meget liten. Kinesiske investeringer på Island forblir minimal, og det er p.t. bare én aktiv utenlandsk direkteinvestering fra Kina på Island. Dette står i sterk kontrast til den betydelige offentlige debatten om kinesisk påvirkningskraft knyttet til store investeringer på Island, med hovedfokus på potensielle sikkerhetstrusler i forbindelse med Arktis' geostrategiske betydning. Den formodentlig største potensielle investeringen fra Kina kom i 2011, da Zhongkun Group kom med et bud om å investere i land for å utvikle et turistkompleks nordøst på Island, noe som førte diskusjonen inn på kontroversielle temaer som eiendomsrett og til en viss grad nasjonal sikkerhet. Selv om artikkelen ikke finner tegn til sikkerhetstrusler som en følge av utenlandske direkteinvesteringer på Island, kan det likevel være på sin plass med en gjennomgang av lovverket knyttet til investeringer på Island fra land utenfor EØS, for å øke forutsigbarheten. En slik analyse kunne utføres i lys av relevante prosesser i andre nordiske land, inkludert for å få på plass standardisert investeringsscreening.
Abstract in English:China, Investments, and National Security: Nordic Policies and Perspectives – IcelandRelations between Iceland and China have increased significantly during the 21st century, with landmark agreements reached regarding free trade and currency swap, as well as Arctic and geothermal cooperation. Iceland became the first western European country to acknowledge China as a developed market economy in 2005 and was the first European country to sign an FTA with China in 2013. While bilateral trade and the inflow of Chinese tourists to Iceland have seen steep growth figures, the flow of capital remains very low. Chinese investments in Iceland remain minimal, with only one currently active FDI from China in Iceland. This contradicts the widely discussed influence of large-scale Chinese investments in Iceland, largely focused on potential security aspects regarding the geostrategic importance of the Arctic region. Arguably, the highest profiled proposed investment case from China came in 2011 with a bid from Zhongkun Group to invest in land for the development of a tourism resort in northeast Iceland, stirring up contentious issues on ownership of land and to some extent national security. While the article does not find detectable security threats from FDI in Iceland, it might however be timely to review the legal process of investments from outside of the EEA into Iceland to increase predictability. Such an analysis could be carried out with regards to compatible cases in the other Nordic countries, including standardized investment screening processes in place.