Number of results to display per page
Search Results
162. Climate Change and Its Impact on Security Provision - The Role of Good Security Sector Governance and Reform
- Author:
- Hans Born
- Publication Date:
- 09-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Geneva Centre for Security Sector Governance (DCAF)
- Abstract:
- While it is clear that SSG/R must play a role in responding to climate change, a greater understanding of how to translate this into practice is required. This policy brief seeks to identify concrete entry points for SSG/R in addressing climate-related security risks, and outlines means for influencing policy in this direction.
- Topic:
- Security, Climate Change, Environment, Governance, and Reform
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
163. UN-IFI Cooperation during Peacekeeping Drawdowns: Opportunities for Mutual Support
- Author:
- Paige Arthur
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center on International Cooperation
- Abstract:
- As increasing political and budgetary pressures have come to bear on UN peace operations in recent years, more attention has been paid to ensuring that drawdowns are undertaken in a way that sustains the gains of a mission’s presence. This policy briefing highlights a number of missed opportunities and argues for greater collaboration between the UN, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) ahead of a mission’s departure to build greater synergies between the country’s political and economic pathways. The brief begins by summarizing the economic challenges related to UN transitions, including diving deeper into the debate on whether or not these transitions create a “financial cliff”—in particular, in relation to official development assistance and foreign direct investment. We then describe three key opportunities for the UN, the Bank, and the IMF to leverage their respective mandates and comparative advantages during mission drawdowns, seizing the moment around transitions to support a country’s pathway to peace in ways that also lessen its economic burdens and supports key reforms. These opportunities include: Generating better alignment and planning between the three institutions in transition moments, with a focus on maintaining and strengthening peacebuilding gains while also seeking to unlock broader economic opportunities; Collaborating across areas of expertise to assess budgetary and resourcing gaps that may prove crippling to a country’s emergence from fragility, if not addressed; Activating levers for additional peacebuilding financing and to support reform, from the UN’s PBC and multi-partner trust funds, to IMF support to improve access to financial markets, to the sensitive use of the World Bank’s new FCV envelopes in IDA19 . The brief is based on desk research as well as interviews with a small number UN, World Bank, and IMF representatives involved in the transition process in Timor-Leste, Côte d’Ivoire, and Liberia, as well as the expected transition in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
- Topic:
- Politics, United Nations, Reform, Multilateralism, Peace, and IMF
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
164. Despite Political Tension, Americans and Russians See Cooperation as Essential
- Author:
- Dina Smeltz, Brendan Helm, Denis Volkov, and Stepan Goncharov
- Publication Date:
- 03-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Chicago Council on Global Affairs
- Abstract:
- A joint Chicago Council on Global Affairs and the Levada Analytical Center survey shows few Russians or Americans expect great changes to US-Russia ties now or in the next 10 years, although both publics see the merits of collaboration. According to a January–February 2021 joint survey by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and the Levada Analytical Center in Moscow, neither Russians nor Americans expect the new US administration to prompt a reset in bilateral relations. While many Russians have yet to form an opinion of US President Joseph Biden, few in either country expect great changes to US-Russia ties now or even in the next 10 years. Despite this anticipated stasis, both publics acknowledge the importance of bilateral cooperation on a number of long-term foreign policy issues.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Bilateral Relations, Public Opinion, and Survey
- Political Geography:
- Russia, North America, Global Focus, and United States of America
165. The Impact of COVID-19 on CSDP: Forging Opportunity out of Crisis?
- Author:
- Tobias Pietz
- Publication Date:
- 09-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- European Union Institute for Security Studies
- Abstract:
- When the Covid-19 pandemic began to sweep through the world in the early months of 2020, no country or international organisation had contingency plans in place to deal with a crisis that could occur anywhere and affect everybody simultaneously. In the case of the missions and operations deployed under the framework of the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP), Covid-19 had a severe impact, including on Brussels-based personnel and structures, early on. In hindsight, it is easy to criticise the first three months of crisis management at the CSDP structures in Brussels as well as what operations and missions did in the field. However, the unique and novel challenge of this pandemic must never be lost sight of in any assessment of CSDP performance. The pandemic and its effect on the CSDP revealed some crucial challenges faced by EU missions and their operational and planning structures. This Brief tries to shed light on the impact that Covid-19 has had on the CSDP and points to some lessons which can be drawn from the experiences of dealing with the pandemic crisis so far.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, COVID-19, and Health Crisis
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
166. Digital Technologies and Civil Conflicts: Insights for peacemakers
- Author:
- Camino Kavanagh
- Publication Date:
- 02-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- European Union Institute for Security Studies
- Abstract:
- Most attention relating to digital technologies and conflict has focused on cyber or information operations between states.1 Yet, it is civil conflicts that have increased in number and become more protracted over the past decade due to a number of factors, including their increasingly internationalised character.2 Moreover, it is in these contexts that societies are more vulnerable and likely to be more affected by the misuse of digital technologies; and it is in these contexts that states show less restraint in their behaviour and can cause more harm to civilians. Mediating or facilitating a solution to civil conflicts, already an enormously difficult task, is compounded by the ways in which numerous actors use digital technologies to disrupt or delay conflict resolution efforts. For mediators and others engaged in peacemaking efforts, understanding these challenges is critical to designing already charged engagement strategies. This Conflict Series Brief attempts to shed light on some of the risks associated with the use of digital technologies that can negatively impact mediation or negotiation efforts in civil conflicts, and examines how peacemakers might address them. Hence, rather than elaborating on the positive uses these technologies offer to mediators, which are already addressed by an emerging literature, we focus on clarifying the additional challenges conflict parties’ use of digital technologies impose on peacemakers. Specifically, this Brief: highlights how digital technologies can undermine peacemaking efforts; summarises the international law, norms and other such measures applicable to the behaviours of the conflict parties in their uses of digital technologies; and suggests a broader approach to stakeholder analysis. On this basis, we illustrate and visualise an analytical framework (see page 4) suggesting how these three main aspects might be flexibly addressed depending upon the specific context. The final section offers some concluding remarks and recommendations.
- Topic:
- Science and Technology, Conflict, Peace, and Digital Policy
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
167. Securing the Heavens: How can space support the EU's Strategic Compass?
- Author:
- Daniel Fiott
- Publication Date:
- 04-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- European Union Institute for Security Studies
- Abstract:
- It may be customary to begin an analysis on space by referencing famous sci-fi productions such as Star Trek. Yet terms such as ‘final frontier’ or ‘to boldly go where no man has gone before’ are outdated. Today, space is used for countless civil and military applications and it is an increasingly contested and congested political and technological arena. While it is true that space is not yet home to photon torpedoes or deflector shields, reality is starting to catch up with the sci-fi world. Consider that the United States took the decision in December 2019 to create a ‘Space Force’ and in September 2020 France created an ‘Air and Space Force’, which followed on from the creation of a Space Command in 2019. Germany too took the decision in September 2020 to create an ‘Air and Space Operations Centre’. A month later, NATO created its first-ever Space Centre in Germany and in 2021 it was decided that France would host the new NATO Centre for Excellence in military space. Additionally, other EU countries such as Italy have established space-defence capacities and on 8 March 2021 France started its first-ever military space exercise, Aster X 2021.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, International Cooperation, Space, and Strategic Interests
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
168. Bridging the Silos: Integrating Strategies across Armed Conflict, Violent Crime, and Violent Extremism to Advance the UN’s Prevention Agenda
- Author:
- Céline Monnier and Daniel Mack
- Publication Date:
- 07-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center on International Cooperation
- Abstract:
- The consequences of violence worldwide are dire. More than half a million people die from violent deaths each year. In 2019, violence cost the global economy $14.5 trillion USD, or $1,909 USD per person. Countries with armed conflicts account for 80 percent of humanitarian spending. Beyond these cold numbers, the human toll of violence results in the suffering of families, trauma-affected communities, and increased fear and hopelessness. Different types of violence—such as crime, violent extremism, and armed conflict—are often interlinked and share risk and resilience factors. Although currently siloed, the UN system has the capacities and knowledge to develop approaches to prevention that cut across interlinked forms of violence. This policy paper makes the argument that the UN can and should adopt a more integrated violence prevention strategy across these three forms of violence. It draws from desk review of UN and academic documents, interviews with UN staff working on different types of violence prevention across the UN system, and a workshop among them. The paper discusses why there is a need for more integrated prevention approaches across different types of violence, what benefits that would bring, and what challenges need to be overcome first. It concludes by making four recommendations: governments should use the SDG 16.1 framework to bring actors together at national level; member states should ask the UN to develop evidence-based guidelines on prevention for countries to implement themselves; the UN should initiate a strategic dialogue at headquarters between fields to better identify commonalities in approaches; and country teams should develop an integrated strategy with specialized sub-strategies.
- Topic:
- United Nations, International Security, Peace, and Inclusion
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
169. Essential Workers
- Author:
- Ian Goldin
- Publication Date:
- 09-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Center on International Cooperation
- Abstract:
- The COVID-19 pandemic has revealed the extent to which we rely on essential workers. Around the world, health workers have been greeted by clapping, but this has not translated into improvements in their working conditions or pay. On the contrary, as COVID-19 cases and deaths have mounted, so too have the pressures and fatalities among health and other essential workers. A new deal for essential workers is not only the right thing to do on ethical and other grounds. It is in everyone’s self-interest. Without a new deal for essential workers, societies will not be able to respond to the intensifying cycle of crises that arise from an increasingly complex, interconnected, and unstable world. Whether it is a natural disaster, large-scale terrorism, geopolitical hostilities, or another pandemic, it is only a matter of time before society must again face down a crisis of unprecedented scale. To build resilience, we need a well-trained, deeply committed, and full complement of essential workers who will rise to the challenge. A new deal for these workers should be seen as a central tenet of creating more resilient economies, and an investment to reduce risk and future proof our societies. In order to close the widening divide between the rhetoric and reality, author Ian Goldin argues in this policy brief paper that a new deal is required for essential workers and begins by defining essential workers and laying out the key facts around the prevailing socioeconomic background for such workers. It then draws on the experience of mitigating and compensating for risks in other socially necessary but hazardous occupations, such as the military, and uses this to define the contours of what a new deal for essential workers should look like.
- Topic:
- Labor Issues, Employment, Peace, Justice, COVID-19, and Inclusion
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
170. Solidarity during Covid-19 at national, regional and global levels: An enabler for improved global pandemic security and governance
- Author:
- Mika Aaltola, Johanna Ketola, Karoliina Vaakanainen, and Aada Peltonen
- Publication Date:
- 05-2021
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Finnish Institute of International Affairs
- Abstract:
- Solidarity has become a global and regional buzzword in the fght against Covid-19. As a result of the unequal and shifting disease burden and resource scarcity among countries, solidarity has manifested itself in various forms depending on the national and regional contexts and disease situations. Politicians worldwide have called for solidarity, which has taken many shapes and forms. At the nation- al and sub-national level, Covid-19 has prompted calls for communal solidarity. Solidarity, at the EU level, has often been used as a synonym for intra-EU coordination and assistance between member states as well as safe- guarding the welfare of EU citizens. In the global arena, UN and WHO leadership has been pushing for global sol- idarity to highlight the global nature and scope of the crisis, simultaneously alluding to the uneven distribu- tion of vaccines and the embedded systemic injustices in global health governance. Tis mosaic of solidarities difers from the normative ideal. In this Briefng Paper, we explore the diferent types of pandemic solidarities to understand the political dis- course during the frst year of the Covid-19 pandemic. We analyze the solidarity rhetoric of the high political leadership as well as key solidarity initiatives at three diferent governance levels: global (UN), regional (EU), and national (case Finland) to see how solidarity has been defned, in which context, and to what ends. Compared to other types of emergencies, pandemics are in a league of their own. One key characteristic of a pandemic emergency is the anxiety connected to the processes of contagion, infection, and spread. As the term ‘pandemic’ signifes, the frst line of defence at the local level has failed, as happened in the initial stage of Covid-19. Whereas natural catastrophes are usually lo- cally contained without additional concerns stemming from the fear of spread, pandemics are, to a degree, an- ti-humanitarian by their very nature. Tey usually lead to a knee-jerk reaction to step back and bufer oneself to prevent the harm from spreading.1 From this per- spective, pandemic solidarity is far more limited and qualitatively diferent. Instead of compassion for distant. others, a nearest-and-dearest approach can ensue. Tis Briefng Paper argues that lower levels of soli- darity should act as enablers for better pandemic gov- ernance at the global level. Until now, the impact of na- tional and regional solidarity has been relatively bleak. Calls for solidarity can act as empty signifers or merely as political rhetoric that is not tied to any concrete efort or action. To shed light on the meanings of solidarity, it is important to identify and distinguish the operative nature of solidarity, or lack thereof, in various contexts.
- Topic:
- Security, International Cooperation, Governance, Public Health, Pandemic, and COVID-19
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus