Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Baltic States Publication Year within 5 Years

1. Baltic and Nordic States Assess the Russian Military Threat

Author:
Marcin Andrzej Piotrowski
Publication Date:
04-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Polish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The newest intelligence reports by the Baltic and Nordic states jointly warn about the aggressive intentions and reconstitution of Russia’s armed forces. All of the documents assume the successful implementation of plans for larger Russian land and airborne forces till the end of 2026. However, these reports differ in the estimates of when the political moment and Russia’s conventional capabilities may permit it to initiate open conflict with NATO. Despite their informational and analytical contents, these reports may affect the Baltic region states’ capabilities development plans and their decisions about whether to increase defence spending.
Topic:
Defense Policy, NATO, Armed Forces, and Regional Security
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Nordic Nations, and Baltic States

2. Between the Baltic and the Balkans, the new geopolitics of gas

Author:
Gilles Lepesant
Publication Date:
01-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Robert Schuman Foundation (RSF)
Abstract:
On December 31, 2024, the gas transit agreement signed in 2019 between the Ukrainian grid operator and Russia expired. As the Ukrainian government had refused to negotiate a renewal of the agreement in advance, gas flows to European markets were suspended. Announced several months ago, Ukraine's opposition to extend its gas transit agreement with Russia (Kyiv is now self-sufficient in gas) marks a new stage in the reshaping of Central Europe's natural gas geography. This process was initiated in the early 1990s and gathered pace with the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Russia halted gas exports via the Nord Stream pipeline and via Belarus in the summer of 2022, and flows through Ukraine were significantly reduced before ceasing altogether. Since January 1st 2025, only the Turk Stream pipeline supplies European countries with Russian gas by land. Central Europe has been particularly hard hit by the gas crisis that started in 2022. Gas plays an important role in this region, not least because of the need for heating and the importance of the manufacturing sector in the region's economies. Gas production is growing slightly in Hungary, Poland and, above all, Romania. But the volumes extracted make only a modest contribution to the region's energy security. Moreover, several central European countries have for several decades enjoyed transit fee revenues. Finally, most of them are landlocked or have short coastlines. All of these factors make Central Europe a unique region. Added to this is the legacy of the Communist period, when energy policies favoured coal, and for which gas is now a often seen as an alternative. In this particular context, energy flows between the Baltic Sea, the Black Sea and the Mediterranean Sea are changing. This is reflected not only in a contraction of flows from Russia, but also in an intensification of north-south or south-north flows, and a growing interdependence between the states of the region, as well as with certain member states of the European Union.
Topic:
European Union, Geopolitics, Gas, Exports, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Balkans, Central Europe, and Baltic States

3. The Joint Expeditionary Force in Northern Europe: Towards a more integrated security architecture?

Author:
Antti Pihlajamaa
Publication Date:
05-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs (FIIA)
Abstract:
The Joint Expeditionary Force – a UK-led defence cooperation format of ten European countries – has gained political momentum since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Since the late 2010s, the JEF has shifted its focus towards hybrid issues, increasingly in Northern Europe. While its role in the hybrid sphere is potentially fruitful, the JEF should be wary of taking on too wide a range of tasks. The JEF’s role as a “sub-threshold” actor could complement NATO’s collective defence efforts below Article 5. Hence, the JEF should be more coherently integrated into the Northern European security architecture. Obstacles to JEF-NATO integration have now been removed, as all JEF nations are also members of the alliance. A more explicit division of labour between the JEF and NATO would help Northern European countries to handle the current security environment comprehensively. Such a security architecture, covering all dimensions of the conflict spectrum, would be particularly beneficial for Finland, which shares a long common border with Russia.
Topic:
Defense Policy, NATO, Regional Security, Defense Cooperation, and Joint Expeditionary Force
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Europe, Finland, and Baltic States

4. The Newest Allies: Finland and Sweden in NATO

Author:
Tony Lawrence, Tomas Jermalavicius, and Jan Hyllander
Publication Date:
03-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
Abstract:
Sweden’s flag was raised at NATO headquarters at midday on 11 March 2024, ceremonially marking one of the most surprising outcomes of Russia’s war in Ukraine. In the face of Russia’s aggression and the risks it presented to their own security, Finland, which joined NATO in April 2023, and Sweden had abandoned decades-long policies of neutrality and non-alignment to become the Alliance’s 31st and 32nd member states. Our report examines the consequences of these changes, largely from the perspective of the defence of the Baltic states. Although Finland had developed armed forces to cope independently with any military aggression, the brutality of Russia’s full-scale attack on Ukraine led to a rapid and substantial shift in public opinion in favour of NATO membership, which was quickly embraced by the leadership. Public opinion shifted rapidly in Sweden too, but the debate there was also heavily influenced by Finland’s inescapable move towards the Alliance, which essentially undercut the logic of Sweden’s continued non-alignment. The two countries submitted their applications to join NATO on the same day in May 2022. As Allies, Finland and Sweden will bring great benefits to the security of the Nordic-Baltic region. Politically, their accession will strengthen NATO, including by creating a large bloc of states in northern Europe whose memberships of security organisations are (mostly) aligned and who demonstrate broadly similar security thinking. At the operational level, their accession will plug a large hole in NATO territory, reducing the isolation and vulnerability of the Baltic states and allowing military commanders many more options for preparing for and dealing with a possible conflict with Russia. At the tactical level, they add modern, capable armed forces to NATO’s inventory. Nonetheless, their accession is not without challenges and risks. The most difficult practical challenge for both countries will likely be developing deployable ground forces to meet the requirements of NATO membership. However, perhaps the more difficult challenges related to accession will be mental and cultural. For Finland, these relate to adjusting an independent, highly self-reliant defence model, held in great regard by both the leadership and population, to meet the needs of collective defence; and to the requirement to bolster Allied cohesion by speaking more openly about threats to the Allies’ common security interests, in particular, Russia. For Sweden, neutrality has been fostered not only as a defining element of its self-identity as a distinctive international actor, but also as a necessary vehicle for the development of a unique democracy and welfare state. These ideas are deep-seated and Sweden’s mental transition to Allied status may be difficult and lengthy. Among the risks is that the addition of two strong Allies will encourage other Allies or their publics to believe that deterrence and defence in the Nordic-Baltic region is complete, needing no further attention. A second is that the low-key approach Finland and Sweden expect to take to their membership, at least in the years immediately following accession, may mean that the benefits of their joining will be only partly realised. It would be a missed opportunity, for example, if Sweden declined to take a leadership role in the Nordic-Baltic region. There is also a risk that Finland and Sweden’s commitment to a strong Nordic regional identity, while useful for promoting practical security and defence cooperation, may be disadvantageous to Baltic security if its pull were to result in the diminished engagement of the two countries in the Baltic region. The tension between the two countries northern and Baltic identities has already been apparent in a discussion concerning their place in NATO’s operational-level command structure. Finally, there is a risk that imprecise talk about ‘strategic depth’ that has sometimes been part of the discussion about the benefits that Finland and Sweden bring to NATO may suggest that other parts of Allied territory are somehow less important. This would be unhelpful to coherent deterrence by denial on the north-east flank. While Finland and Sweden’s accession to NATO greatly benefits the security and defence of the Baltic states, it is important that such risks and challenges are recognised, in order that they can be mitigated. We make several recommendations to Finland and Sweden as they continue their integration into the Alliance.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, NATO, Alliance, and Enlargement
Political Geography:
Russia, Finland, Sweden, Nordic Nations, and Baltic States

5. The Washington Summit: NATO and the Baltic Region

Author:
Toms Rostoks
Publication Date:
06-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
Abstract:
NATO heads of state and government will gather in Washington on 9-11 July to mark the Alliance’s 75th anniversary. While a third year of full-scale war rages in Europe, they will need to guard the tone of their celebrations. But it would be remiss of the Allies not to recognise the importance and success of their organisation. NATO remains the essential transatlantic forum. It has had huge positive impact on security in Europe and elsewhere, built shared understanding and purpose among a growing number of members, and successfully adapted to decades of changing circumstances. There is much to applaud. But there is also work to be done. The summit’s main business will concern Ukraine, defence and deterrence, and burden-sharing. While there are unlikely to be big announcements, the summit should play a significant role in ensuring that the decisions taken in Madrid in 2022, and Vilnius in 2023 are properly implemented. This series of briefs examines some of the key issues for the Washington Summit. In the second brief of the series, Toms Rostoks focuses on NATO’s role in defence and deterrence in the Baltic region. There has been good progress through the steps taken by the Baltic states and by their Allies, but substantial shortcomings remain in the Alliance’s posture on the north-east flank. The Baltic region thus remains a vulnerability for NATO.
Topic:
Defense Policy, NATO, Alliance, Deterrence, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Eastern Europe, Baltic Sea, and Baltic States

6. New Russian Immigration to the EU: The Case of the Baltic States, Finland, Germany & Poland

Author:
Igor Gretskiy
Publication Date:
10-2024
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
Abstract:
The political atmosphere in Russia, as well as the September 2022 mobilisation call for military service, made thousands of Russians leave their home country. Although a vast majority of them have settled in post-Soviet countries, a noticeable portion has also taken up residence in EU countries. A recent couple of years have seen significant expert interest in new Russian immigration, so there is no shortage of publications on the phenomenon. However, many of these analyses suffer from substantial flaws. This report aims to provide a better understanding of new Russian immigration to the EU, as well as this group’s prevailing views on the most sensitive political issues. It concludes that the scale of emigration from Russia following the invasion of Ukraine is often overstated. It seems appropriate to distinguish between two waves of new Russian immigration to the EU. The spring wave was apparently more substantial in number and included a higher proportion of political and civil activists, academics, and IT professionals. In contrast, the autumn wave was less “politicised” as many of those leaving Russia were not necessarily opposed to Putin or his war but were primarily motivated by the fear of conscription and the prospect of being sent to the front line. After moving abroad, interest in Russia-related political activities among new Russian immigrants, even seasoned activists, tends to fade. Few remain engaged in political endeavours, instead focusing more on adapting to new realities. Their interactions with associations of Russian migrants from the previous “post-Crimean wave” are sporadic. When it comes to issues related to the politics of EU countries, new Russian immigrants often have a Russia-centric perspective on most of them. This is especially true regarding visa and travel sanctions against Russia. Immigrants remain almost impervious to the argument that for the governments of countries bordering Russia, the absolute priority is their national security and domestic public order, not the transformation of the Russian political regime at any cost. There were several quite sensitive topics that often provoked mixed feelings and even negative emotions among the respondents. The most challenging and almost taboo subject in Russian immigrant communities was donations to support the Ukrainian army. Along with Russian influencers and opposition politicians, most new Russian immigrants are reluctant to get involved in the Russia-Ukraine war, viewing it as not their concern. They largely attribute Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to the Russian government and state-owned media, seeing the Russian population merely as “victims of propaganda” and absolving “average Russians” of responsibility for the war. New Russian émigrés preserve regular contacts with relatives and friends in their homeland but tend to avoid discussing politically charged topics, particularly those related to Ukraine. It appears that they have virtually no impact on the perception of the Russia-Ukraine war and the political attitudes of those who stayed in Russia, and this divide between the two groups is likely to endure. Many admitted that by staying abroad, they are losing touch with developments in Russia. Moreover, most new Russian immigrants see no future for themselves or their children in Russia and are unlikely to return there. A few might consider a temporary return if a trusted leader came to power, but generally, they prefer to live in a free, democratic Russia without taking risks or acting as change agents. Hence, when developing a strategy regarding new Russian immigrants, it is essential to primarily consider the EU’s own security considerations rather than the imagined capabilities of these immigrants. It is crucial to avoid letting the wish for significant socio-political change in Russia cloud objective analysis. In the foreseeable future, Russia will continue to pose serious security threats to Europe, while, as of now, there is no serious indication that new Russian immigration could emerge as a politically influential force back home anytime soon.
Topic:
Security, Diaspora, Immigration, Sanctions, European Union, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, Ukraine, Finland, Poland, Lithuania, Germany, Estonia, Latvia, and Baltic States

7. The Joint Expeditionary Force: Baltic Interests

Author:
Tony Lawrence
Publication Date:
11-2024
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
Abstract:
Elements of the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) will spend much of November 2024 in Latvia, taking part in a series of exercises known as Joint Protector 24.[1] Leaders of the JEF countries—Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and the UK will then meet in Tallinn on 16-17 December to discuss further cooperation in the framework.[2] What is the JEF, and what does it offer the Baltic region? Despite its name, the JEF is not a force. It is a flexible framework led by the UK, under which the UK itself and at least one other member (a ‘1 + 1’ format) can pool military capabilities for the purpose of conducting specific operations. The UK also provides the backbone of a permanent operational headquarters for the JEF—the Standing Joint Force Headquarters—although other command and control options are available depending on the scale and nature of a particular operation.
Topic:
Defense Policy, NATO, Armed Forces, Security Cooperation, and Joint Expeditionary Force
Political Geography:
United Kingdom, Finland, Norway, Lithuania, Estonia, Denmark, Sweden, Latvia, Netherlands, Iceland, and Baltic States

8. Small powers as non-permanent members of the United Nations Security Council: A case study of the Baltic states

Author:
Eduards Gailišs
Publication Date:
03-2024
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Security and Defence Quarterly
Institution:
War Studies University
Abstract:
The main objective of this paper is to identify how small powers can make a difference by taking up a role at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) as non-permanent members. This research takes a closer look at the Baltic states, Lithuania and Estonia, and gives a perspective for Latvia too. This paper examines whether these states use strategies that have made other small powers successful at the Security Council. Most of the materials used were documents from foreign services and the UNSC, and the methods employed were qualitative document analysis and interview. Lithuania was successful at making resolutions and highlighted topics, such as small arms and protection of journalists, whereas Estonia was successful at agenda setting and highlighted cyber security and environment security. Small powers can successfully work at the UNSC by setting the agenda and working on resolutions. However, their time as part of the UNSC is limited and their abilities to solve military conflicts depend on the support of the great powers. The Baltic states used some strategies that other small powers have successfully used, although they lacked influence for mediation and coalition building.
Topic:
United Nations, International Security, UN Security Council, and Small Powers
Political Geography:
Baltic States

9. Defence of Baltic States, Poland Runs into Ottawa Treaty on Mines

Author:
Anna Maria Dyner and Stefania Kolarz
Publication Date:
02-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Polish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
By deciding to build a defence line on the border with Russia and declaring the possibility of using anti-personnel mines, representatives of the Estonian parliament have opened the debate on possible withdrawal from the 1997 Ottawa Treaty on anti-personnel mines. This step may be necessary for the Baltic States to protect their territories from aggression, as they are faced with a lack of operational depth. However, for other states, including Poland, which have other power-projection capabilities, it is a last resort.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Landmines, and Ottawa Treaty
Political Geography:
Russia, Poland, Estonia, and Baltic States

10. Europe’s Conscription Challenge: Lessons From Nordic and Baltic States

Author:
Sophia Besch and Katrine Westgaard
Publication Date:
07-2024
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
As Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine reminds European countries about the importance of manpower, many are once again weighing the promise and perils of compulsory military service.
Topic:
Armed Forces, Armed Conflict, Conscription, Regional Security, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe, Nordic Nations, and Baltic States