Search

Begin New Search Topic Crisis Management

51. Health sovereignty: How to build a resilient European response to pandemics

Author:
Jonathan Hackenbroich, Jeremy Shapiro, and Tara Varma
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Council On Foreign Relations
Abstract:
The coronavirus affected EU member states in different ways and to different extents, but almost all found that their public health relied, more than they understood, on goods or services from third countries. This reliance undermined Europe’s capacity to respond autonomously. The EU bodies coordinating the response and providing an early warning system were slow to act and requests for aid from EU member states went unheeded, creating feelings of abandonment among the worst-hit countries. Europe must improve its early warning systems, supply chain resilience, medical research and development, and cyber security and technology, to act decisively in future public health emergencies. Europe can build greater health security by creating common strategic stocks, diversifying and reshoring supply chains, strengthening investment protection in innovative companies, investing in R&D, and coordinating efforts in multilateral forums.
Topic:
Sovereignty, European Union, Crisis Management, Pandemic, Resilience, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Europe

52. In sickness and in health: European cooperation during the coronavirus crisis

Author:
Pawel Zerka
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
European Council On Foreign Relations
Abstract:
ECFR research into how EU member states and institutions worked together – or failed to – at the height of covid-19 confirms Germany was the bloc’s undisputed crisis leader. Germany made a shaky start in showing solidarity on the pandemic, but regained other member states’ trust on the health and economy fronts. The Netherlands, however, paid a reputational price as the leading ‘frugal’ state opposing greater financial burden-sharing. EU institutions won few plaudits but policymakers still look to it for post-crisis economic leadership. France emerged at the head of a strengthened ‘southern’ grouping of member states, while the Visegrad platform was invisible during this crisis. It will fall to Germany and France to close the north-south divide, building coalitions on major policies. But they should not forget that closing the east-west divide remains an important goal.
Topic:
International Cooperation, Regional Cooperation, Health Care Policy, European Union, Crisis Management, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Europe and Germany

53. Rebuilding the Transatlantic Relationship – Transatlantic Policy Forum in Review

Author:
Danielle Piatkiewicz and Miroslava Pisklová
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Europeum Institute for European Policy
Abstract:
It was noted that the pandemic has not brought about systemic change but has instead accelerated and exacerbated existing trends. Both the US and the EU see the pandemic furthering disagreements and on both sides of the Atlantic by causing rise to internal political divisions on how to tackle the pandemic. One of the big lessons of this global crisis is that collaboration is crucial. Not even powerful countries, such as the US, can tackle it on their own. Now more than ever, it is time to move beyond competition and focus on strengthening international cooperation, otherwise we risk a success of non-democratic actors seeking to undermine democracy and rule of law.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Multilateralism, Crisis Management, Transatlantic Relations, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

54. Brief on COVID-19: National governments, not the EU, sleepwalked into the corona crisis

Author:
Christian Kvorning Lassen
Publication Date:
04-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Europeum Institute for European Policy
Abstract:
In his brief, Christian Kvorning Lassen writes that on January 26, the EU’s Centre for Disease Control (ECDC) warned Member States that Covid-19 infection spread in Europe would be probable and considerable. The EU offered in January to support Member States with purchasing of medical equipment, test kits, protective gear, and general support. Member States refused the EU’s help in January, stating that their health care systems were adequately prepared for the Virus.
Topic:
Government, Crisis Management, COVID-19, and Health Crisis
Political Geography:
Europe

55. Brief on COVID-19: European integration continues on several fronts as the COVID-19 crisis escalates. Without the Czech Republic

Author:
Jiří Lacina
Publication Date:
04-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Europeum Institute for European Policy
Abstract:
In his brief, Jiří Lacina explores the impact of COVID-19 on the future development of European integration and the role of Czechia in this development. The EU, its institutions and the Member States are working together to withstand the current pandemic and prepare for the economic crisis to follow. Simultaneously, ideas on the future arrangement of the EU are appearing. Two emerged on 9 April: one of monetary and the other of environmental nature – and both dealing with region’s economic recovery. For now, the Czech Republic is not engaging in any of them, and once again risks being left behind.
Topic:
European Union, Economy, Crisis Management, Coronavirus, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Europe and Czech Republic

56. Preparing for Crises in Estonia: Improvement Options for Civilian Food and Emergency Goods Supplies

Author:
Ivo Juurvee and Ramon Loik
Publication Date:
02-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
International Centre for Defence and Security - ICDS
Abstract:
The Estonian Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications and the Estonian Ministry of Rural Affairs commissioned the International Centre for Defence and Security (ICDS) to compile a list of civilian food and emergency goods supplies, estimated average amounts of supplies at home and in stores, and calculations for the price of national emergency goods supplies and logistics. In addition to the quantities of food and industrial goods, the contracting authorities were interested in the legal issues of stockpiling and the possibilities of storage and distribution. Water, fuel, and drug supplies were not covered by the studies. In the course of the research, the experts also reviewed the solutions of Finland, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Lithuania and other countries and took into account the recommendations of international organisations. The experience of other countries suggests that involving businesses and maintaining the operation of trading networks in the event of a crisis are of key importance. It is reasonable to organise logistics centrally, as crisis transport cannot be ordered separately by ministries and local authorities. Recommendations for the division of tasks between the state and local governments: State-level tasks: Ensure that the goods required in a crisis situation exist through purchases or pre-contracts. Ensure the timely delivery of required food products and emergency goods to distribution points in municipalities (e.g. through pre-contracts with logistics companies). Support local authorities in planning the distribution of goods and test their preparedness by organising special exercises. Local government-level tasks (preparations for distribution of goods): Have an overview of the population and where people are. Coordinate with the state-level to identify the locations of existing and potential additional distribution points that should be situated in the vicinity of shopping centres or other locations people are familiar with visiting. Plan the local distribution of supplies and find relevant partners.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, Food, Crisis Management, and Resilience
Political Geography:
Estonia and Baltic States

57. COVID-19 and Authoritarian Regimes: China vs. Russia

Author:
Yaroslav Shevchenko
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Foreign Policy Research Institute
Abstract:
The Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China are certainly the two most prominent authoritarian regimes in the world today, with their quasi-alliance characterized as an “axis of authoritarians” and portrayed as a major threat to the West and global liberal democracy. However, despite unmistakable similarities that exist between Xi Jinping of China and Vladimir Putin of Russia, the reality is far more complex. Their respective responses to the COVID-19 crisis shed some light on differences between the political-governance models of these two countries.
Topic:
Authoritarianism, Economy, Crisis Management, COVID-19, and Health Crisis
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Eurasia, and Asia

58. Rebuilding Sweden’s crisis preparedness: Lack of clarity impedes implementation

Author:
Mariette Hagglund
Publication Date:
05-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
Changes in the security environment and Sweden’s related policy changes adopted in the early 2000s made large national-level planning and organization unnecessary. This led to a decentralization of Sweden’s crisis preparedness system. Covid-19 is the latest reminder of some of the shortcomings in Sweden’s crisis preparedness. Previous warning signs were the 2004 tsunami in Southeast Asia, and the forest fires in 2014 and 2018. A major effort is currently underway in Sweden to build a streamlined system to respond to the broad scope of vulnerabilities and threats. A functioning crisis preparedness system is not only important in itself, but also as a contribution to Sweden’s total defence efforts. Rebuilding the system, however, will be slow and costly. Sweden’s crisis preparedness system is characterized by a complex authority landscape and discrepancies between sectors and regions. While the Swedish constitution does not allow for exceptions in crises, and ministerial governance is forbidden, the Covid-19 situation may spark a discussion about the need for changes in the legal framework.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Crisis Management, Public Health, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Europe and Sweden

59. The EU’s external action on counter-terrorism: Development, structures and actions

Author:
Tuomas Iso-Markku and Teemu Tammikko
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
Terrorism is one of the most significant security threats in Europe. As it is transnational in character, countering it requires both cooperation between EU member states and widespread external action. This report examines the latter by focusing on the concepts, development, actors and structures, as well as the practices of the EU’s external action on counter-terrorism. The EU’s external action on counter-terrorism is performed in four different frameworks: diplomacy, crisis management, external aid, and the external action of the EU’s internal security agencies. All of these have their own policy-making structures with different actors and mandates, and hence the overall picture is complex. Several ongoing institutional reforms add to the complexity. Although the EU’s external action on counter-terrorism has its challenges and limitations, the EU has shown that it is capable of adapting its approach to changing needs. The EU can add value to the counter-terrorism action of its member states by developing and promoting common concepts and practices, maintaining an overview of the threat, and facilitating cooperation with different partners. However, the EU’s external action on counter-terrorism is dependent on the ability of the member states to agree on common goals and the ability of the different EU actors to coordinate their actions. This publication is updated version of the Finnish report published as part of the implementation of the Government Plan for Analysis, Assessment and Research in January 2020.
Topic:
Diplomacy, European Union, Counter-terrorism, and Crisis Management
Political Geography:
Europe

60. Crisis from Kolkata to Kabul: COVID-19’s Impact on South Asia

Author:
Husain Haqqani and Aparna Pande
Publication Date:
05-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Hudson Institute
Abstract:
The world’s most populous region, South Asia, with almost 1.9 billion people living in eight countries, has so far had fewer reported infections and fatalities per capita from the novel coronavirus than projected in early models. However, the region is unlikely to escape the widespread disruption and damage felt across the globe, and its worst health-care crisis may be yet to come. In South Asia, as in other regions, the COVID-19 pandemic is testing the capacities of states to provide security and effective healthcare and to maintain essential services. It is also having an impact on fragile democratic institutions and societal bonds, in addition to putting considerable strains on the economy. [...] Following is a country-by-country report, with inputs from experts on the ground, on the coronavirus pandemic’s impact in South Asia and its human, economic, and political consequences.
Topic:
Economics, Health, Crisis Management, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Pakistan, China, South Asia, India, Asia, and Sri Lanka