Search

Begin New Search Topic Defense Policy Publishing Institution Finnish Institute of International Affairs

21. The changing European defence market: Will the new European defence market legislation be a game-changer for Finland?

Author:
Harri Mikkola, Jukka Anteroinen, and Ville Lauttamäki
Publication Date:
02-2013
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The European defence industrial base is transforming. The changes in the European defence market legislation, the decrease in defence materiel demand and changing defence requirements are redefining the industry in a way that has not been seen in decades. The new European legislation in particular poses serious challenges for the Finnish defence industry, including the national market opening and the diminishing possibility for offset arrangements. It is likely that the major European states are trying to protect their own defence industrial base. The future of the Finnish defence industry will be determined by whether the European market opens up in the first place, in part or in its entirety. There is no going back to the time preceding the new legislation. It is crucial for the Finnish defence industry to find and utilize new market opportunities. Networking with the European system integrators and sub-contracting chains will be of paramount importance.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, Economics, and Industrial Policy
Political Geography:
Europe and Finland

22. Not just another arms deal: The security policy implications of the United States selling advanced missiles to Finland

Author:
Charly Salonius-Pasternak
Publication Date:
09-2012
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
Finland's decision to acquire advanced semi-stealthy Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles (JASSM) from the United States is much more than an arms deal – it has significant political and regional military implications. Finland is only the second country to be approved for JASSM. No NATO country has ever received such approval. This suggests something about the closeness of the relationship between the United States and Finland, as well as something about how the United States sees European and regional defence arrangements. In the web of multilateral, multinational and bilateral relationships that Finland is weaving to enhance its security, the US relationship is a key cable The JASSM acquisition significantly changes Finland's ability to disrupt enemy activities, both within Finland and beyond its borders. Despite being a conventional weapon, it will serve as a deterrent. Finnish decision-makers have a responsibility to understand both the implications of the new capabilities, and to ensure that the continued development of the Finnish Defence Forces is not inhibited due to misunderstandings of what a modern defence requires and consists of.
Topic:
Defense Policy, NATO, Arms Control and Proliferation, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, and Finland

23. The beginning of the end? The future of international engagement in Afghanistan

Author:
Timo Behr and Charly Salonius-Pasternak
Publication Date:
04-2012
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
States which contribute to various international efforts in Afghanistan will find it increasingly difficult to balance a need to show long-term commitment with an unpredictable political and quickly changing operating environment. Recent events in Afghanistan are threatening to undermine the plans for an orderly transition of security responsibilities to Afghan authorities by the end of 2014. Countries must be ready to adjust contributions in both size and task during both 2012 and 2013. Germany has pledged to only gradually withdraw its forces and maintain its focus on partnering and training, despite an increasingly unstable environment. Current planning also foresees a German commitment in the post-2014 period. Finland will increasingly focus on civilian crisis management efforts and development assistance, and will stay engaged and committed as long as its closest partners also do so. Sweden is set to continue leading a Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT), but post-2014 commitments are unclear. The United States is set to return to 'pre-surge' force levels (though with a different force structure) of around 68,000 soldiers by autumn 2012. Further withdrawals of up to 30,000 soldiers are being discussed.
Topic:
Conflict Resolution, Defense Policy, Peace Studies, and War
Political Geography:
Afghanistan, United States, Finland, Germany, and Sweden

24. Practicing progressive pragmatism: Charting Barack Obama's course for U.S. foreign policy

Author:
Charly Salonius-Pasternak
Publication Date:
03-2011
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
President Barack Obama's view and handling of foreign policy challenges can be described as pragmatically progressive. His foreign policy blends a realist mindset and pragmatic approach with liberal and, at times, idealistic and far-reaching goals. Obama's foreign policy decision-making process is deliberate. This is not always compatible with the expectations of the modern political and media environment. Two years into his presidency, Obama has engaged with the five major national security issues he outlined as a candidate, meeting initial success in four of them. When faced with unexpected events largely beyond his control, Obama seems not to make snap decisions based on a particular ideology, preferring to take the time to see how events unfold. When faced with crises that build up slowly or were previously identified in scenarios, Obama's administration has responded robustly and deliberately.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, and Diplomacy
Political Geography:
United States

25. Hitting a moving target: Implications of Japan's missile defence

Author:
Kristian Kurki
Publication Date:
02-2010
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The ballistic missile defence (bmd) has been promoted as a means to counter the security concern posed by North Korea's missile and nuclear programmes. While these could threaten Japan in theory, the likelihood of an attack by North Korea is negligible as the consequences of such an action would compromise the survival of the North Korean regime. Conversely, an exaggerated response to North Korea's missile programme increases the risk of even further unpredictable provocations by North Korea. Other regional actors, especially China and even Russia, may counter Japan's increased defence readiness with even greater military presence in the region, leading to an exacerbation of regional tension. bmd, and intensified defence measures at large, will contribute to a perpetuation of rivalry between Japan and its East Asian neighbours, restricting Japan's diplomatic manoeuvrability and reducing its future policy options towards consolidating a regional security architecture. bmd should not be seen as a test case in the validity and future integrity of the us-Japanese defence alliance. Disparate political and cultural traditions aside, shared economic interests and values suffice to ensure the continuity of the alliance, which is not as fragile as recent media reports have suggested.
Topic:
Security and Defense Policy
Political Geography:
Japan, Israel, East Asia, and North Korea

26. Controversies over missile defense in Europe

Author:
Raimo Väyrynen
Publication Date:
04-2009
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The plan to deploy an anti-missile system in Central Europe has been one of the most controversial security policy issues in the past few years. The Bush Administration pushed hard for the deployment of the radar site in the Czech Republic and interceptor missiles in Poland, largely because it would provide an additional layer in the global anti-ballistic missile defense of the United States. In both of these countries, public opinion has been against the deployments and the governments have had to negotiate between external and internal pressures pushing them in different policy directions. Russia has been adamantly opposed to the missile defense plan, issuing both threats and suggesting alternative ways to diminish the threat that the United States feels from Iran. The result has been a political stalemate that has further complicated otherwise tense relations between Moscow and Washington, D.C. With the arrival of the Obama Administration, there is a pause in the missile dispute, but no permanent resolution of the conflict is in sight.
Topic:
Conflict Prevention, Security, Defense Policy, Nuclear Weapons, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, Iran, Washington, Poland, Moscow, and Czech Republic

27. Medvedev's amendments to the law on defence: The consequences for Europe

Author:
Yury E. Fedorov
Publication Date:
11-2009
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
In November 2009, the 'Law on Amendments to the “Law on Defence”' proposed by President Medvedev entered into force. It allows the Kremlin to dispatch troops outside Russia for four purposes: to counter armed attacks against Russian armed forces, other troops and bodies deployed beyond its borders; to counter or prevent an armed attack against another country if this country has requested Russia to do so; to protect Russian citizens abroad from an armed attack; and to combat piracy and guarantee the safety of shipping. The law is an attempt to close the gap between Moscow's strategic goals, primarily the establishment of its geopolitical dominance over the former Soviet republics, and Russia's legislation, which restricted its ability to deploy armed forces beyond national borders. In effect, the amended legislation enables the Kremlin to deploy its armed forces abroad in a wide range of situations, precisely because of a lack of clear criteria. The wording of 'Medvedev's amendments' sheds light on some plans and scenarios that may be taking shape in Moscow. It is not beyond the realms of possibility that Russia may plan to ignite large-scale disturbances and ethnic clashes in Sevastopol or in Latvia and Estonia, which may be used as a pretext for Russian military intervention. A Russo-Ukrainian conflict in Crimea would pose not so much a military as a political challenge for Europe and the West. Even though Ukraine does not belong to these organizations, if NATO and the EU failed to respond to Russian intervention in Crimea with strong political and economic measures, their strategic relevance would be seriously undermined. If NATO did not defend its member states in the Baltic, the strategic role of the Alliance would be reduced to zero. The aforementioned scenarios fall into the worst-case category, yet there are numerous precedents in Russia's history which demonstrate that worst-case scenarios can become reality. European dependence on Russian energy supplies and interest in Russia's support in resolving the Iranian nuclear problem and the conflict in Afghanistan, as well as the Obama administration's interest in Russia's partnership in nuclear issues, constrain Western ability to respond. However, the West could and should make it quite clear that new Russia's military interventions will result in the country's political ostracization. Furthermore, the West could propose and develop an internationally recognised mechanism regulating the most important aspects of humanitarian intervention. In particular, it should minimise the ability of individual states to make unilateral decisions to intervene militarily if the UN Security Council were unable to make firm decisions. Such mechanisms could be discussed and developed in the frameworks of the UN, the OSCE, the so-called Corfu process and similar international forums.
Topic:
Security, Defense Policy, and Law
Political Geography:
Russia, Europe, and Asia

28. The US and Iran on a Confrontational Course

Author:
Tapani Vaahtoranta and Steve Wright
Publication Date:
03-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
The US and Iran are on a confrontational course. Iran challenges the US hegemony in the region and is striving for regional dominance. The US does not accept the current Iranian regime, foreign policy or drive towards nuclear capability. The strategies of both have led to a classic game of chicken. Neither is ready to give concessions to avoid confrontation.
Topic:
Foreign Policy and Defense Policy
Political Geography:
United States, Iran, and Middle East

29. "WMD" Terrorism - How Scared Should We Be?

Author:
Toby Archer
Publication Date:
05-2005
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
“WMD” is a political term, not an analytical one. It mixes up very different weapons; some that would have little effect if used by terrorists, and some that would have catastrophic effects. The more dangerous the type of weapon, the more difficult it is for terrorist groups to obtain those weapons. It is important to understand the differing reasons why terrorists have not chosen to use “WMD” in the past, in order to make useful threat assessments. With radical jihadi groups, the symbolic value of suicide attacks as a demonstration of faith seems as important as the effects of the attack. If this changes it could increase the interest of jihadis in “WMD”.
Topic:
Defense Policy, Terrorism, and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Political Geography:
United States

30. Theories at a loss? EU-NATO fusion and the 'low-politicisation' of security and defence in European integration

Author:
Hanna Ojanen
Publication Date:
01-2002
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Finnish Institute of International Affairs
Abstract:
In the European Union, security and defence integration was for a long time seen as impossible or at least highly unlikely. Theories of European integration leaned complacently on the idea that security and defence policy have a specific character that explains this state of affairs. Yet, recent developments seem seriously to challenge their assumptions: the new joint EU crisis management with military means is bound at least to affect, if not replace, the traditional defence policy of the member states.
Topic:
Defense Policy, NATO, International Organization, and International Political Economy
Political Geography:
Europe