Search

4011. The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Strategic Stability and Nuclear Risk, Volume I, Euro-Atlantic perspectives

Author:
Dr Vincent Boulanin, S. M. Amadae, Jean-Marc Rickli, Shahar Avin, Frank Sauer, John Borrie, Dimitri Scheftelowitsch, Justin Bronk, Page O. Stoutland, Magnus Hagström, Petr Topychkanov, Michael Horowitz, Anja Kaspersen, and Chris King
Publication Date:
05-2019
Content Type:
Book
Institution:
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Abstract:
This edited volume focuses on the impact on artificial intelligence (AI) on nuclear strategy. It is the first instalment of a trilogy that explores regional perspectives and trends related to the impact that recent advances in AI could have nuclear weapons and doctrines, strategic stability and nuclear risk. It assembles the views of 14 experts from the Euro-Atlantic community on why and how machine learning and autonomy might become the focus of an armed race among nuclear-armed states; and how the adoption of these technologies might impact their calculation of strategic stability and nuclear risk at the regional level and trans-regional level.
Topic:
Nuclear Weapons, Cybersecurity, Risk, Artificial Intelligence, and Strategic Stability
Political Geography:
Europe and United States of America

4012. Multilateral Peace Operations and the Challenges of Irregular Migration and Human Trafficking

Author:
Jaïr van der Lijn
Publication Date:
06-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Abstract:
The third phase of the New Geopolitics of Peace Operations (NGP) initiative seeks to enhance understanding of how peace operations interact with non-traditional security challenges such as terrorism and violent extremism, irregular migration, piracy, organized crime and environmental degradation. It aims to identify the various perceptions, positions and interests of the relevant stakeholders. By engaging key stakeholders and mapping the policy space for the potential role of peace operations in addressing non-traditional security challenges, it also aims to stimulate open dialogue, cooperation and mutual understanding. Four dialogue meetings organized by SIPRI and the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES) will focus on a different non-traditional security challenge. Each will be preceded by a background paper that sets the baseline for the meeting: giving an overview of the main developments and discussions regarding peace operations and the specific challenge to be discussed. The initiative will conclude with a final report based on the outcomes of these meetings that will advance the discussion on peace operations and non‑traditional security challenges. This phase of the NGP initiative is supported by the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland, co-sponsored by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ethiopia, and in continued partnership with FES.
Topic:
Security, Conflict, Multilateralism, and Peace
Political Geography:
Global Focus

4013. A Confluence of Crises: On Water, Climate and Security in the Middle East and North Africa

Author:
Johan Schaar
Publication Date:
07-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Abstract:
The Middle East and North Africa region (MENA) faces simultaneous crises of security, water scarcity and climate change. They are interlinked—the water crisis is exacerbated by climate change and may fuel conflict, while insecurity is an obstacle to dealing with other pressing issues. Together, the three constitute a confluence of crises that need to be addressed together. Authoritarian and militarized governments in MENA countries repress public discourse and action related to water and climate crises, viewing critics as threats to national security. But the elite’s own economic interests and role in the political economy make them vulnerable to the new risks and threats. The water and climate crises are mostly transboundary and require states to act together. But by prioritizing narrow security interests, states accord weak mandates to regional institutions, preventing agreements on shared challenges. A regional security framework is needed, encompassing water, climate and the current conflicts.
Topic:
Security, Climate Change, Water, Disarmament, and Risk
Political Geography:
Middle East and North Africa

4014. Narratives in the Russian Media of Conflict and Cooperation in the Arctic

Author:
Ekaterina Klimenko, Jan Nilsson, and Miyase Christensen
Publication Date:
08-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Abstract:
The Arctic has been narrated as both a region of cooperation and a region of conflict. This paper presents an analysis of how three Russian newspapers (Rossiyakaya Gazeta, Izvestiya and Novaya Gazeta) reported on the Arctic region between 2007 and 2016. The aim of the analysis is to provide a foundation for a discussion of Russian perceptions of conflict and cooperation in the Arctic in a decade when the desecuritization and peaceful cooperation that began in the late 1980s and early 1990s was challenged by a combination of changes to the physical environment and a shifting geopolitical landscape. The paper also explores how Russia’s narratives of conflict and cooperation fit into narratives about the region that have emerged in the international media. Last, the paper discusses what Russian media narratives can tell us about the priorities and future trends of Russia’s Arctic policy.
Topic:
Security, Media, Conflict, and Peace
Political Geography:
Russia, Eurasia, and Arctic

4015. Advancing United Nations Responses to Climate-related Security Risks

Author:
Camilla Born, Karolina Eklöw, and Malin Mobjörk
Publication Date:
09-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Abstract:
The security implications of climate change have increasingly been debated in the United Nations Security Council. Yet, there is a growing concern by many UN member states about the lack of adequate responses to the risks that climate change poses to peace and security. In recent years, some modest but notable changes at the UN have taken place, of which the creation of the Climate Security Mechanism is the primary example. This SIPRI Policy Brief summarizes the recent evolution of the climate security debate in the UN and highlights three priority areas for future action: (a) supporting and establishing climate security action in the field, (b) nurturing knowledge provision and (c) building sustainable sources of financing for climate security action. All these steps will require committed actors, innovation and long-term investment. Escalating climate impacts make the mitigation of climate-related security risks by the UN and its member states not only demanded but urgent. Recent institutional progress demonstrates that committed and cooperative actors can drive institutional change. This progress must be bolstered and action delivered in the field.
Topic:
Security, Climate Change, Environment, United Nations, and Risk
Political Geography:
Global Focus

4016. Climate-related Security Risks and Peacebuilding in Somalia

Author:
Karolina Eklöw and Florian Krampe
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Abstract:
Climate-related security risks are transforming the security landscape in which multilateral peacebuilding efforts take place. This policy paper offers a glimpse into the future of peacebuilding in the time of climate change by providing an in-depth assessment of the United Nations Assistance Mission in Somalia (UNSOM). Climate-related change in Somalia has reduced livelihood options and caused migration. It has also left significant parts of the population in a vulnerable condition. These climate-related security risks contribute to grievances and increase inequality and fragility, which in turn pose challenges to the implementation of UNSOM’s mandate. The impacts of climate change have hindered UNSOM in its work to provide peace and security in Somalia and in its efforts to establish functioning governance and judicial systems. UNSOM has responded to the growing impact of climate-related change. It has learned lessons from previous failed responses—notably the 2011 drought—and has created innovative initiatives that have been effective. While there is still room for improvement, UNSOM’s new initiatives may help to deliver a set of responses that meet the short-term need for a rapid humanitarian response and the long-term objective of achieving a sustainable and resilient society. The challenges faced by UNSOM and its responses to them have wider implications. They suggest that there is a need for synergetic policy responses that can turn the responses to climate-related security risks into opportunities for UN efforts to sustain peace.
Topic:
Security, Climate Change, Migration, Governance, Risk, and Peace
Political Geography:
Africa and Somalia

4017. The Socio-economic Impact of Anti-vehicle Mines in Angola

Author:
Yeonju Jung
Publication Date:
11-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Abstract:
The humanitarian and developmental impact of anti-vehicle mines (AVMs) is particularly relevant in immediate post-conflict reconstruction efforts. However, the comprehensive analysis of how AVMs hamper the socio-economic and sustainable development outlook of communities in the medium and long term has often been overlooked. This pilot study depicts the impact of AVM contamination on socio-economic development and the benefits of AVM clearance on sustainable development. To do so, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) serve as a framework to measure the impact of AVM clearance on agriculture, infrastructure, and access to social services.
Topic:
Development, Conflict, Peace, and Landmines
Political Geography:
Africa and Angola

4018. Arms Flows to South East Asia

Author:
Siemon T. Wezeman
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Stockholm International Peace Research Institute
Abstract:
The security environment of South East Asia is making more and more headlines and is increasing cause for concern. While old tensions and conflicts remain, China’s rise as a military power and its claims on the South China Sea not only add a new element of insecurity but also draw other powers into the mix. As this paper documents, states in South East Asia have significantly increased their military spending, their arms acquisitions and their arms inventories over the past decade. This growth has outpaced the global trend and the trends of most other regions. While the growth of military capabilities is not an uncontrollable arms race, there is cause for real concern. The increased size and capabilities of most armed forces in South East Asia—coupled with increased tensions in the region, especially over the South China Sea—lead to more military forces operating in close proximity to ‘unfriendly’ forces. Mechanisms and agreed rules to deal with the overall tensions or with unexpected confrontations of opposing military forces are lacking, which does not make it easy to prevent incidents from escalating. Furthermore, weak transparency in foreign and defence policy poses a risk of misunderstandings about why South East Asian states acquire weapons, what their ‘red lines’ are and what the response to crossing those lines would be.
Topic:
Security, Arms Control and Proliferation, Military Affairs, and Weapons
Political Geography:
Asia and Southeast Asia

4019. Europe in a multipolar missile world – Why the EU and NATO should not try to salvage the INF Treaty

Author:
Bruno Hellendorff
Publication Date:
04-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
Abstract:
On 1 February 2019, the US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that his country had suspended its compliance with the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty, or INF Treaty, and would withdraw from it within six months. The INF Treaty, little known outside of arms control and disarmament circles, was a landmark Cold War agreement between the United States of America and the USSR – the first to ban an entire category of weapons (ground-based medium- and intermediate-range missiles). The US withdrawal, announced in dramatic terms by President Donald Trump in October 2018, followed the claim that Russia had recently developed and fielded a missile with performances forbidden by the INF Treaty. The end of this little-known treaty is not anecdotal. Not only will it further strain the US-Russia relationship and antagonise allies, it will also contribute to the erosion of what is left of the global arms-control architecture and incentivise arms-race behav- iours among great powers. In a world where security is increasingly less a question of multilateral deliberation and rules-based interactions, the end of the INF Treaty is a further signal that missile technologies are again becoming a venue for competition between great powers: only this time, at least three are playing the game (United States, China and Russia) rather than two (United States and USSR). Additionally, missile technology proliferation has turned into a major dimension of contemporary battlefield realities, and missile programmes of countries such as Iran and North Korea continue to pose important diplomatic and non-proliferation challenges. Meanwhile, Europe is, by and large, left watching as its regional security architecture erodes. Welcome to what US National Security Advisor John Bolton recently termed ‘a multipolar missile world’. The EU should not try to salvage the INF Treaty. Its diplomatic capital might be better spent in areas where it could potentially make a difference, rather than in a treaty to which it is not even party. Existing multilateral regimes and agreements with the EU or its Member States as parties are already in dire need of reinforcement in the face of technological progress, a volatile diplomatic environment and self-centred, competitive political narratives. These include, inter alia, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) framework (including its Structured Dialogue), multilateral export control regimes (MECR) like the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), transparency and trust-building mechanisms like the Hague Code of Conduct against missile proliferation (HCoC), and nuclear-related frame- works like the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA or ‘Iran deal’) or the Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Process. These, however, may simply fail to meet the challenge of a multipolar missile world. Renewed efforts, both conceptual and in the realm of capabilities, are needed in a NATO framework to reinforce the linkage between deterrence and diplomacy. NATO-EU dialogue and cooperation on defence issues could be further enhanced, and European countries should work more with like-minded partners at both bilat- eral or multilateral levels on the challenges of non-proliferation and disarmament in the twenty-first century. The demise of the INF Treaty should therefore re-energise the debate on European strategic autonomy, help support collective capability building – not least in NATO – and prompt new discussions on stronger multilateral rules on missile development, use and proliferation.
Topic:
Defense Policy, NATO, Arms Control and Proliferation, Treaties and Agreements, Military Strategy, and European Union
Political Geography:
Europe, North Atlantic, and North America

4020. Autonomy and Strategy: What Should Europe Want?

Author:
Jolyon Howorth
Publication Date:
04-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
Abstract:
Europe wants autonomy and it wants a strategy. Semantically, of course, “wants” has a double meaning. First, it means “lacks”. Europe lacks autonomy and it lacks a strategy. The second meaning of wants is “desires”. Here, we have a genuine question. How many EU member states genuinely desire autonomy for the EU? How many are genuinely in favor of a grand strategy – as opposed to the EU’s default practice of just muddling through? And there is also a third meaning behind wants: “needs”. In my view, the EU needs strategic autonomy. But having said that, all I have done is set a point of arrival. How to get there?
Topic:
Defense Policy, Regional Cooperation, Military Strategy, European Union, and Autonomy
Political Geography:
Europe