Poland and the Czech Republic : New Members Torn Between the EU and NATO

What makes some European transitional states assume the role as “trusted allies” to the United States in the war against terrorism in general and the Iraq war in particular, in sharp contrast to the Franco-German axis that vehemently oppose recent US policy in the Middle-east? Why was not Europe coupled tighter as a political entity than to allow the disarray that followed the US and UK initiatives regarding Iraq that seriously damaged the cohesion of NATO and the EU’s Common foreign and security policy? In order to begin answer those questions, this study will investigate the basic principles and policy ideas underlying the foreign policy of two increasingly central, yet surprisingly overlooked, actors in modern European politics – Poland and the Czech Republic.  A New Strategic Triangl

Crisis Decision Making and Management

Crisis management studies is a research area that analyzes how public and private actors respond to events that threaten individuals and society. There are many organizational and societal processes that enter this empirical space, and several social science disciplines have contributed to the development of this research area, such as sociology, political science, psychology, public administration, and international relations. A core question when studying the management of crises will always be: What characterizes high-stakes decisions made under pressing circumstances? When starting to answer this question, we need an understanding of both psychological and institutional forces that surround the situation in order to see the individual decision maker in context

Sweden’s Security Policy after Covid-19.

The pandemic has caused ruptures in how nations view their vulnerabilities and partnerships but also generated new thinking on national and regional security assets. Sweden became the global outlier early in the outbreak—pictured as unconcerned with the spread of the disease, indeed shooting for herd immunity according to some experts and pundits. This image, whether justified or not, came with a cost. Borders with the neighboring Nordics were closed for long periods, its standing in the European Union (EU) arena suffered, and the reputation of this self-proclaimed humanitarian powerhouse took a beating. The national dialogue, especially concerning security and international partnerships, has changed as a result of this “collective trauma.” As light at the end of the tunnel is appearing, new bearings are taken as to improving national readiness, strengthening security, and realignments needed to stay afloat in the trade war that has ensued in a parallel development. The pandemic was a catalyst of many things but perhaps the most lasting will be the need for strategic direction that has not been very pressing since the end of the Cold War. In Sweden that means a revitalized domestic conversation on which of a long list of national interests are truly important in this new era of global turbulence

Sweden’s Security Policy after Covid-19.

The pandemic has caused ruptures in how nations view their vulnerabilities and partnerships but also generated new thinking on national and regional security assets. Sweden became the global outlier early in the outbreak—pictured as unconcerned with the spread of the disease, indeed shooting for herd immunity according to some experts and pundits. This image, whether justified or not, came with a cost. Borders with the neighboring Nordics were closed for long periods, its standing in the European Union (EU) arena suffered, and the reputation of this self-proclaimed humanitarian powerhouse took a beating. The national dialogue, especially concerning security and international partnerships, has changed as a result of this “collective trauma.” As light at the end of the tunnel is appearing, new bearings are taken as to improving national readiness, strengthening security, and realignments needed to stay afloat in the trade war that has ensued in a parallel development. The pandemic was a catalyst of many things but perhaps the most lasting will be the need for strategic direction that has not been very pressing since the end of the Cold War. In Sweden that means a revitalized domestic conversation on which of a long list of national interests are truly important in this new era of global turbulence

The System for Crisis Management in Sweden: Collaborative, Conformist, Contradictory

This chapter introduces the system for crisis management in Sweden. Over the last century, Sweden has gone from being a poor European backwater to being among the countries with the highest human development in the world. The droughts and harsh winters that killed thousands and drove numerous Swedes to emigrate in the past are mere distractions today and the contemporary system for crisis management is designed to deal with a broader variety of crises than the ones triggered by natural hazards. The system is based on the principles of responsibility, parity and proximity, and distributes sector and area responsibility for crisis management to numerous actors. It is built to a great extent on collaboration between these actors, which is challenging but working relatively well in the cultural context of consensus-seeking and compliance to official guidelines and accepted rules of engagement. However, the system is in itself ambiguous in the sense of distributing responsibility to all kinds of actors and then focusing almost exclusively on public actors in legislation, guidelines and practice. There is also often a gap between policy and practice concerning how area responsibility is exercised, and a lack of clarity in current sector specific legislation

Explaining Success and Failure in Crisis Coordination

In virtually every assessment of responses to large-scale crises and disasters, coordination is identified as a critical failure factor. After the crisis, official committees and political opponents often characterize the early phases of the response as a ‘failure to coordinate.’ Not surprisingly, improved coordination quickly emerges as the prescribed solution. Coordination, then, is apparently both the problem and the solution. But the proposed solutions rarely solve the problem: coordination continues to mar most crises and disasters. In the absence of a shared body of knowledge on coordination, it is hard to formulate a normative framework that allows for systematic assessment of coordination in times of crisis. As coordination is widely perceived as an important function of crisis and disaster management, this absence undermines a fair and balanced assessment of crisis management performance. This paper seeks to address that void. We aim to develop a framework that explains both the failure and success of crisis coordination. We do this by exploring the relevant literature, reformulating what coordination is and distilling from research the factors that cause failure and success

When Power Changes Hands: The Political Psychology of Leadership Succession in Democracies

Leadership succession in democratic governments and political parties is an ubiquitous but relatively understudied phenomen, where the political becomes intensely personal and vice versa. This article outlines the puzzles that leadership succession pose