In this paper, an analysis is made of the stability of the international order across Europe’s periphery. The purpose is to see to what extent various cornerstones of the international order are under threat: is the Westphalian system failing in the Middle East? Will disputes over water lead to conflict? Specifically, this paper looks at five different ‘regimes’, or sets of international rules: the state sovereignty regime, the human rights regime, the international justice regime, the environmental regime, and the sea transportation regime. The main conclusion is that for those domains in which states — including external power — have a direct stake, the rules-based systems are holding. Meanwhile, in those where they do not — human rights and international justice — the system has collapsed, for all intents and purposes.

Read the paper here.

Photo: Georges Jansoone (JoJan) CC BY-SA 3.0], from Wikimedia Commons

The notion of Middle Powers is well established in academic literature, but not always used with success in practice. In a volatile world, there is much value in seeking partners that can help to uphold the current international order. In this paper, we develop criteria to define middle powers, and distinguish between ‘established’ middle powers (which share a liberal-democratic outlook) and ‘emerging’ middle powers (which can go either way). Secondly, the paper identifies specific middle power partners for the Netherlands across a number of relevant policy domains in the area of peace and security. Finally, the geopolitical ramifications of the ‘power shift to the East’, away from the US to China, are considered for middle powers, with a suggestion to create a global alliance of like-minded middle powers that is willing to uphold liberal-democratic values.

Read the paper here.

Authors: Willem Oosterveld and Bianca Torossian.

Photo: © PR UN, New York

The European periphery sometimes appears to present an unending series of violent events and sudden upheavals. For policy-makers, this raises questions about what to expect in terms of trends in political violence, their impact on the international order, and how to tackle the underlying causes. In this paper, we analyze trends in political violence and corresponding threats that could possibly materialize in Europe and the Netherlands. The main conclusion is that political violence remains at substantial levels across the periphery, and this is likely to remain so.

Read the paper here. 

Authors: Willem Oosterveld and Bianca Torossian.

Photo by alisdare1 on Visualhunt.com / CC BY-SA

European Defence Fund: Challenges and Opportunities for Dutch Participation

Confronted with numerous challenges at home and abroad, European defence is at a turning point. The European Commission has launched various initiatives to boost and strengthen European defence in general and the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base in particular. The European Defence Fund (EDF) constitutes a core element in these efforts. The EDF is intended to facilitate Member States in cooperating on research and development of key strategic defence capabilities, and in making defence materiel cooperation the norm.

Although the foundations have been laid, many aspects of the EDF remain to be determined. The window of opportunity for Member States (including the Netherlands) to shape the EDF agenda according to national interests and priorities is still open. The coming two years will be crucial for the establishment of a solid base for a national strategy on the EDF, and for the identification of the objectives to be pursued during the first seven-year cycle of the Programme. It is therefore crucial that the Netherlands is fully committed and prepared from the onset of the EDF, and that it maximises the preparation efforts necessary to become a successful participant.

This HCSS Security Paper examines the opportunities and the challenges for the Netherlands associated with the implementation of the EDF, outlines steps that can be taken at the national level to overcome these challenges, and offers a number of recommendations for relevant  stakeholders to ensure optimal added value of the EDF for the Netherlands.

Authors: Eric Wilms, Lotte de Jong, Katarina Kertysova, Frank Bekkers, Karlijn Jans

Read the paper here.

The internal cohesion of the European Union (EU) is being tested by both internal and external challenges. These include mass migration, rising populism, a lack of respect for the rule of law, terrorism, and economic and monetary difficulties. These challenges have placed a huge strain on the bonds between EU Member States and has illuminated the fragility of European unity and solidarity. Member States are increasingly unwilling to share sovereignty and comply with existing agreements, key norms and rules, and the rule of law. The result is an increase in vertical tensions between national and European levels of government — i.e., between the collective European interests — represented by the European Parliament (EP) and the European Commission (EC), and the national interests of individual EU Member States.

Some take these vertical tensions as a sign that the EU is falling apart. Others, like EC President Jean-Claude Juncker, claim that that EU Member States are actually working more closely together towards a common goal, in particular due to the current geopolitical situation. The latter rationale is driven by the erosion of the transatlantic Alliance, increasing aggression from belligerent powers such as China and Russia, and the chaos surrounding the Brexit process.

To which extent is the EU coming together or falling apart when it comes to key policy dossiers? Does the EU, as a regime, have the capacity to manage or channel increasing tensions with and between its Member States?

This paper defines regimes as “a set of implicit and explicit principles, norms and rules and decision-making procedures around which the actors converge in a particular area of international relations.”

Within regimes, norms are defined as standards of appropriate behavior. In the EU regime, norms are found in primary and secondary EU legislation and provide direction to the Union’s dealings in complex subject matters such as those central to this paper. These include solidarity, consensus, shared sovereignty, compliance, and values of democracy and the rule of law. Rules are defined as concrete actions in policy dossiers as well as the general rules of EU decision-making.

In this paper we examine these claims by looking at six norms and rules that represent critical components of EU cooperation. These rules are identified in the 2018 State of the Union:

• Economic and Monetary Union (Banking Union);
• Migration;
• The Schengen Zone;
• Defense cooperation;
• Sounds public finances;
• Tax harmonization;
• Principles of decision-making;
• Democracy and rule of law.

This paper first analyzes the current state of affairs in the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU), migration, defense cooperation and the Schengen Zone. The analyses of these topics include the definition of the regime at hand, the vertical tensions that pertain to it, and a key take-away. The paper will then look at two extra dimensions along which we measure how vertical tensions are influencing EU cooperation: 1) the principles of decision-making, and 2) democracy and the rule of law. The conclusion will provide an overall assessment of where and how the EU is coming together or falling apart and to what extent the EU regime has the capacity to manage or channel vertical tensions.

Read the paper here.

This paper, part of the Strategic Monitor 2018-2019, conducts an empirical analysis of trends in interstate military competition. It gauges the perceptions and intentions, capabilities, and conflict activities of leading military powers in the international system for the period 2008-2018. The principal conclusion is that interstate military competition is intensifying, and can be expected to continue doing so for the foreseeable future.  

Combined with the dramatic rise of internationalized intrastate conflict, there is a considerable risk of escalation from indirect to direct state-on-state conflict. For the Netherlands, the key implications of increasing military competition reside in the risks to the territorial and economic security of the Netherlands and its allies, and the erosion of international law. Read the paper here.

Authors: Tim Sweijs, Director of Research and Floris Holstege, assistant analyst. 

Nederland heeft er belang bij om bedrijven binnen haar grenzen te halen, samen te werken met buitenlandse ondernemingen of diensten uit te besteden om zo economische toegevoegde waarde te genereren. Voor nationale en regionale overheden en gemeenten is de economische ontwikkeling een topprioriteit waarbij innovatie in een open setting als belangrijk wordt gezien. Tegelijkertijd wordt onderkend dat dit niet zonder consequenties is en verantwoordelijkheid vraagt van allerlei partijen in het onderkennen van de risico’s die dat met zich mee brengt met betrekking tot bijvoorbeeld IP-diefstal of de ongewilde introductie van afhankelijkheid van buitenlandse partijen.

Naar aanleiding van vraagstukken met betrekking tot investeringen en aankopen in Nederland door buitenlandse ondernemingen  speelt steeds de vraag of bepaalde bedrijven wel of geen toestemming zou moeten worden geweigerd. Het gaat daarbij om investeringen dan wel het verwerven van het eigenaarschap van belangrijke bedrijven en infrastructuren, vooral als die mogelijk van belang zijn voor de (nationale) veiligheid.

Om deze vraag te kunnen beantwoorden heeft HCSS een analyse gemaakt van de bestaande regelgeving die hiervoor in Nederland voorhanden is.

Dit heeft geresulteerd in dit concept toetsingskader. Dit toetsingskader heeft geen officiële status en HCSS pretendeert ook zeker niet compleet te zijn, het is vooral een leidraad. Wel is onze inschatting dat met dit kader er een goed overzicht op nationaal niveau is gecreëerd dat als startpunt kan worden gebruikt bij de bepaling van de wenselijkheid van vestiging van buitenlandse organisaties, bedrijven of instellingen in Nederland.

Download de paper met de knop rechts of klik hier voor de mobiele versie. 

Since the dawn of the atomic age, nuclear deterrence in Europe has been primarily provided by the US, first through bilateral alliances and later within the NATO framework. Within this structure, US tactical nuclear weapons (TNWs) are currently based in the Netherlands (although this has never been confirmed nor denied by The Hague) and four other European non-nuclear NATO allies, and US strategic nuclear weapons cover European NATO territory.

In recent years the strength and cohesion of NATO has been jeopardized by rising tensions in the transatlantic relationship based on disagreements on defense spending. At the same time, Russia has been accused of violating the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, while EU-Russia relations have significantly worsened because of a series of other conflicts. This dynamic has weakened the perception of extended deterrence and increased the fear of decoupling USA and EU. It has prompted recent debates in EU states, for instance in Germany, on whether a European nuclear deterrent may be the way forward.

This snapshot gives a concise overview of the status quo of nuclear deterrence in Europe and the design of NATO nuclear sharing, explains the theoretical concept of extended nuclear deterrence, and offers a set of policy options for the EU and its member states to start addressing their changing strategic environment.

Download the snapshot via the button on the right or click here for the mobile version.

Authors: Mihailo Jovetic (former Assistant Analyst) and Michel Roelen (Strategic Analyst). 

The Global Security Pulse tracks emerging security trends and risks worldwide.

This month’s edition explores trends identified within the realm of political violence. This Pulse presents new and underappreciated developments regarding the effects of large-scale foreign infrastructure projects, the premature repatriation of refugees, and resource mismanagement on the prevalence of political violence, as well as how these recent trends and developments affect the contemporary international order.

The Global Security Pulse (GSP) is made using an advanced horizon-scanning methodology that relies on the manual monitoring of hundreds of validated foresight resources, the structured coding of signals, and expert assessment. The GSP product is based on the Clingendael Radar and has been further developed by The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies and the Clingendael Institute. It is part of the Strategic Monitor Program, which receives funding from the Dutch Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Defense.

Authors: Reinier Bergema, Esther Chavannes, Willem Oosterveld, Bianca Torossian (HCSS). Contributors: Peter Knoope (ICCT), Pieter Bindt, Tim Sweijs (HCSS), Danny Pronk (Clingendael).

Use the button on the right to download the Pulse or click here to access the mobile version.

Click here to access the methodology document.

DISCLAIMER

The research for and production of this report has been conducted within the PROGRESS research framework agreement. Responsibility for the contents and for the opinions expressed, rests solely with the authors and does not constitute, nor should be construed as, an endorsement by the Netherlands Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Defense.

In the beginning of 2018, the People’s Republic of China formally invited countries in Latin America and the Caribbean to join its Belt and Road initiative (BRI). Created in 2013, the BRI has mainly be seen as an endeavor to secure steady supplies of raw materials, principally from Africa and the Middle East, and to tie the economic fates of its Asian neighbors to that of China. The big question: why would China want to include the Caribbean and South Pacific in the BRI? As neither region is highly promising in terms of critical raw materials, speculation about Chinese engagement has focused on geopolitical motives.

HCSS’ latest report, ‘The Belt and Road Initiative Looks East,’ aims to understand the consequences of China’s dealings with the nations in the Caribbean and the South Pacific, and offers recommendations to the Netherlands and its strategic partners on how to respond to these developments.

In both regions, the Chinese engage in large-scale infrastructure projects, including building highways, hospitals and schools but also government buildings and presidential palaces. As is the case with BRI and related projects elsewhere, China’s economic inroads also have geopolitical consequences, and affects good governance at the local level. In the Caribbean, Beijing benefits from the strategic neglect on the part of the United States, which traditionally considered the Caribbean as its own backyard. In the South Pacific, China has shown actual interest in establishing permanent military bases, while countries in the region could face pressure to facilitate this because of their sizeable external debt to China.

The most important policy recommendations for the Netherlands and its partners include advice on how to help the islands’ societies to become more resilient to Chinese influence, economically, socially, and politically. This can be done by offering alternatives for Chinese loans and investments, including through supporting existing regional organizations; supporting good governance in the region through civil society; empowering local media outlets; teaming up with like minded countries who have interests in the region; and, when opportune, to reach out to China in seeking to make it a responsible security partner both in the Caribbean and in the South Pacific.

Download the report via the button on the right or click here for the mobile version.

Tim Sweijs, Director of Research at The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies, spoke recently at the SEDE Public Hearing on "Artificial Intelligence and Its Future Impact on Security". 

This event was held at the European Parliament in Brussels and is a result of the increasing need for awareness and discussion surrounding artificial intelligence and its role in the future of security and defense. Within his testimony, Tim drew reference to two HCSS reports: “Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Defense” and “Playing To Your Strengths: A Different Perspective on Future Capabilities for the Royal Netherlands Army”.

Download the testimony via the button on the right or click here.

In this new HCSS Energy Transition Program article, Strategic Energy Analyst Jan Frederik Braun and Strategic Advisor Energy Lucia van Geuns argue that effective carbon pricing and climate-related disclosure should be key pillars of the Dutch commitment to formulate a new climate agreement before the end of the year.

Strengthening these pillars contribute to an international level playing field for climate action and is the only meaningful way for the Netherlands to contribute to lower global CO2 emissions.

Download the article via the button on the right or click here for the mobile version.

Also available is a shortened opinion piece in Dutch, which was originally published in the October edition of the Dutch Environment Magazine. Please click here to view.

This report contains the results from a research project aimed at identifying new capabilities for the future Royal Netherlands Army (RNLA). Rather than sketch a full future force profile, it concentrates on promising new, or to be renewed capabilities. The results are intended to feed ongoing transformation efforts within the RNLA and inform the Army leadership in anticipation of the Defense Review 2020 [de Herijkingsnota].

In the context of the changing character of conflict on the one hand, and the burgeoning costs of traditional military platforms on the other, force providers should actively explore new capabilities for their armed forces that play to their strengths.
For small and medium sized force providers, their agility puts them in a relatively propitious position to pursue innovative concepts and capabilities, instead of trying to merely be smaller versions of the great powers’ militaries.

This report presents six themes, each suggesting a diverse set of new or to be renewed capabilities for the RNLA. 

1. Rethinking Phase Zero: Shaping the Human Domain;
2. Multi-Domain, Multi-Level Operations;
3. AI in the OODA Loop;
4. Robotic and Autonomous Systems;
5. Mosaic Warfare: Distributed and Networked Capabilities;
6. Empowering the Agents of Resilience

This report offers a concise description of each of these themes, examines relevant developments for the Army, and identifies promising and typically underexplored capabilities or lines of capability development that the RLNA can pursue in conjunction with a particular theme. This is summarized in Table 3 on page 53.

Download the report via the button on the right or click here to access the mobile version.

The Global Security Pulse tracks emerging security trends and risks worldwide.

This month’s edition explores trends connected to the existing nexus between crime and terrorism, and presents new and underappreciated developments regarding European disengagement strategies, rising right-wing extremism, countering FinTech abuse, and the effects on the international order.

The Global Security Pulse (GSP) makes use of an advanced horizon-scanning methodology that relies on the manual monitoring of hundreds of validated foresight resources, the structured coding of signals, and expert assessment. The GSP product is based on the Clingendael Radar and has been further developed by The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies and the Clingendael Institute. It is part of the Strategic Monitor Program, which receives funding from the Dutch Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Defense.

Authors: Reinier Bergema, Esther Chavannes (HCSS), Renske van der Veer, Walle Bos (ICCT). Contributors: Alastair Reed (TU Delft), Kristina Tranakieva, Tim Sweijs, Arlinda Rrustemi (HCSS), Danny Pronk, Aaron Arends (Clingendael).

Use the button on the right to download the Pulse or click here to access the mobile version.

Click here to access the methodology document.

DISCLAIMER

The research for and production of this report has been conducted within the PROGRESS research framework agreement. Responsibility for the contents and for the opinions expressed, rests solely with the authors and does not constitute, nor should be construed as, an endorsement by the Netherlands Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Defense.

Authors: Willem Oosterveld & Kristina Tranakieva 

In a time of Brexit and growing populism in Europe, economic conditions are never too far from the picture. Rising unemployment and inflation can be important drivers of Euroscepticism, sometimes even in times of economic growth.

This snapshot explains the connection between the economy and changing attitudes towards the E.U. While economic conditions are important for Euroscepticism, individuals cannot always accurately perceive them, often leaving room for politically-motivated narratives to fill the gap.

Download the Snapshot via the button on the button on the right or click here for the mobile version.