Space as a military domain is becoming increasingly important. Global powers are investing huge amounts of money into the development and construction of new (military) space assets and it seems as though we’re on the eve of a new ‘space race’. In a new HCSS snapshot, Patrick Bolder and Esther Chavannes shed light on the opportunities and challenges these military space developments go hand in hand with.
From observation and communication applications to weapon delivery, space will become indispensable to military operations. While major global powers are investing heavily in military space infrastructure and assets, societies’ dependency on space is also increasing rapidly.
Societies’ dependency on space and the prospect of space as the military domain of the future, raises questions which require answers. To be able to answer these, it is imperative to define how the military can use and protect space assets. At the same time, protection of our daily life on Earth – already highly dependent on accurate and unincumbered functioning of many space assets – requires careful consideration as well.
“The world is badly under-prepared for even modest biological threats, leaving us vulnerable to potentially huge impacts on individual lives, societal well-being, economic activity and national security. Revolutionary new biotechnologies promise miraculous advances, but also create daunting challenges of oversight and control.” – World Economic Forum
“The world is badly under-prepared for even modest biological threats, leaving us vulnerable to potentially huge impacts on individual lives, societal well-being, economic activity and national security. Revolutionary new biotechnologies promise miraculous advances, but also create daunting challenges of oversight and control.” – World Economic Forum
De moordaanslag op Navalny, het meervoudige gebruik van chemische wapens in Syrië, de recentelijke brand in een Russisch biologisch lab - dergelijke incidenten zijn weliswaar onwaarschijnlijk, maar in potentie hebben ze een gigantische impact. Hoe goed is Nederland hierop voorbereid? In dit rapport analyseren Paul Sinning, Stephan de Spiegeleire en Frank Bekkers actuele biologische en chemische dreigingen en of de Nederlandse B/C-kennisinfrastructuur in het licht van deze dreigingen voldoet.
Het verleden toont aan dat zowel de chemische als de biologische dreiging reëel is. Daarnaast is er momenteel sprake van een aanzienlijke drempelverlaging op dit gebied: de technische en praktische waarschijnlijkheid van B/C-aanslagen is de laatste jaren alleen maar toegenomen.
De huidige kennis over B/C-strijdmiddelen en de organisatie hiervan kent diverse tekortkomingen. Gelukkig hebben er in Nederland nauwelijks noemenswaardige incidenten met B/C-middelen plaatsgevonden. De keerzijde hiervan is dat dit de Nederlandse casuïstiek weinig houvast biedt op de vraag of in Nederland sprake is van een acceptabel basisniveau van kennis en of deze kennis in de praktijk zijn waarde heeft bewezen.
Tegen deze achtergrond maakt het rapport de volgende aanbevelingen:
- Neem het thema ‘CBRN’ op in de nationale risicobeoordeling;
- Programmeer een nationale B/C-strategie;
- Formuleer een gemeenschappelijk afwegingskader voor de prioritering van de kennisinfrastructuur;
- Richt kennissturing op systeemniveau in;
- Organiseer het overdragen en delen van kennis naar en tussen first responders
- Investeer in een integrale kostenbewuste benadering van nationale risico’s
De strategische dreigingen van de toekomst zijn in toenemende mate hybride: militaire middelen en cyberoperaties, beïnvloedingscampagnes en economische sancties worden georkestreerd ingezet. Hoe kan de Koninklijke Landmacht hier het beste op inspelen? Je leest het in het nieuwe HCSS rapport van Rob de Wijk, Tim Sweijs en Frank Bekkers.
Hybride oorlogsvoering kent een lange voorgeschiedenis, maar is recente tijden vooral door Rusland toegepast en gepionierd. Deze hernieuwde Russische assertiviteit dwingt de NAVO om een nieuwe balans te vinden tussen traditionele collectieve verdediging en operaties buiten het Verdragsgebied enerzijds, en hybride dreigingen en operaties anderzijds.
In dit nieuwe HCSS rapport analyseren Rob de Wijk, Tim Sweijs en Frank Bekkers wat de hybride dreigingen van de toekomst zijn en wat voor rol de Koninklijke Landmacht op dit vlak kan spelen. Dit doen zij door de Russische wijze van hybride oorlogsvoering te analyseren en vervolgens te duiden wat het antwoord van de Koninklijke Landmacht hierop kan of moet zijn.
Lees het complete rapport hier.
Conflicts between states have taken on new forms and hybrid operations play an increasingly important role in this volatile environment. Belligerent powers introduce a new model of conflict fought by proxy, across domains, and below the conventional war threshold to advance their foreign policy goals while limiting decisive responsiveness of their victim.
Conflicts between states have taken on new forms and hybrid operations play an increasingly important role in this volatile environment. Belligerent powers introduce a new model of conflict fought by proxy, across domains, and below the conventional war threshold to advance their foreign policy goals while limiting decisive responsiveness of their victim.
Given these hybrid threats, how should Western states respond? Are there any tools available Western states have that can draw red lines into blurred lines of hybrid conflict?
About this Paper
China has long maintained that it has sole exclusive control over the contested areas of the South China Sea. In recent years, this rhetoric has been backed up by concrete actions. However, China’s actions are challenging established international norms – specifically ones of international passage and freedom of navigation. Norms are not static, they can change with time. How can Western partners prevent this norm from changing? What actions can they take?
This case study analyses such actions. American freedom of navigation operations, as well as legal challenges and diplomatic engagement, all signal that many states prefer to maintain the existing norm of freedom of navigation in these areas. Yet, this case study finds that the Chinese pursuit of norm revision may be slow but more effective down the line as it spills over to other emerging powers.
About the Paper Series
This paper is part of a series that argues that the West does have one powerful tool that can help shape hybrid threat actors. That tool is international norms. Norms set international expectations of acceptable state behavior – yardsticks which the international community can leverage when calling out unscrupulous states.
But norms do not develop out of nothing. This report applies the norm lifecycle theory, which analyzes norm development from emergence to cascade and internalization, to five case studies to to better understand the real-life strategies, tools of influence, dilemmas, and trade-offs that empower state-led norm processes. The report not only considers how norms develop, but also what role they play within the counter-hybrid posture of a state, and how they, in conjunction with countermeasures, shape adversarial hybrid behavior.
This report also explores four other case studies on Russian, Chinese, and ISIS hybrid conflict actions. The case studies are published individually as a paper series and compiled in a full report with complete overview of the theoretical underpinnings of norm development and the key insights that emerge from the analysis, as well as the concluding remarks and policy recommendations. The policy recommendations explore ways for the Netherlands and its partners to help promote and enforce norms of restraint beyond classic like-minded groups of states while being cognizant of unintended consequences.
Please find an overview of the other case studies below.
- Case Study 1: Protecting Electoral Infrastructure from Russian Cyber Operations
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 2: Responding to Russian Disinformation in Peacetime
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 3: Countering ISIS propaganda in Conflict Theatres
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 4: Responding to Chinese Economic Espionage
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
Conflicts between states have taken on new forms and hybrid operations play an increasingly important role in this volatile environment. Belligerent powers introduce a new model of conflict fought by proxy, across domains, and below the conventional war threshold to advance their foreign policy goals while limiting decisive responsiveness of their victim.
Conflicts between states have taken on new forms and hybrid operations play an increasingly important role in this volatile environment. Belligerent powers introduce a new model of conflict fought by proxy, across domains, and below the conventional war threshold to advance their foreign policy goals while limiting decisive responsiveness of their victim.
Given these hybrid threats, how should Western states respond? Are there any tools available Western states have that can draw red lines into blurred lines of hybrid conflict?
Download this case study here.
About this Paper
In the past few years, Chinese economic espionage has become a major issue of concern for Western powers. Ultimately, this cumulated in the issuing of the 2015 ‘Memorandum of Understanding’ (MoU) between the U.S. and China prohibiting such behaviour – but in recent years China has been backsliding on this agreement. What actions are available to Western states to combat the theft of their intellectual property (IP)? Can a norm be sustained prohibiting the cyber-enabled theft of IP?
This case study examines both questions. It finds that the West has used a variety of tools, from sanctions to indictments to diplomatic agreements, and considers their second-order normative effects. These actions led to a norm that prohibits cyber-enabled IP theft for economic benefits. However, with the recent resurgence in Chinese IP theft, can this norm truly be sustained?
About the Paper Series
This paper is part of a series that argues that the West does have one powerful tool that can help shape hybrid threat actors. That tool is international norms. Norms set international expectations of acceptable state behavior – yardsticks which the international community can leverage when calling out unscrupulous states.
But norms do not develop out of nothing. This report applies the norm lifecycle theory, which analyzes norm development from emergence to cascade and internalization, to five case studies to to better understand the real-life strategies, tools of influence, dilemmas, and trade-offs that empower state-led norm processes. The report not only considers how norms develop, but also what role they play within the counter-hybrid posture of a state, and how they, in conjunction with countermeasures, shape adversarial hybrid behavior.
This report also explores four other case studies on Russian, Chinese, and ISIS hybrid conflict actions. The case studies are published individually as a paper series and compiled in a full report with complete overview of the theoretical underpinnings of norm development and the key insights that emerge from the analysis, as well as the concluding remarks and policy recommendations. The policy recommendations explore ways for the Netherlands and its partners to help promote and enforce norms of restraint beyond classic like-minded groups of states while being cognizant of unintended consequences.
Please find an overview of the other case studies below.
- Case Study 1: Protecting Electoral Infrastructure from Russian Cyber Operations
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 2: Responding to Russian Disinformation in Peacetime
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 3: Countering ISIS propaganda in Conflict Theatres
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 5: Upholding Freedom of Navigation in the South China Sea
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
"If the multilateral system collapses, this would have catastrophic consequences for the economy and security of the Netherlands.” – Rob de Wijk
The international multilateral system brings the Netherlands a lot of benefits. For example, against a contribution of €5.4 million to the WTO in 2019, the Netherlands recorded a 2.9% increase in exports worth almost €13 billion. Moreover, the internal European market increases the per capita income by a further €1,000 per year: the annual benefits for the Netherlands are between €3,000 and €5,000 per capita per year, while the net remittance is about €150.
The vital interests of the Netherlands can only be protected through multilateral cooperation. The global balance of power, however, is changing rapidly, and the multilateral system is under pressure. Erosion or even collapse of the multilateral system could potentially have disastrous consequences for the Netherlands: it would expose the country to geopolitical forces over which we have no control and relegate it to a toy of the major powers.
Download the full report here.
In this new study, "Adjusting the Multilateral System to Safeguard Dutch Interests", Rob de Wijk, Jack Thompson and Esther Chavannes illustrate:
-
the importance of a well-functioning multilateral system for a middle power like the Netherlands;
-
the advantages of multilateralism for the Netherlands;
-
the consequences of the impending demise of the system;
-
how the Netherlands can contribute to revitalizing the international system;
-
and which system reforms are needed in order to achieve this.
In order to breathe new life into the international system, the Netherlands needs to start thinking in terms of power politics and forge alliances with like-minded and often larger countries, both in and outside of the European Union. This also means that Western countries will have to make concessions when shaping the new multilateral system.
Therefore, the Netherlands must provide a new narrative which gives insight into the importance and benefits of multilateralism in times of major global power shifts and additionally give direction to the modernization of the multilateral system.
“To promote reform of the multilateral system, the Netherlands will need to forge coalitions with like-minded countries, using both coalition-building and hard-nosed power politics.” – Jack Thompson
In a series of Annexes, the study explores in detail the challenges facing multilateral organizations that are especially important to the Netherlands: the World Trade Organization (WTO), the UN Security Council (UNSC), and the UN’s human rights bodies.
You can download the complete report in English here, or find a Dutch summary here.
Conflicts between states have taken on new forms and hybrid operations play an increasingly important role in this volatile environment. Belligerent powers introduce a new model of conflict fought by proxy, across domains, and below the conventional war threshold to advance their foreign policy goals while limiting decisive responsiveness of their victim.
Conflicts between states have taken on new forms and hybrid operations play an increasingly important role in this volatile environment. Belligerent powers introduce a new model of conflict fought by proxy, across domains, and below the conventional war threshold to advance their foreign policy goals while limiting decisive responsiveness of their victim.
Given these hybrid threats, how should Western states respond? Are there any tools available Western states have that can draw red lines into blurred lines of hybrid conflict?
Download this case study here.
About this Paper
In 2014, ISIS began embarking on a massive propaganda campaign primarily aimed at foreign audiences. This campaign notably abused new social media technologies to reach millions. Responding to such a campaign is tough for Western authorities, especially as rivals like Russia were hoping to exploit any precedents the West may set. How should they respond? How can they avoid setting undesirable precedents?
This case study explores the Western countermeasures, their second-order normative effects, and a potential norm proposal for information operations. The key Western responses were strategic communication, psychological operations, and covert cyber operations. A common theme emerged from these countermeasures in the form of a normative benchmark of truthfulness for information operations: the broader the target audience and the mediums used (e.g. radio or television), the more truth is prevalent. Inversely, targeted covert influencing operations (e.g. PSYOPS and MILDEC) may leverage a higher degree of falsehoods.
About the Paper Series
This paper is part of a series that argues that the West does have one powerful tool that can help shape hybrid threat actors. That tool is international norms. Norms set international expectations of acceptable state behavior – yardsticks which the international community can leverage when calling out unscrupulous states.
But norms do not develop out of nothing. This report applies the norm lifecycle theory, which analyzes norm development from emergence to cascade and internalization, to five case studies to to better understand the real-life strategies, tools of influence, dilemmas, and trade-offs that empower state-led norm processes. The report not only considers how norms develop, but also what role they play within the counter-hybrid posture of a state, and how they, in conjunction with countermeasures, shape adversarial hybrid behavior.
This report also explores four other case studies on Russian, Chinese, and ISIS hybrid conflict actions. The case studies are published individually as a paper series and compiled in a full report with complete overview of the theoretical underpinnings of norm development and the key insights that emerge from the analysis, as well as the concluding remarks and policy recommendations. The policy recommendations explore ways for the Netherlands and its partners to help promote and enforce norms of restraint beyond classic like-minded groups of states while being cognizant of unintended consequences.
Please find an overview of the other case studies below.
- Case Study 1: Protecting Electoral Infrastructure from Russian Cyber Operations
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 2: Responding to Russian disinformation in peacetime
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 4: Responding to Chinese Economic Espionage
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 5: Upholding Freedom of Navigation in the South China Sea
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
"Als het multilateraal systeem instort, zou dit voor een open land als Nederland catastrofale gevolgen voor de economie en de veiligheid hebben." – Rob de Wijk
"Als het multilateraal systeem instort, zou dit voor een open land als Nederland catastrofale gevolgen voor de economie en de veiligheid hebben." – Rob de Wijk
Het multilaterale systeem, waar Nederland onderdeel van is, levert ons ontzettend veel op. Zo boekte Nederland tegenover een bijdrage van €5,4 miljoen aan de WTO in 2019 een exportstijging van 2,9% procent ter waarde van bijna €13 miljard. En de interne Europese markt verhoogt het inkomen per hoofd van de bevolking met nog eens €1.000 per jaar: de jaarlijkse baten voor Nederland liggen tussen de €3.000 en €5.000 per hoofd van de bevolking per jaar, terwijl de netto afdracht ongeveer €150 bedraagt.
De vitale belangen van Nederland kunnen uitsluitend beschermd worden door multilaterale samenwerking, maar dit systeem staat onder druk. Door wereldwijde machtsverschuivingen verandert het huidige multilaterale systeem, met mogelijk desastreuze gevolgen voor Nederland. Erosie of zelfs instorting van het multilateraal systeem zou vergaande gevolgen hebben: het zou ons land blootstellen aan geopolitieke krachten waarover we geen controle hebben en ons degraderen tot speelbal van de grootmachten.
In een nieuwe studie van HCSS geven Rob de Wijk en zijn medeauteurs aan welke hervormingen noodzakelijk zijn om het multilaterale systeem overeind te houden en nieuw leven in te blazen. Dit vereist op de eerste plaats dat Nederland machtspolitiek gaat denken, en coalities moet smeden met gelijkgestemde, vaak grotere landen binnen en buiten de EU.
Het is onontkoombaar dat Westerse landen bij de vormgeving van een nieuw multilateraal systeem water bij de wijn moeten doen. Daarom moet Nederland met een nieuw narratief komen waarmee het belang en de opbrengsten van het multilateralisme in tijden van grote mondiale veranderingen inzichtelijk wordt gemaakt en richting wordt gegeven aan de modernisering van het stelsel.
Het volledige Engelstalige rapport zal worden gepubliceerd op donderdag 1 oktober 2020.
Lees hier de Nederlandse samenvatting van het rapport, geschreven door Rob de Wijk.
Conflicts between states have taken on new forms and hybrid operations play an increasingly important role in this volatile environment. Belligerent powers introduce a new model of conflict fought by proxy, across domains, and below the conventional war threshold to advance their foreign policy goals while limiting decisive responsiveness of their victim.
Conflicts between states have taken on new forms and hybrid operations play an increasingly important role in this volatile environment. Belligerent powers introduce a new model of conflict fought by proxy, across domains, and below the conventional war threshold to advance their foreign policy goals while limiting decisive responsiveness of their victim.
Given these hybrid threats, how should Western states respond? Are there any tools available Western states have that can draw red lines into blurred lines of hybrid conflict?
Download this case study here.
About this Paper
In addition to being victims of Russian hacking during their 2016 and 2018 elections, the U.S. and France were also exposed to Russian disinformation campaigns designed to target domestic audiences. Disinformation is especially difficult to respond to as it is not explicitly banned by international law. So, how should states respond to being a victim of a disinformation campaign? Are there any non-legal instruments states can use to support their case?
This case study analyses the differing American and French countermeasures, which ranged from offensive cyberoperations to anti-disinformation campaigns, and their second-order normative effects. In lieu of explicit norm emergence, our analysis offers suggestions for framing and linking a norm proposal against disinformation, as well as first steps to assist in socialization, to prohibit concerted Russian covert influence operations aimed at undermining democratic processes, while allowing overt support for democratic processes and voices.
About the Paper Series
This paper is part of a series that argues that the West does have one powerful tool that can help shape hybrid threat actors. That tool is international norms. Norms set international expectations of acceptable state behavior – yardsticks which the international community can leverage when calling out unscrupulous states.
But norms do not develop out of nothing. This report applies the norm lifecycle theory, which analyzes norm development from emergence to cascade and internalization, to five case studies to to better understand the real-life strategies, tools of influence, dilemmas, and trade-offs that empower state-led norm processes. The report not only considers how norms develop, but also what role they play within the counter-hybrid posture of a state, and how they, in conjunction with countermeasures, shape adversarial hybrid behavior.
This report also explores four other case studies on Russian, Chinese, and ISIS hybrid conflict actions. The case studies are published individually as a paper series and compiled in a full report with complete overview of the theoretical underpinnings of norm development and the key insights that emerge from the analysis, as well as the concluding remarks and policy recommendations. The policy recommendations explore ways for the Netherlands and its partners to help promote and enforce norms of restraint beyond classic like-minded groups of states while being cognizant of unintended consequences.
Please find an overview of the other case studies below.
- Case Study 1: Protecting Electoral Infrastructure from Russian Cyber Operations
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 3: Countering ISIS Propaganda in Conflict Theatres
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 4: Responding to Chinese Economic Espionage
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 5: Upholding Freedom of Navigation in the South China Sea
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
Conflicts between states have taken on new forms and hybrid operations play an increasingly important role in this volatile environment. Belligerent powers introduce a new model of conflict fought by proxy, across domains, and below the conventional war threshold to advance their foreign policy goals while limiting decisive responsiveness of their victim.
Given these hybrid threats, how should Western states respond? Are there any tools available Western states have that can draw red lines into blurred lines of hybrid conflict?
Download this case study here.
About this Paper
In 2016 and 2018, both the U.S. and France found their electoral infrastructure under attack from Russian malicious cyber operations. Notably, this included the hacking of the Presidential campaigns of Hilary Clinton and Emmanuel Macron. How should Western governments respond to these attacks? Are there any effective tools they could use to deter such behavior?
This case study details how Western governments used a mix of sanctions, indictments, and diplomatic expulsions to respond to these intrusions, as well as their second-order normative effects. As such, a norm emerged which prohibited the cyberoperations against electoral infrastructure. This case study details how this norm emerged, which actors were key, and the challenges we face today in keeping it alive.
About the Paper Series
This paper is part of a series that argues that the West does have one powerful tool that can help shape hybrid threat actors. That tool is international norms. Norms set international expectations of acceptable state behavior – yardsticks which the international community can leverage when calling out unscrupulous states.
But norms do not develop out of nothing. This report applies the norm lifecycle theory, which analyzes norm development from emergence to cascade and internalization, to five case studies to to better understand the real-life strategies, tools of influence, dilemmas, and trade-offs that empower state-led norm processes. The report not only considers how norms develop, but also what role they play within the counter-hybrid posture of a state, and how they, in conjunction with countermeasures, shape adversarial hybrid behavior.
This report also explores four other case studies on Russian, Chinese, and ISIS hybrid conflict actions. The case studies are published individually as a paper series and compiled in a full report with complete overview of the theoretical underpinnings of norm development and the key insights that emerge from the analysis, as well as the concluding remarks and policy recommendations. The policy recommendations explore ways for the Netherlands and its partners to help promote and enforce norms of restraint beyond classic like-minded groups of states while being cognizant of unintended consequences.
Please find an overview of the other case studies below.
- Case Study 2: Responding to Russian Disinformation in Peacetime
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 3: Countering ISIS Propaganda in Conflict Theatres
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 4: Responding to Chinese Economic Espionage
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 5: Upholding Freedom of Navigation in the South China Sea
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
Conflicts between states have taken on new forms and hybrid operations play an increasingly important role in this volatile environment. Belligerent powers introduce a new model of conflict fought by proxy, across domains, and below the conventional war threshold to advance their foreign policy goals while limiting decisive responsiveness of their victim.
Conflicts between states have taken on new forms and hybrid operations play an increasingly important role in this volatile environment. Belligerent powers introduce a new model of conflict fought by proxy, across domains, and below the conventional war threshold to advance their foreign policy goals while limiting decisive responsiveness of their victim.
Given these hybrid threats, how should Western states respond? Are there any tools available Western states have that can draw red lines into blurred lines of hybrid conflict?
Download the full report here.
This paper series argues that the West does have one powerful tool that can help shape hybrid threat actors. That tool is international norms. Norms set international expectations of acceptable state behavior – yardsticks which the international community can leverage when calling out unscrupulous states.
But norms do not develop out of nothing. This report applies the norm lifecycle theory, which analyzes norm development from emergence to cascade and internalization, to five case studies to to better understand the real-life strategies, tools of influence, dilemmas, and trade-offs that empower state-led norm processes. The report not only considers how norms develop, but also what role they play within the counter-hybrid posture of a state, and how they, in conjunction with countermeasures, shape adversarial hybrid behavior.
As many norm entrepreneurs often seem to underestimate, the pursuit of countermeasures may lead to unintended second-order normative effects that undermine their long-term strategic interests. For instance, overt cyber pre-deployment in adversary systems can introduce a norm of mutually assured debilitated, while overt offensive cyberspace operations in response to disinformation can weaponize information in the same ways as Russia. This scenario is explored in-depth in the second case study of this report dealing with Russian disinformation campaigns.
This report also explores four other case studies on Russian, Chinese, and ISIS hybrid conflict actions. The case studies are published individually as a paper series and compiled in a full report with complete overview of the theoretical underpinnings of norm development and the key insights that emerge from the analysis, as well as the concluding remarks and policy recommendations. The policy recommendations explore ways for the Netherlands and its partners to help promote and enforce norms of restraint beyond classic like-minded groups of states while being cognizant of unintended consequences.
Please find an overview of the separate case studies below:
- Case Study 1: Protecting Electoral Infrastructure from Russian cyber operations
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 2: Responding to Russian Disinformation in Peacetime
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 3: Countering ISIS Propaganda in Conflict Theatres
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 4: Responding to Chinese Economic Espionage
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
- Case Study 5: Upholding Freedom of Navigation in the South China Sea
Download Case Study | Download Factsheet
"Imagine Carl von Clausewitz sitting on a tripod stool playing with Lego"
On June 30th, The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies (HCSS) and the Netherlands Defence Academy (NLDA), hosted a Global Expert Symposium on NATO’s Warfighting Capstone Concept (NWCC), in coordination with NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Transformation (SACT). At the Symposium the NWCC Team presented unclassified findings from the Capstone Concept, followed by discussions between experts. Now, HCSS and the NLDA present the key findings of the Symposium.
Even though the Alliance’s historical track-record shows that future success is possible, this is not guaranteed. NATO’s military superiority is under threat, with China and Russia actively recalibrating more offensive military postures. Today, Members of the Alliance are already subject to persistent attacks under traditional thresholds of war. Conflicts close to the Alliance borders also harness considerable spillover risk to Allied territories. Tomorrow, conflicts will be characterized by the widening of the battlespace, the fusion of physical and non-physical dimensions, and the rise of borderless warfare.
The report presents the main takeaways from the Symposium, which guide NATO’s future capability development so that it can continue to defend and protect the interests and values of its members.
Read the complete report here.
Wat zijn de gevolgen van Covid-19 voor de Europese veiligheid? In een nieuwe notitie gaan HCSS onderzoekers Tim Sweijs, Femke Remmits, Hugo van Manen en Frank Bekkers in op de veiligheidsimplicaties van de pandemie voor Europa en geven zij aanbevelingen voor het Nederlands buitenland- en veiligheidsbeleid om deze het hoofd te bieden.
Wat zijn de gevolgen van Covid-19 voor de Europese veiligheid? In een nieuwe notitie gaan HCSS onderzoekers Tim Sweijs, Femke Remmits, Hugo van Manen en Frank Bekkers in op de veiligheidsimplicaties van de pandemie voor Europa en geven zij aanbevelingen voor het Nederlands buitenland- en veiligheidsbeleid om deze het hoofd te bieden.
Hoe zal de coronacrisis de internationale machtsverhoudingen veranderen? Welk spoor trekt de virusuitbraak door bestaande bondgenootschappen? Welke lering kunnen we trekken uit de gevolgen van pandemieën uit het verleden? En wat zijn de belangrijkste te verwachten veiligheidsdynamieken voor de komende vijf jaar?
Covid-19 is in de eerste plaats een versneller van al langer zichtbare veiligheidstrends in en aan de randen van Europa op het gebied van democratie, goed bestuur en mensenrechten, sociale veiligheid, politieke stabiliteit, interstatelijke competitie en geopolitieke rivaliteit.
Het beteugelen van het virus vereist maatregelen zonder precedent en zal uiteindelijk grote sociale en politieke gevolgen hebben, ook voor Nederland. De coronacrisis kan in de toekomst leiden tot erosie van democratische normen en principes, het vergroten van de maatschappelijke polarisatie en het destabiliseren van kwetsbare landen aan de randen van het Europese continent. Bovendien gooit de pandemie olie op het vuur van interstatelijke competitie.
Hoe kan Nederland deze aanzienlijke gevolgen het hoofd bieden? Onze notitie benadrukt de volgende aandachtspunten voor het Nederlands buitenland- en veiligheidsbeleid:
- Nederland moet zich internationaal blijven inzetten voor democratische normen, goed bestuur en de bescherming van mensenrechten, speerpunten van het Nederlands beleid;
- Het voorkomen van verdere escalatie van maatschappelijke onrust en politieke instabiliteit in en aan de randen van Europa vergen Nederlandse inspanningen en inzet op het gebied van conflictpreventie, conflictstabilisatie en conflictindamming;
- De mondiale weerbaarheid tegen een volgende pandemie zal versterkt moeten worden. Deze weerbaarheid stoelt op voldoende reactiecapaciteit van de zorg; op R&D-capaciteit om vaccins te ontwikkelen én te produceren; en op het verbeteren van internationale early warning capaciteiten.
Download de notitie nu door op de “Download PDF”-knop te drukken.
Deze notitie is onderdeel van een serie waarin onderzoekers van Instituut Clingendael en het Den Haag Centrum voor Strategische Studies (HCSS) hun licht laten schijnen op de consequenties van deze pandemie. Eerder aan bod kwamen de geopolitieke gevolgen van de Coronacrisis, en wat dit betekent voor de Europese Unie (EU) en voor het multilaterale veiligheidsstelsel.
Disclaimer:
Het onderzoek naar en de productie van deze notitie is uitgevoerd binnen de PROGRESS kaderovereenkomst voor onderzoek. De verantwoordelijkheid voor de inhoud en meningen berust uitsluitend bij de auteurs en moet niet worden opgevat als een standpunt van de Nederlandse Ministeries van Buitenlandse Zaken en Defensie.
Challenges related to the water situation in Iraq are numerous and complex. While the supply of water from the Euphrates and Tigris rivers is decreasing, water demand is rapidly increasing. Iraq’s water supply has fallen by 30% since the 1980’s as a result of lower levels of rainfall, the construction of dams, heavy water use by the oil industry and the impacts of war on vital water infrastructure. By 2025, overall water supply is predicted to decrease by up to 60%, compared to 2015. Water quality has also deteriorated, resulting in health crises and widespread protests.
The water challenges in Iraq have an interprovincial dimension that has received little attention at the national and international level. Even though the relationship between water and stability is complex and dependent on context, it can be asserted that geographical, legal, economic and socio-political factors impact the likelihood of water-related conflict.
How should this urgent and complex crisis be addressed? In this working paper, Water, Peace and Security (WPS) experts Dorith Kool, Laura Birkman and Bianca Torossian analyze this pressing and under-researched crisis and outline the building blocks to effectively address water-related conflict in Iraq.
Download the working paper here or by clicking on the “Download PDF” button on the top right of this page.
Water, Peace and Security:
This working paper is an outcome of The Water, Peace and Security (WPS) partnership. The partnership was founded in 2018 to pioneer the development of innovative tools and services that help identify and address water-related security risks. These tools and services can link hydrological, social, economic, ecological and political factors to pinpoint changes in short-term water availability and their potential impacts on society. Based on this information, evidence-based actions can be taken to mitigate human security risks, which WPS facilitates through capacity development and dialogue support.
WPS is a collaboration between the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs and a consortium of six partners: IHE Delft (lead partner), World Resources Institute (WRI), Deltares, The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies (HCSS), Wetlands International and International Alert.
The Expert Group of the International Military Council on Climate and Security (IMCCS) released a new report, “Climate and Security in the Indo-Asia Pacific”, urging leaders to make climate change a security priority in the Indo-Asia Pacific.
The Expert Group of the International Military Council on Climate and Security (IMCCS) released a new report, “Climate and Security in the Indo-Asia Pacific”, urging leaders to make climate change a security priority in the Indo-Asia Pacific.
This unprecedented report clearly outlines how climate change is already affecting the security situation in the Indo-Asia Pacific region and what the future security risks are.
The IMCCS is a group of senior military leaders, security experts, and security institutions across the globe – currently hailing from 38 countries in every hemisphere – dedicated to anticipating, analyzing, and addressing the security risks of a changing climate.
The emergence and ongoing consequences of Covid-19 have exposed serious societal vulnerabilities, even in wealthy nations, and demonstrated that foreseeable crises can have severe social, economic, political and security consequences. Furthermore, the Covid-19 crisis is a wake-up call for using science as a basis for risk management. Likewise, climate science should be incorporated into security policy and planning to avoid worst outcomes.
The report, which is part of the World Climate and Security Report 2020 Briefer Series, articulates six main points:
- Addressing the root causes of climate change should be a security priority for the region;
- Climate change should be higher on the regional security agenda;
- Climate change is worsening underlying security tensions in the region;
- Many security dynamics in the region are highly sensitive to climate change;
- Security communities in the Indo-Asia Pacific have a responsibility to prepare for and prevent these foreseeable security challenges;
- Better coordination between security communities is critical for combating climate-related security threats.
Download the high-res PDF of the “Climate and Security in the Indo-Asia Pacific” report here, or by clicking on the PDF button on the right.
“The COVID-19 crisis has showed us how vulnerable we are to changes in our environment. We can’t hide from them behind our national boundaries and we have to address them collectively. The crisis also taught us what happens if we let time slip through our fingers; the longer we wait to prepare and to respond, the more severe the consequences will be. To me, COVID-19 is a prelude of the disruptions we can expect from our changing climate. This unprecedented report clearly outlines how climate change is already affecting the security situation in the Indo-Asia Pacific region and what the future security risks are. It’s not often that we have such foresight of future security threats. We have a responsibility to be prepared, to build resilience and to not let time slip through our fingers.”
General Tom Middendorp, Chair of the IMCCS and former Chief of Defence of the Netherlands
"The Indo-Asia Pacific experiences some of the highest levels of exposure and vulnerability to climate change in the world, while also accommodating populations with the lowest capacity to respond and adapt. The IMCCS is working on a risk matrix that assesses the nexus between climate change and security. This can strengthen vulnerability assessments and support and inform relevant decision-makers by including accurate, up-to-date insights of the security impacts of climate change and supporting efforts to integrate climate change into defense planning and operations."
Michel Rademaker, Executive Member IMCCS, Deputy Director The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies
"Climate science provides us with deep knowledge about what we can expect in terms of extreme weather and other risk factors. What is missing is a better understanding of the threat nexus between climate change and security. The IMCCS provides tools and services that support more accurate and timely early warning systems, improved and sustainable defense planning, and smarter civil-military collaborations in humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. This IMCCS report provides a useful overview of the climate-driven security risks facing the Indo-Asia and Pacific regions and how these insights can be more effectively shared, bundled, and integrated into decision making processes."
Laura Birkman, Climate Security Analyst, The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies