The Norwegian government must have known that the 2011 bombing campaign in Libya could lead to the fall of Muammar Gaddafi, argues PRIO researcher Kristian Berg Harpviken.
Checkpoint outside Brega, Libya in 2011. Photo: Al Jazeera English
In light of the recent release of the commission’s official report on Norway’s participation in the military operation in Libya, Harpviken was asked to comment in an interview with the Norwegian daily newspaper Klassekampen. Harpviken claims the report is an important piece of work that should be used to inform debates on how Norway makes decisions about when to engage in international military operations – but that it also leaves us with unanswered questions.
The destruction of an Il-20M radio-electronic surveillance aircraft with 15 crew members in the late evening of September 17 was not the worst tragedy in the records of the three years long Russian military intervention in Syria but it is perhaps the most difficult one to explain away.
Russian Defense Ministry puts the blame squarely on Israel.
It was not a technical fault, like with the crash of Antonov-26 transport plane on March 6, which claimed 32 lives, but a surface-to-air S-200 missile fired by the Syrian air defense that brought the plane down. In the morning of September 18, Russian Defense Ministry produced the first explanation of this disaster putting the blame squarely on the Israeli Air Force, which allegedly used the slow-moving Russian turboprop plane as a cover for the strike deliver by four F-16 fighters. It took Israel a few days to disprove this accusation, which has left many awkward questions for the Russian command regarding the real responsibility for the case of “friendly fire”. What complicates this blame game is the conjunction of four setbacks in the execution of Russian intervention.Read More
Monday 17 September Extra-Ordinary IGAD summit endorse R-ARCSS and request the UN Security Council to review its mandate for the Regional Protection Force. Thursday 20 September At a briefing for the UN Security Council, the Under-Secretary-General for Peacekeeping Operations Jean Pierre Lacroix reported on an increasingly stable security situation in Abyei, thus advocated that the… Read more »
Plan S.: PRIO would far rather pay fees to ensure that all our publications in subscription journals are made available via open access than be forced to publish our best research in lower quality journals.
The new European Plan S – an open access (OA) policy for research results – is ambitious and radical. It will also come at a very high cost to some of Norway’s leading research milieus. Institutions that compete successfully for the most prestigious research grants will be penalized, because they will be forced to publish their important research in insignificant journals. This is not only a bad way of disseminating research, it will also have a widespread negative impact on recruitment to, and the internationalization of, the best research projects.
Monday 10 September The International Committee of the Red Cross reported that the ceasefire in South Sudan appears to hold. However, the SPLM-IO accused government forces of violating the ceasefire agreement. Tuesday 11 September The Government of South Sudan extended oil production agreements with four companies: South Sudan’s Nile Petroleum Company, Malaysia’s Petronas, China National… Read more »
Monday 3 September The parties to the recent ceasefire agreement started a three-day workshop on ceasefire and transitional security arrangements. Tuesday 4 September South Sudan refugee representatives met with the key stakeholders of the Khartoum peace negotiations. Amnesty International reported that South Sudanese authorities have arbitrarily arrested, detained, tortured and ill-treated people despite promises to… Read more »
Tuesday 28 August The IGAD mediation team proposed a referendum to decide on the number of states in South Sudan. Wednesday 29 August President Kiir promoted more than 120 army officers to major generals. President Kiir arrived in Beijing for the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation taking place on 3-4 September. At the forum, China pledged… Read more »
Monday 20 August According to Sentry, a US-based watchdog, General Jok Riak did not receive an official waiver from the UN when he visited China, thereby revealing a gap in sanctions enforcement. Tuesday 21 August The Chairperson of the Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission, Festus G. Mogae, resigned from his position. Mogae was criticized for… Read more »
Is ‘sustainability’ a good guiding principle for migration policy? Or does using this word muddle well-informed debate on international migration?
Photo: Jørgen Carling / PRIO
The notion of ‘sustainable migration’ has been floated as a guiding principle for migration policy. Is it a concept we should embrace? On the one hand, it neatly captures the idea that migration should be managed in a way that ensures well-balanced distribution of costs and benefits, today and in the future. On the other hand, ‘sustainable migration’ can serve as a politically charged rhetorical device: it thrives on the liberal and progressive connotations of ‘sustainable’, but implicitly presents migration as an existential threat to society.
In an effort to establish a platform of knowledge on ‘sustainable migration’, the Norwegian Ministry of Justice and Public Security commissioned us to write a paper on how the concept of ‘sustainable migration’ may be defined, applied and understood. We conducted the project in collaboration with our colleagues Cindy Horst and Cathrine Talleraas. The Ministry also commissioned two professors at the University of Oxford, Alexander Betts and Paul Collier, to write a parallel paper.
Describing something as ‘sustainable’ entails it can be maintained over time. So ‘sustainable migration’ would suggest migration at a level that can continue indefinitely. This may seem like a reasonable yardstick for assessing policy, but unfortunately it is not so simple. Meanwhile, the word ‘sustainable’ is already being used in the immigration debate in Norway and around the world’. This public use happens without connection to ongoing research or the development of analytically meaningful definitions. So what kind of understanding and political message does the use of this word send?
Islamic aid organizations offer qurbani (animal sacrifice) services for Eid-ul-Adha (as shown in an advertisement above), and use the profits from sales of the animal skins to fund their welfare programmes. Photo: Marta Bivand Erdal / PRIO
Meanwhile, in conjunction with Eid-ul-Adha, Muslims worldwide conduct qurbani, sacrificing a goat, sheep, cow or camel, where a third of the meat is distributed to the poor or vulnerable. The sale of animal skins, donated by individuals after the ritual sacrifice, is a major source of income for many charity, welfare, and aid organizations. Religious festivals in Islam often involve distribution of food and donations to help people in need.
Religious alms-giving is often criticized for failing to support long-term, sustainable development. Our research among Muslims in Norway and Pakistan shows, however, that many Muslims are keen to give to organizations and initiatives designed to achieve lasting change in people’s lives, for example through funding education. Many are also concerned about sustainable development.
