| 1. |
- Bakardjieva, Maria, et al.
(author)
-
Digital Media and the Dynamics of Civil Society : Retooling Citizenship in New EU Democracies
- 2021
-
Book (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Nowadays, it is already a truism to state that digital media are effective tools used by citizens, civil society organizations (CSOs) and social movementsto protest, to demand, to push and (sometimes) achieve social and political change. No question, they are. This has been observed and registered time and again in a luminous series of academic contributions (some notable examples include Castells 2012; Cottle 2011; De Luca. Lawson and Sun 2012; Howard and Muzammil 2011; Tremayne 2014; Tufekci 2017). Exactly how these media have been taken up by civic actors in specific contexts has been studied and discussed in fascinating detail (Cammaerts, 2018; Gerbaudo 2012; Treré 2019). This book goes one step further to ask a broader question: Has the use of digital media by civic actors improved (or depleted) the quality of democratic life understood as broad and effective citizen participation in public affairs and decision-making?
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Engelbrekt, Kjell, Professor, 1964-
(author)
-
A brief intellectual history of geopolitical thought and its relevance to the Baltic Sea region
- 2018
-
In: Global Affairs. - : Informa UK Limited. - 2334-0460 .- 2334-0479. ; 4:4-5, s. 475-485
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- This article outlines a general history of the intellectual origins and development of geopolitical thought. It provides categories for assessing contemporary expressions of this phenomenon, and then discusses the applicability of these tools to the Baltic Sea region. The article focuses on eliciting and juxtaposing contrasts between the three classical bodies of literature that evolved largely in parallel, and ends up briefly commenting on a fourth, partly “critical” approach. The main takeaway is that considering all four geopolitical approaches before applying any of them to the Baltic Sea realm encourages analysts to embrace a more holistic and dynamic viewpoint than each of the alternatives individually can offer. Such a conceptualization promises to forge analytical linkages between a series of relevant, geographically contingent circumstances including resources, arenas and communities that represent prerequisites and opportunities incrisis, conflict, or war.
|
|
| 5. |
- Engelbrekt, Kjell, 1964-, et al.
(author)
-
A Reassertive Russia and an Expanded European Union
- 2010
-
In: Russia and Europe. - London and New York : Routledge. - 9780415561051 ; , s. 1-16
-
Book chapter (peer-reviewed)abstract
- In this volume three parameters that seem geared to directly influence the Russian-European relationship are of particular interest. The first concerns the norms, values and institutions that Russia presently embodies both internally and externally, and which from time to time clash with those of the EU. Most recently there has been significant contention regarding the democratic process and respect for human rights in the countries situated west and south of Russia, and indeed in Russia itself. A second parameter concerns Russia’s relationship to the EU and to European great powers such as Germany, France and Great Britain, each with a long historical lineage. But it also pertains to other states of central concern to Russia, Poland, Italy, and Spain. A third parameter concerns the relations between Russia and the states geographically located between the EU area and Russia but also the former Warzaw pact and Comecon countries most recently joining the EU. Any divergencies among states within the EU is bound to be exploited by Russia, especially when basic interests are involved, and there have been a little bit too much of such divergencies for a common EU strategy towards Russia to develop easily. In addition, the states of the ‘New Europe’ rather reinforce conflicts and deepen the existing rifts regarding democratization, human rights issues and energy dependence.
|
|
| 6. |
- Engelbrekt, Kjell, 1964-
(author)
-
Après le non-alignement
- 2009
-
In: Nordiques. - 1761-7677. ; 19:2, s. 1-17
-
Journal article (other academic/artistic)
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Engelbrekt, Kjell, 1964-
(author)
-
Begrepp, teori, analysinstrument
- 2015. - 2., [utök.] uppl.
-
In: Svensk säkerhetspolitik i Europa och Sverige. - Stockholm : Norstedts Juridik AB. - 9789139114192 ; , s. 19-34
-
Book chapter (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 9. |
- Engelbrekt, Kjell, 1964-
(author)
-
Begrepp, teori, analysinstrument
- 2010. - 1
-
In: Svensk säkerhetspolitik i Europa och världen. - Stockholm : Norstedts Juridik AB. - 9789139110910 ; , s. 19-35
-
Book chapter (other academic/artistic)
|
|
| 10. |
- Engelbrekt, Kjell, Professor, 1964-
(author)
-
Beyond Burdensharing and European Strategic Autonomy : Rebuilding Transatlantic Security After the Ukraine War
- 2022
-
In: European Foreign Affairs Review. - 1384-6299 .- 1875-8223. ; 27:03, s. 383-400
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The war in Ukraine unleashed in early 2022 may temporarily obscure the long-term trend that the United States is shrinking its military footprint in and around Europe, as the defence posture of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) in Central Europe suddenly was bolstered by tens ofthousands of additional US troops. For as long as the war drags on, certainly, these reinforcements will stay in place. But if, and when, the war ends or shifts to attrition warfare stretching out for years, aswas the case after the 2014 annexation of the Crimea, one can easily envisage changes in how European governments manage security and defence issues among themselves and in relation to their North American counterparts. While the debate on transatlantic security so far has played out in two distinct modes, either focusing on the economic side of burdensharing or projecting a vision of European strategic autonomy, there is a need for a more sober understanding of the future division of labour, one that would be grounded in the right blend of economics and deterrence. The main suggestion of this article is that stakeholders on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean ‘split the difference’ and strike a new grand bargain on the basis of their respective strengths. Once key issues of financial equity and militarydeterrence have been adequately addressed, European governments will still have their work cut out forthemselves. They must elaborate solutions to specific challenges at the sub-strategic theatre level and atthe same time navigate the complexities of optimizing defence reforms, aligning regional force designs and rendering foreign policy compatible with the strategic priorities of the European Union (EU) and Europe at large.
|
|
